Ask HN: Recommendations for a desktop app development environment? - <AUTHOR>

We need to build a small downloadable client software to complement our web app. Basically users will download this, install and it will guide them through a series of steps to help them upload certain files.
Most of the current solutions in this space use Java applets, which are often not supported by default and thus hard for our users (who are relatively non-technical)
Would love to hear your recommendations for a good solutions to this. Ideally we'd like to have one codebase, but having separate executables for Win/OSX/Linux would be fine.
Our priorities are as follows:
1. The final product should be easy to install for the user (ie not require them to install any additional software)
2. Decent looking GUI (doesn't have to be perfectly native looking)
3. Quick to develop in
4. Ideally single codebase, at least for Win/OSX
EDIT: cleaned up a bit and added requirements <comment><USER2> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Web_Start>

Java applications can be launched by downloading a small file (JNLP).

1) Java is required to be installed, but is fairly common already.

2) Decent loooking GUI, it can look a little dated but it works.

3) Java is relatively easy to develop with.

4) Java is cross platform so it will work on Windows/OSX/Linux.

<comment><USER3> I heartily agree with this for a simple uploader app. The work required to get a basic version running and ready for distribution is minimal. However, make sure you test it on several platforms to make sure it looks nice and intuitive on each one. I have used one or two Swing apps with extremely strange-looking file pickers that did confusing things like consistently open up to / instead of to the user's home directory. I've also seen Java Web Start apps that used the Motif look and feel on OSX! I think things like that only happen if you go out of your way to screw up, but test to be sure. Avoid silly mistakes like that and Java Web Start will be just fine for such a simple application, and much less trouble to package and distribute.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It depends upon your language of choice; I'd advise you to use a well known and well supported cross-platform GUI toolkit (by order of personal recommendation): WxWidgets, Qt, Gtk, Tk, GNUStep,Fltk ... It largely depends upon your familiarity with the toolkit, the quality of available bindings for your language of choice, and the importance (or not) of having a nice GUI, following more or less closely the host system visual guidelines.

Generally I'd naturally go for WxWidgets, which is mature, relatively easy to use, provides bindings for about any language in common use, and gives a good look-and-feel and OS integration on Windows, Mac OS X and Gnome/KDE desktops.

Many people (more often Apple purists) will pretend that cross-platform toolkits are ugly and don't fit well anywhere. That's blatant nonsense, IMO; nowadays in fact it's quite the opposite, even the old cranky Tk can be made decent-looking without much work (but good knowledge of its internals).

Java applets are a real problem mostly on windows, because windows hasn't come with Java pre-installed for a very long time; the JRE is a complete PITA to manage (long, slow updates about each time you need it...), then Java desktop apps have pretty horrible startup time and heavy memory usage. Python, or Perl, or even C/C++/ObjC are probably saner and easier choices overall.

</comment><comment><USER5> If your goal is to provide a quality solution for your users, you should be writing it in the native platform SDKs.

If your goal is to try to save yourself some effort, even though it will negatively impact your users, then you should use whatever set of cross- platform tools you can be successful in.

</comment><comment><USER6> IMO, if conversion rates are a concern, the need to download a separate runtime first makes Java, newer versions of .NET, etc non-starters. Note that Adobe AIR doesn't require this anymore: [http://www.adobe.com/devnet/air/articles/air3-install-and- de...](http://www.adobe.com/devnet/air/articles/air3-install-and-deployment- options.html)

If you're providing a useful tool to already-committed users of your website, this might not be an issue.

If slightly non-native looks aren't a concern, go with whatever's easiest. I'd choose Qt/C++, but I'm already comfortable with them. py2exe/py2app are probably reasonable if you know Python.

Consider outsourcing this if you can. The details will occupy a lot of your time. For instance: you ideally want both a standard Windows installer (put together with something like NSIS), and to sign your installer + installed executable to avoid Windows warning your users that it's probably malware. That's a day's work for someone who has done it before, probably a week for you to do it the first time.

EDIT: that said, if you do outsource, beware that most contractors will be blind to their preferred environment's sore spots. Java+Swing devs don't account for Swing apps looking like ass, .NET devs don't care that needing to find, download and install the _Microsoft .NET 4.5 Runtime Environment_ pisses your users off and hurts conversion rates, etc.

EDIT 2: test, test, and test some more. Just because your app runs fine on Windows XP doesn't mean it will work fine on Windows 7 64-bit, and vice versa. If you're eligible (most startups are), it's worth signing up to Microsoft BizSpark just to get access to ISOs of every Windows version from XP up from MSDN.

</comment><comment><USER7> Look into Qt. It's cross platform and widely used and I think you can even use JavaScript if you aren't familiar with other programming languages.

Also personally for a simply program I would not have the users install it. A self contained executable would be sufficient and less of a hassle. You can still put store data in the user's own configuration directory.

</comment><comment><USER8> python + pyside + {py2exe, py2app} is pretty nice, but it still has the problem of users having to find a file that they downloaded to run it.

If you know what browser they're running the extension apis for firefox, chrome, and safari give you access to the OS and the ability to run your own native code.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'd pick Qt. If you are more familiar with web technologies, the QML based UI- design comes naturally. If your app is very simple (like static content with state changes), you can code most of it in QML/JavaScript. It's cross- platform, quick to develop, native UI, etc.

</comment><comment><USER10> You might have some luck with wrapping a web application into a desktop one by using something like Tide SDK (formerly Titanium Desktop). You wouldn't get a proper desktop application, but I think it would definitely work as a file uploader and it should be easier for your team to manage.

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

Things like Adobe AIR would serve the same purpose, but the user experience isn't that great, arguably on the same level with Java if not worse.

</comment><comment><USER11> Since you already hava java applets, looks like developing it in Java Swing is a no brainer. Bundle JVM with your application. Yes, it will take ~50 megs in size, but:

1\. It is cross-platform (yes, to the extent) but much better than anything else out there.

2\. Pluggable LaF.

3\. Utilize your java skills and knoweldge.

4\. Potentially - easy start on Android.

</comment><comment><USER12> If it's just for uploading files, I would (if you haven't already) seriously consider your options for just building it into the web app.

Otherwise, I'd vote Qt/C++ as I've seen quite a few solid, fast apps built on this platform, though I'm not a C++ dev.

</comment><comment><USER13> Have a look at Real Studio <[http://www.realsoftware.com/realstudio/>](http://www.realsoftware.com/realstudio/>). I've used it for several cross platform projects and it's reasonably inexpensive and produces decent apps.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks everyone for the recommendations so far! Looks like we need to check out Qt and wxWindows. BTW does anyone have any experience with Adobe Air for this? (Not sure if still maintained or not..)

<comment><USER14> It still is. In fact AIR might be the simplest choice out there, since you can develop for it with web based technologies. But it is severely restricted when it comes to accessing native desktop APIs. The default look and feel are very ...web-ish, that might or might not be what you want. One thing for sure is that the look is pretty consistent as they include a Webkit rendering engine.

My biggest gripe with with AIR is that the user has to install Adobe AIR before he can install your application and you know how Adobe installations are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> dropbox uses python extensively in their client apps, with some bindings to native platforms.

Personally, I'm looking into doing c#/mono and either qt or sdl for graphics, but wouldn't really recommend it unless your app depends on graphics speed.

</comment><comment><USER16> Why not build a web app?

<comment><USER17> "to complement our web app"

<comment><USER16> My bad. But If a app will only be used for uploading files, you can do that in a web app. Every user would get a personalized link. No installation required.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> When you say not supported by default do you mean not supported when the user doesn't have a JRE installed?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, and it also seems like Java applet support is not switched on by default in many (most?) modern browsers.</comment></comment>


Estimating the size of COVID-2019 outbreak in Iran - <AUTHOR> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.24.20027375v1 <comment><USER2> The Wuhan virus, you mean? I struggle to remember these cryptic acronyms.

<comment><USER3> If you struggle to remember "cryptic acronyms" IT must be pretty challenging for you, how do you cope? You obviously know what this acronym is referring to.

<comment><USER2> That must be one of the reasons I quit coding.</comment></comment></comment>


Odd Jobs on Disco Street: An Introduction to BASIC - <AUTHOR> http://discorunner.com/learning/tutorials/odd-jobs-on-disco-street/#basic

<comment><USER2> This is pretty good, but not exactly written in a totally fulfilling manner.

I'm not certain why this wouldn't just print PI forever.

      2 LET PI = 3.14 : GOSUB 20 : LET MONEY = MONEY + 1
      20 PRINT PI : RETURN
      101 PRINT "I have"; MONEY ;"dollars."

Outputs:

      RUN
      Happy Birthday Mrs. Bits
      3.14
      3.14
      ?RETURN WITHOUT GOSUB ERROR AT LINE 20

Which is explained (to children) like this:

"the program counter went to house 1, then house 2, then house 20, then back to house 2, but then went back to house 20 a second time because it was the next house after 2 with any code. When it got there, it delivered the Pi again, but then was told to RETURN but didn't know where to RETURN to! So it got confused and gave up.

We can solve this problem though by putting a REMark at line 21. It won't actually do anything, but the program counter won't get lost if we do."</comment>


Show HN: Documentation made easy - <AUTHOR> http://www.docjitsu.net/

<comment><USER2> No actual information on the page, and I have to give you my e-mail address to get more? No privacy policy? No "about us" or contact info linked from your copyright footer? Copyrighted by who?

So many red flags.

<comment><AUTHOR> We are actually starting all this, thanks for your feedback. We also managed to correct some of the issues you pointed out. We hope to have you testing the software soon :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "Whenever some of your artifacts change, Docjitsu can track the change and notify that maybe your documentation is out-dated."

How do you expect to do this? Isn't this too intrusive? I don't want to be forced to update stuff I didn't change.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can define how and when you want to be requested to update the documentation. If no changes are needed you can just say that it is ok as is.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hi there. Would you be interested on a framework that easily allows you to write and maintain software documentation? Something that serves as a bridge between documentation and system artifacts (code, database, filesystem, etc).

</comment><comment><USER4> Need this so much!! Have someone tried it?

<comment><USER5> *has anyone

I haven't tried it, nor anything like it. It's great to know something like this exists, I SO want that!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anybody tried it? How does it work?

<comment><USER7> Doesn't seem to exist yet. Got excited as documentation is a pain, buuut there's nothing at the link. You give them your email address and then...nothing. No info, no download. Not sure what's going on.</comment></comment>


Flipping the Script on Recruiters - <AUTHOR> http://npnd.com/blog/2015/2/4/from-pull-to-push-flipping-the-script-on-technical-recruiters <comment><USER3> This is an interesting approach that I might adopt, if only because my ordinary interactions with recruiters have been so wretched. It can hardly be worse than my results thus far.

The behavior of recruiters is puzzling to me. I've repeatedly been contacted by recruiters who want to talk to me about opportunities at X (where X has been Amazon, Google, and a few others). I've responded to these and then received no further contact from the recruiter. They go to the trouble of making a pitch to me and then disappear when their pitch is well-received. My only guess is that they're operating like a telemarketer, spamming the message out to some large number of people to ensure they get a few responses and ignoring any extras.

Just last week a Google recruiter contacted me and gave me a link to his calendar to schedule an appointment. I made the appointment and he no-showed. He later contacted me and said he'd spent the day at a conference he received a last-minute invite to attend. I'm just astounded that these folks treat people with such contempt, given that it reflects poorly on them and the business they're associated with.

<comment><USER4> As I understand it, the problem is this:

Joe Random Recruiter can decide one day that he is a recruiter for Google/Twitter/FB/anyone else. He doesn't need or obtain their permission - <USER2> just starts firing out emails to everyone he can find on i.e., LinkedIn.

The email says something like: "My client, {Google, Facebook, etc}, is looking for someone with {one of your skills}. Are you interested?"

If you reply yes, he then sends an email to {Google, Facebook, etc} and says:

"I'm representing an engineer with {your skills} at {outrageous price including fat commission}. Are you interested?"

Assuming they are in fact interested in you (which they likely are), Google/Facebook/etc is now in a tough position.

\- Google/FB/etc can say YES, pay the fat commission to the recruiter, and give you the job. You think the recruiter is a gift from heaven.

\- Google/FB/etc can say NO, and the recruiter will just tell you they flaked, the opportunity disappeared, or just never contact you again.

The twist is that if Google/FB/etc says NO, the you will end up with a bad impression of THEM, not Joe Random Recruiter. They don't even know your name, with which they could reach out and explain.

Google/FB/etc know this, and as an engineer you are (currently) so valuable that they are (currently) forced to play ball.

And unfortunately, since this method actually works, we see more "recruiters" popping up every day. Even worse, the bad ones are the most aggresive, and they drown out the honest players.

My advice to the Googles/FBs/Twitters of the world: make a page listing the firms you DO work with, just as you list the IP ranges of your crawlers. Not a great idea, but its all I've come up with.

My advice to the job seekers of this world: cut them some slack - you probably didn't ever actually talk to Google/Facebook/etc, or at least they were misinformed about you.

<comment><USER5> You seem to have a good grasp on this, so I'll ask you: why are things set up such that recruiters are "Joe Random Recruiter" to me, rather than "Joe, who I have met, worked with across multiple job switches, and who relies on my trust"?

<comment><USER6> Whenever you have a good interaction with a recruiter, tell them that, and tell them that you'd like to build a relationship and contact them every time you begin a job search. The good ones will be receptive.

<comment><USER7> I think it is common for agencies to have Non Compete clauses such that if your favorite recruiter goes someplace else, they aren't allowed to represent you for a certain period.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There seems to be in this thread (and on HN in general) a lack of empathy for the recruiter.

Here's my perspective on (internal) recruiters as someone who sits next to them at an office:

1\. Recruiters tend to be really nice people.

2\. All day long they talk about prospects with other recruiters almost as if they were talking about potential romantic partners. Except replace any discussion of your physical characteristics with your intellectual / linkedin characteristics. It would be weird if it weren't their job.

3\. If a recruiter sends you an InMail, if you reply back (no matter what the response) it helps them as each unanswered InMail costs them money (they don't get to reuse it).

4\. Their job is really hard (especially for finding developers), and they are under a ton of pressure, especially when a company is growing, to build head count. Investors really value head count growth heading into a Series B / Series C round of funding.

So, consequently, I would recommend that devs cut recruiters some slack. Be grateful we live in a time where our greatest annoyance is someone contacting us with a job opportunity.

It wasn't always like this and it probably won't be forever.

<comment><USER9> Isn't the dislike for external recruiters? They can be wildly variable in quality - spamming by keywords, regardless of geographic areas. And the _good_ ones may _overprepare,_ asking questions that the company won't.

Edit: oh yeah. Sudden radio silence. Adding bogus resume tidbits. Posting bogus jobs, just to pump their contact numbers in the database.

I see a _lot_ more _bad_ external recruiters than good.

<comment><USER10> I've had sudden radio silence so much, even after talking to them on the phone. I don't understand because sure they wasted my time, but now they're wasting _their_ time too!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> For an illustration of just how dishonest, lazy and rude IT recruiters can be check out [http://shit-it-recruiters-say.tumblr.com/](http://shit-it- recruiters-say.tumblr.com/). Yes, at least in the UK they really are that bad.

</comment><comment><USER12> I started just replying with a "No thanks, but I'll hang onto your info in case anything changes or I come across anyone else who's looking", and then I add their email to a "recruiters" contact list in Gmail.

I now have close to 300 folks split between internal/external/vc. I haven't needed to use the list yet, but I have shared it with one or two friends who were interested in changing jobs.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's great! I like the stats that an email vendor provides. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I like this. I know that recruiters are something a lot of us have to deal with, and most of the time they are an annoyance. This approach sounds like it could save a lot of wasted time for both of us. That said, I realize I don't know much about the business of being a recruiter, and I wonder what their perspective might be.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah. I would actually _love_ to hear their point of view on this. Surely they don't like cold calling and emailing all day but also there might be a lot we don't know about as the talent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This would be an interesting twist on a job board. After reaching critical mass, charge recruiters to see the updates. They get a pool of people they already qualified when they're actually looking and developers get more control over the process.

<comment><USER13> Wow. Charging someone to help you find a job. Now that's really flipping the script!

<comment><USER14> I was thinking that the job board would get all of the money, but revenue sharing with the developers would be even more interesting! The amounts paid to external recruiters in this industry are insane...

<comment><USER15> Aren't you basically describing a (better) LinkedIn?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> All the independent recruiters in my area have an autoresponder set up in my GMail that tells them politely that I don't work with their kind because the incentive structure of their business creates quantity of matches over quality.

I'm happy to receive interest from recruiters who work for the companies they're recruiting for, though.

</comment><comment><USER17> I like the proactive approach. Just yesterday, I went to an IXDA breakfast event and some recruiters showed up. Some people were just annoyed by their presence, but I thought it was a good opportunity to talk. They were pretty new to the industry, so I gave them pointers about how supporting the community by sponsoring events, organizing talks at companies they are hiring for, telling better stories about the companies they are hiring for, etc could get them better results than the usual cold-emailing.

I just think that if you don't like how they are doing things, give them pointers. Won't work everywhere, but sometimes it will, and that will be worth it.

</comment><comment><USER18> Nice idea.</comment>


Oblong industries, inc. - <AUTHOR> http://www.oblong.com/ <comment><USER2> Next time I need to change cubes with chinese characters from clear to red or rearrange alphabet letters with a friend, this will be a viable option.

I always find it unsettling when I see demos of "new user interface technology" that involves people performing tasks that seem primarily designed to look visually impressive and only secondarily (if at all) are related to a task someone would actually want to accomplish.

Show me how this can help me work faster. I'm currently unconvinced that this system is superior to a mouse + keyboard. I'm not even convinced that the demo tasks couldn't have been completed just as easily using keyboard shortcuts and a mouse.

</comment><comment><USER3> That technology may look perfectly adapted in movies (eg. Minority Report) and concept demos, but I'm utterly unconvinced it would be much practical for real-world usage.

For one thing, it seems like you'll have to learn lots of complex gestures if you want to accomplish something nontrivial. You'll run out of simple, intuitive, distingishable gestures really fast.

</comment><comment><USER4> Neat. But I can hardly hold a wiimote up for a half-hour. I work on computers 8 hours a day. I do not want to hold my hands up and wave at them for 8 hours!

<comment><USER5> Most people start with their hands out in front, then settle down to a shoot- from-the-hip pose that's much more comfortable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Jesus Christ, I need to drop out of hs. Tech is just passing me by.

</comment><comment><USER7> isn't there a copyright/trademark infringement on the name? i.e. for that "The Oblong's" show?

<comment><USER8> Copyright isn't for names, and trademarks usually only apply in one industry.</comment></comment>


"Scarf Guy" Quickly Becomes the Apple Event's Biggest Fashion Sensation - <AUTHOR> http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/scarf-guy-quickly-becomes-the-apple-events-biggest-fashion-s?bffb&utm_term=4ldqpgp#4ldqpgp

<comment><USER2> [http://www.betabrand.com/tan-reflective-infinity-bike- scarf....](http://www.betabrand.com/tan-reflective-infinity-bike- scarf.html?r=D5)

<comment><USER2> This one is not out of stock, but the wheat one has so much more panache. [http://www.betabrand.com/red-reflective-infinity-bike- scarf....](http://www.betabrand.com/red-reflective-infinity-bike- scarf.html?r=D5)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How can I ethically reach out to potential blog sponsors? - <AUTHOR> I've been running my small security blog for about 3 years with monthly articles.
It has been successful so far in regards to bringing opportunities and gaining industry contacts, but I've never directly made any money from it.
I've tried having a 'Sponsor Me' banner, where I've received a few reasonable offers, but non from companies that I align/agree with or would be happy to promote.
What would be a reasonable way to directly approach companies that I would like to sponsor me? Is this a big no-no, or is there an ethical way to do it? I've had a look at 'cold emailing' services, but they seem to go against the values of my blog, which are privacy, security, non-tracking, etc.
Any advice or case studies would be massively appreciated. :) Thank you. <comment><USER2> I think this is the kind of thing that you just need to go out and do yourself, at least for the first 5- 10 sponsors.

First, have a clear idea of what you are offering (you can look around at other blogs in the same space and even reach out to them to see what they are offering/charging).

Display ads? Paragraphs in a email newsletter? Links on your sidebar? Job listings? Sponsored blog post?

Then, what will it cost? How long does the agreement run for? Is it exclusive? What happens if two companies in the same market want to sponsor you?

Then, what is the value? How many people visit/read your site each month? What kind of engagement can the sponsor expect? (You'll have a better idea of this after a few times, but I can warn you in my experience you'll get far less engagement than you expect.)

You seem to have a list of ethical companies you'd like to be associated with. If you don't, build that list.

Then see who you know at those companies (LinkedIn). If you don't know anyone, see if you have any 2nd degree connections and ask for an intro.

Then present your offering and your cost to these connections. If you are priced right in the market, you'll sell some sponsorships.

</comment><comment><USER3> What is unethical about cold-emailing a company? A business is not a person. Conducting business requires open communication, or else no one would ever make money.

</comment><comment><USER4> Find companies who already spend money advertising to readers of your particular niche. This will usually be tradeshow sponsors, industry magazines, other websites, podcasts, etc.

It is much easier to get them to give you a small portion of their existing budget than to create a budget exclusively for you.

It is a good idea to not have the mindset that you somehow deserve their money or thinking that your site is only $X of their huge budget. It is their job to get the best return on their expenditures and it is your job to deliver that to them.

Also since you seem to have a privacy conscious site, it will be important to make the case that since you don't track users directly, users target your content because it is such a specific niche that only people interested in it (and the potential advertisers' products) read and visit your site.

Having sold a lot of ads directly, it is really important to be a trustworthy person that advertisers enjoy dealing with so they have every reason to keep you in their budget every year.</comment>


Polyphonic overtone singing explained visually (2014) [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHTF1-IhuC0 <comment><USER2> Interestingly, this technique is often called throat singing, because it typically occurs with a style of singing that does begin in the throat. But the overtones themselves are "singled out" by the shape of your tongue, which is why it sounds so much like a varietal RearrrearrrRRRRearrrr effect. The "throat" part of throat singing is the rough "frog" and grinding sounds you hear in Tuva (for example), which is done to provide richer overtones for singling out with the tongue.

I saw an illustrated guide of how to do it, but it was so long ago I probably won't find it again. It's basically a lot like how you pronounce the R sound, except that your tongue takes on a bit of an S wave shape. If you look at a referee's whistle, you can get a fairly good idea what shape it is that you are forming inside your mouth. The shape of the whistle is to emphasize a specific frequency in the hiss noise made by blowing into it. Polyphonic overtone singing is pretty much exactly the same thing, but using voice instead of hiss to generate the complex tones.

And just like learning to whistle, at first you'll sound like a raving lunatic and maybe even come close to passing out from hyperventilating. But once you begin finding the ideal tongue placements for a pitch, you'll very rapidly learn more, and it'll be exactly as automatic as after you learn to whistle. They're very very similar things to do, and the difficulty is identical.

If you are tongue tied (as I am) you probably won't ever be able to do it right. But you should be able to coax out at least a bit of overtone.

Now go out and try it, and enjoy knowing your neighbours will be forever terrified of you.

<comment><USER3> For the overtones put your tongue somewhere between an L and an R sound. Then move around your lips to create different o shapes while humming. Move around your tongue slightly in different ways as well. At some point you'll accidently create an overtone for a brief moment. Then see if you can recreate that. Slowly you'll be able to consistently hit the overtones and from there it's smooth sailing.

For the throat singing it's the exact same technique beat boxers use to create the deep bass. Just try to make a exagurated sigh. Do so until you accidently do throat singing for a brief second, then see if you can recreate that for a longer duration.

It's all about trial and error! It's really not as hard to learn as it might seem :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have yet to see a real performance where this technique is used artistically _and_ in a way that sounds pleasant.

<comment><USER2> Have you watched Ghengis Blues? That's actually the very first place I ever heard of Tuvan throat singing, which has a lot of polyphonic overtones going on.

The story is great, and the mix with blues is really interesting. The dude has the most thunderous voice I've ever heard. Subwoofer gold.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_xlbCq0WTw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_xlbCq0WTw)

<comment><USER4> Definitely an interesting sound, but not my definition of singing. The term "polyphonic singing" makes me want to hear a single person sing in a way such that it sounds like two or more people singing in harmony.

<comment><USER5> it's very brief, but she gets quite a reaction from the band at around 6:10: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SJIgTLe0hc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SJIgTLe0hc)

<comment><USER2> I noticed David Lee Roth (Van Halen and solo) does exactly that polyphonic vocal riff in a number of songs.

<comment><USER6> His vocal track separated. Try around 3:25 or so: [https://youtu.be/IArxakPsPE0](https://youtu.be/IArxakPsPE0)

<comment><USER2> It's only 3:28 long. I think you meant 2:25 since he does a really good overtone at about 2:30. Thanks for this perfect example. Usually I'm the only one who knows wtf I'm talking about when I mention such obscure things.

<comment><USER6> Oops, yes...2:25.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Why is she dressed like that?

<comment><USER8> Because she can dress however she wants</comment></comment>


Here comes Google TV - <AUTHOR> http://googletv.blogspot.com/

<comment><USER2> Does anyone know if the Logitech offering will work with 'older' TV sets? I've a ViewSonic LPW425 that works a treat, but doesn't seem horribly compatible with digital hook-up.</comment>


37signals Answers - <AUTHOR> http://answers.37signals.com/ <comment><USER2> I like the direction that UI design has been headed at 37Signals. They've gone from extremely minimal to clean and simple. I seem to recall that they've hired some graphics people in the last year, which is a skill I don't think they had that much of in the past.

That aside, kudos on this - most forums are painful to look at and use.</comment>


The Globalization of Startups - <AUTHOR> http://measuringmeasures.blogspot.com/2010/02/globalization-of-startups.html

<comment><USER2> It is a pitty the author did not mention Israel, currently the second largest high-tech industry after silicon valley.

<comment><USER3> I was going to include Israel (I hear really awesome things about it). I hope to visit sometime soon. But I don't know anyone who could do the guest essay for Israel. I am hoping to do a follow up post sometime with guest essays including Israel, Brazil, China, Russia and others.

<comment><USER2> I am somewhat acquainted with heavy-weight entrepreneurs in Israel. In addition, several of my friends are involved in start-ups, myself included. Drop me a line (shmichael at gmail) if that seems interesting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The startup culture is surely catching up in rest of the world. We are just a couple of ex-Microsofties who moved to Chennai, India from Seattle a couple of months ago as we found the former to be more suitable even for product based startups in some factors.

There is an enormous amount of interest here in entrepreneurship these days. For ex. every month we have an informal entrepreneur gathering at a cafe shop and there are hundreds of tech entrepreneurs directly and indirectly become part of these gatherings; otoh even in tech centers like Seattle it would be hard to see more than a dozen guys turning up for these events.

There are plenty of expats returning back to India after their studies and few years of work experience in the US and that is significantly changing the startup culture and attitudes here and resulting in a lot of cross pollination - where ideas of West meets with efficiency of the east.

<comment><USER5> "with efficiency of the east"

What efficiency would this be? Why should ideas be "Western" and "efficiency" Eastern?</comment></comment>


The Beginning Of The End For Active Learning - <AUTHOR> http://hunch.net/?p=1800

<comment><USER2> You should read the title again.</comment>


"The real story is the endless echo chamber of Silicon Valley" - <AUTHOR> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20081229/twitter-where-nobody-knows-your-name-the-sequel/

<comment><USER2> Maybe I just read the wrong blogs, but I've been waiting for someone to say this for a long time. Aside from my techie friends, I know absolutely nobody who uses Twitter, and it's been up for a long time now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Same here... But from the story's votes I guess we're in minority in YC :)</comment></comment>


A Cautionary Tale: Do not move or rename your iCloud folder - <AUTHOR> http://www.tuaw.com/2012/08/22/a-cautionary-tale-do-not-move-or-rename-your-icloud-folder/

<comment><USER2> "As if it were a swarm of bees, you should stay away from the SyncServices folder." - <http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1865>

Wow. When Apple's copywriting is that down-to-earth, you know that something is different.

In seriousness, between this fragility and the lack of nested folders in iCloud, I get the feeling that Apple's taken a leaf out of Windows 8's book on this one... by focusing on non-power users, they'll generate a lot of hate and bad press from their once-loyal power-user customers.

<comment><USER3> I'm a non-iCloud user (well, sort of), and I can't fathom a scenario where I would ever be tempted to use it. _However_ , it's completely understandable what happened here and the guy even states this repeatedly: it was entirely his fault. He corrupted his own data.

That said, the magnitude of problems resulting from this surprised me. What happens if an iCloud sync folders gets corrupted due to a technical problem one day? Isn't this fragility also kind of a nightmare for Apple's developers?

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I don't think he can reasonably declare this to be his own fault. He's doing that to avoid criticism, but realistically, there's no conceivable reason that moving the local endpoint of the sync on one machine should cause the other machines to try to move their local endpoint. I can't even fathom how you could code it to make this kind of disaster happen.

<comment><USER5> Most file references in Apple's frameworks track by both the target's path and inode, with the inode considered "more canonical". This is used in NSDocument apps where when you move a file with it still open, the app can tell where it went and continue working at the new path. Finder aliases (different from symlinks) also do this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nowhere did he mention disabling iCloud, moving the directory back into place, and re-enabling it.

That might seem like the first step in solving this problem, and I wouldn't doubt that he did it if not for the instant jump to "restoring my iPad didn't help. everything is miserably broken so I called Apple."

<comment><USER7> I was thinking the same thing - was there an attempt to restore things to the way they were? Using time machine to revert that one folder would have been interesting to try, considering it was hosed anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think if he'd made a symbolic link within his Dropbox folder to his iCloud folder, it would have worked as expected. At least, that's how the Linux client works.

</comment><comment><USER9> I wonder what kind of link he used? Can directories have hard links on HFS+?

<comment><USER10> Yes. That is, in fact, how Time Machine backs up so quickly. But I believe there are no userspace utilities to create them (and major POSIX assumptions break down, so you need to be careful if you do it in your everyday data).

<comment><USER11> Much to my surprise, rsync on osx (with the --link-dest arg, iirc) can create directory hardlinks. I was unable to figure out any other tool to delete them; I ended up having to rsync an empty directory on top.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> at-fates-hands Wow - talk about dodging a bullet. I just had a co-worker tell me to try something similar since I'm an avid Dropbox user. Although I don't use icloud, this story probably saved me quite a bit of frustration.

</comment><comment><USER12> Ubuntu One ftw :)

<comment><USER13> For those of us not on Ubuntu, care to explain why?

<comment><USER14> Obviously because in Ubuntu you can freely move the non-existing iCloud folder.</comment></comment></comment>


Collection of Responsive Design resources and sites - <AUTHOR> http://bestdesignwebgallery.com/blog/responsive-designs/

<comment><AUTHOR> Came across this while looking for resources on RD, thought others might find some of these useful</comment>


Former Grooveshark Execs Raise $950K for ECommerce Customer Intelligence Startup - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/31/former-grooveshark-execs-raise-950k-for-e-commerce-customer-intelligence-startup-tandem/

<comment><USER2> What a wonderful product that so many companies are in need of!

</comment><comment><USER3> I actually helped these guys with their beta and one of the founders is a buddy of mine. They did some really advanced statistics and analysis of our customers that we would never have been able to do on our own. The TC article makes it sound a bit fluffy, but they do an awesome statistical deep dive.

</comment><comment><USER4> Very cool product. The Techcrunch article did not really do the concept justice. The team has a really deep understanding of statistics and how turning those numbers into actual product/market feedback.

</comment><comment><USER5> My dream is to collaborate with these guys. Stats nerds will rule the world.</comment>


Federal Reserve to make unlimited bond purchases in move to support economy - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/03/23/fed-unlimited-credit-coronavirus/ <comment><USER2> Dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22663318](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22663318)</comment>


The Reason Your Lifestyle Business is Failing - <AUTHOR> http://www.seanogle.com/headline/failing-business

<comment><USER2> Title should be "The Reason Your Lifestyle Business as a Blog Writer is Failing"

This article has absolutely no bearing on my "lifestyle business".

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been exploring the 4hww lifestyle business thing for a bit now, and it's always nice to read the other side of the argument. However, in this case I can't help but feel that anyone who's churning away at a blog or ebook that no-one cares about, has missed the core of the strategy. I'm pretty sure Monsieur Ferris himself says that you should test the market by getting cash commitment before embarking on a big project. I've not got the book to hand so correct me if i'm wrong, but i recall something about making experimental ebay auctions which you cancel at the last minute, and so forth. If you can't prove your market with real money, abandon that particular ship and find another. Regardless of how you plan to run a product-selling business, that seems like good sense to me. If you've poured hours into your ebook without checking to see that there are buyers at that price, you've dug your own grave.

</comment><comment><USER4> A few acquittances have asked me about wanting to start a business that makes "2-3k" and doesn't take much time...I always laugh a little bit, because the 2-3k thing is possible, but no matter how you shake it, your probably going to need to spend a lot of time to get there.

If you like at the businesses Tim Ferris built: They were very low maintenance, which is what you want, but that doesn't say anything about the amount of time to build up and get to a point where you can live a low maintenance lifestyle.

I've seen a few people do some cool, cheeky things that skirted the above, but in general I wouldn't count on it.

<comment><USER5> It's totally possible. Most just fail to realize that it's possible after hours and hours of hard work - and even then, maintenance is generally required.</comment></comment>


Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data - <AUTHOR> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2086454-revealed-google-ai-has-access-to-huge-haul-of-nhs-patient-data/ <comment><USER4> Why are people astonished?

For more than a decade researchers have been able to get access to large deidentified datasets. As a PhD student I have access to data on 150 Million visits by 45 Million patients. In some ways the data and access I have is superior to that of Google & NHS (since UK is a tiny country in comparison to USA), and I am just a PhD student. Though I have been working on it for last 5 years.

Recently there is a new qualified entity program run by CMS which provides access to Medicare data.

You can read more about my research and see the demo of the system in my past submissions and at

[http://www.computationalhealthcare.com](http://www.computationalhealthcare.com)

Also for the actual govenment program [http://www.ahrq.gov/research/data/index.html](http://www.ahrq.gov/research/data/index.html)

Actually when it comes to Medical information its a much much more complex problem legally. This paper gives a good overview on issue of "Patient ownership of data" [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1857986](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1857986)

I am by no means minimizing the concenrs that people have. But I think the article paints Google in negative light while ignoring current standard practices. I wish the discussion would be more rooted in the facts about how such data sharing systems work currently.

<comment><USER5> > Why are people astonished?

Because politicians keep making promises in regards to privacy that they don't keep in regards to "confidential" information.

Similarly, most of the medical value from such information [e.g. Frequency of X within a given population fitting certain characteristics] would likely deanonymize people.

<comment><USER6> No politician was involved in this decision.

<comment><USER5> [http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16021240](http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16021240)

> "All necessary safeguards would be in place to ensure protection of > patients' details - the data will be anonymised and the process will be > carefully and robustly regulated.

> "Proper regulation and essential safeguards need to be in place when it > comes to patients data," he said. "It cannot be done in a way where > essential rules are threatened."

The legality of these data sharing laws start off with public promises of anonymization, robust regulation, safeguards, and privacy.

[https://www.england.nhs.uk/2014/01/geraint- lewis/](https://www.england.nhs.uk/2014/01/geraint-lewis/)

> Amber data are where we remove each patient's identifiers (their date of > birth, postcode, and so on) and replace them with a meaningless pseudonym > that bears no relationship to their "real world" identity. Amber data are > essential for tracking how individuals interact with the different parts of > the NHS and social care over time. For example, using amber data we can see > how the NHS cares for cohorts of patients who are admitted repeatedly to > hospital but who seldom visit their GP. In theory, a determined analyst > could attempt to re-identify individuals within amber data by linking them > to other data sets. For this reason, we never publish amber data. Instead, > amber data are only made available under a legal contract to approved > analysts for approved purposes. The contract stipulates how the data must be > stored and protected, and how the data must be destroyed afterwards. Any > attempt to re-identify an individual is strictly prohibited and there is a > range of criminal and civil penalties for any infringements.

The problem with psuedonymous data is the NHS basically admits it can be used to identify people given sufficient effort.

\---

That is why people are "astonished" by these decisions. The politician provides the initial promises that imply anonymity, the implementation doesn't provide true anonymity but provides criminal penalties for pulling off the mask, and then the data is handed to enough 3rd parties if such data is leaked its likely impossible to know by whom unless the data was tampered with to provide a per-contract identifier.

I understand this _specific_ decision did not involve a politician but the conversation was why people are surprised. How many people do you think really know the anonymity originally promised became a permeable pseudonym?

<comment><USER6> You've linked to a page about care.data

This Google thing has fuck all to do with care.data - they're totally separate.

I understand "the" NHS is complex, but it's pretty frustrating talking to someone who has very strong opinions and who clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.

It's really weird to link to a document that talks about the severe legal penalties for anyone who attempts to de-anonymise the data, and then use that to say "look how flimsy these agreements are!", especially when the document you link to has a BOLD lead saying that things are even stricter in the newer document.

> The politician provides the initial promises

Again, not a politician. Chief data officer at NHS England, and a real doctor. [http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/about/our-people/dr- geraint-...](http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/about/our-people/dr-geraint- lewis)

> The problem with psuedonymous data is the NHS basically admits it can be > used to identify people given sufficient effort.

It's trivially easy for Google to do this already without the NHS data, and they don't face prison time for doing it. See all the pregnant teens outed by supermarket loyalty cards for other examples.

<comment><USER5> > It's trivially easy for Google to do this already without the NHS data, and > they don't face prison time for doing it. See all the pregnant teens outed > by supermarket loyalty cards for other examples.

And how many members of the general population do you think are aware of this?

> I understand "the" NHS is complex, but it's pretty frustrating talking to > someone who has very strong opinions and who clearly doesn't know what > they're talking about.

It probably has something to do with the fact you are completely missing the point I'm discussing rather than the strength of my opinions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think this situation nicely juxtaposes positive externality with private rights.

As an individual, you may wish to hoard all of your personal medical information. Doing so may provide marginal benefit or protection against some theoretical harms. However, much of medical science relies on large population studies. Is knee surgery worth it? Are breast exams? Do COX-2 inhibitors increase heart attacks? Enormous amounts of good could be done by having large datasets of entire patient histories available for analysis by all, assuming they could not be de-anonymized (if not, then the datasets have to be analyzed under contracts)

Whenever I visit the doctor and I am given a form asking if my data can be sent to some group to participate in a study, I always answer yes. Never once have I had any negative repercussions from doing so, and it is my hope that the data was used to publish scientific papers that added to net knowledge of humanity. However, I have to wonder if asking me for permission actually interferes with random sampling. Are people who give permission vs people who refuse statistically more likely to have other behaviors that may influence the results?

<comment><AUTHOR> > Whenever I visit the doctor and I am given a form asking if my data can be > sent to some group to participate in a study, I always answer yes. Never > once have I had any negative repercussions from doing so, and it is my hope > that the data was used to publish scientific papers that added to net > knowledge of humanity.

I've grown cynical. My first thought on seeing this kind of form is that a third party will be making money from the information I provide somehow - whether it's through patented drugs or treatments or through pay journals like those owned by Elsevier. Neither I, nor anyone I know, will get to benefit from from the information I provide without spending money (often exorbitant amounts of it). This is the flip side of privatizing everything. Why should I lift a finger to help for-profit entities when they will not do the same to help me?

<comment><USER8> It's going to sound like I'm telling you how to live your life and how to feel and I really don't mean it that way but I don't know any other way to express my viewpoint so I'll just power through it:

The idea that someone, somewhere is making a profit on something you provided should make you happy, not sad. To make a profit, they had to be paid, and to be paid they normally have to have provided something that someone wanted enough to part with cash. That cash changed hands is not the main point of the transaction (it's a net zero for society, someone gained cash and someone lost it), the main point is rather that something of value was created.

You threw out the example of pay journals like Elsevier. It is true that for cases like that, there may be a market inefficiency that means not much value is created. But I think those are edge cases and relatively rare. Even if our worst fears about Elsevier and other rent seeking journals are true, it would still be the case that you're helping rather than hurting by providing anonymized personal data.

<comment><AUTHOR> > The idea that someone, somewhere is making a profit on something you > provided [for free] should make you happy, not sad.

This seems like a double standard. Why should I be happy when corporations will regularly go to court to make sure that nothing they create returns to the public domain within my lifetime? The norm seems to be capturing this kind value wherever (and for a long as) possible, not distributing it freely for the good of mankind.

I'm not making a normative argument that this is a healthy way to live or for society to operate. In a functional community resources, ideas, and capabilities may be shared freely for the benefit of all, but it can't always go one way. That's exploitation, not community.

<comment><USER9> Ok, so what? Even if a company fights to maintain control over their product, there's _still_ a societal benefit even if that benefit has been artificially limited due to price. And while they can delay things to an extent, eventually, they'll lose control over their product as IP protections run out. There are still games that can be played at that point when everything is lined up just right, but those are games that can be addressed through legislation and the courts.

I'd rather hideously expensive treatments exist, even if I can't afford them, than live in a world where they're never even an option. Price can and does change over time, and those treatments become more accessible to more people. But if the treatments are never developed in the first place, then that's an even greater tragedy because then there's literally nothing that can be done to make them accessible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Terrible reporting. Improving health outcomes by AI analysis of patient data is a much bigger prize - morally and commercially - than anything which could be achieved through ad targeting. Google is far too smart to squander such an opportunity by abusing patients' trust.

<comment><USER11> The big problem is the precedent it sets for data access.

What are the criteria for who gets access? What are the constraints of that access?

This story covers the latter being blown apart, the constraints were poorly defined and implemented and thus even if the criteria is well defined access to far more data was made possible.

I'm sure that few patients desire an end to research, or would argue that such access isn't a good thing... but what of the insurance industry? Should they have access? Would the NHS be able to define and enforce those constraints?

Perhaps that's an obvious no.

What then of an insurer partnering with a medical research company, from the viewpoint of "This costs insurance a lot of money, we'd like to fund a way to reduce that financial exposure".

The grey areas emerge immediately.

If we cannot control access to patient data, data that would be trivial to either strip anonymity or just to have in aggregate enough to still produce net-negatives (i.e. correlated by post code would reveal enough with little extra work)... and if we cannot define and enforce the constraints of access... then we really shouldn't be sharing what is highly sensitive and personal information that was originally only disclosed between a patient and a Doctor under the premise that what is shared is covered by the explicit and implicit confidentiality of that conversation.

It's always worth remembering:

Data was acquired under doctor patient confidentiality.

If we considered that data to have a licence, it is the most restrictive licence possible. One could consider what has happened here as a re-licensing without permission. Such an act could have a chilling effect on the relationship between the doctor and patient.

<comment><USER12> You are making some implicit assumptions that they data access isn't highly controlled.

I have seen a few of these sorts of deals killed because of data access concerns, and/or computation requirements ("you can have access to anonymized data, but you have to run your code in a sandbox on our health servers").

And, this is why we have legislation.

<comment><USER11> Less implicit, from the originally linked article:

> The scale of the sharing program was apparently misrepresented to the > public, originally announced as an app to help hospitals monitor patients > with kidney disease with real-time alerts and analytics. But since those > patients don't have their own separate dataset, Google has argued it needs > access to all patient data from the participating hospitals.

No assumption there, they didn't have a separate dataset and so granted access to all patient data.

<comment><USER12> "so granted access to all patient data"

Yes, but under what conditions? Many privacy laws apply here, and treating Google as some monolithic entity where everyone working there can now read anyone's personal health history is inaccurate.

<comment><USER5> Its psuedononymous data the NHS has previously admitted can be deanonymized given sufficient effort but such deanonymization carries criminal and civil penalties.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> As an expert in machine learning, I don't see how someone would expect this to work. Actually to predict a disease, you need true positives and true negatives. If you only had access to the true positive data, it would be a lot harder to predict accurately.

<comment><USER12> Seems pretty simple, really.

1000 patients come in with symptoms that look like cancer at year 0.

100 actually get diagnosed with cancer at some point between year 0 and year 5.

Presumably, the remaining 900 didn't have cancer at year 0.

<comment><USER14> "Seems". You can't know what fraction of your remaining 900 had cancer but weren't diagnosed with it for any of a wide variety of reasons, from death through misadventure, through false negative, to simple loss to followup. Clinical studies are designed to exclude such confounding outcomes. It's very difficult to see how any study of this data could be designed to do likewise.

<comment><USER12> True, but I think you can mitigate these issues.

Especially for the NHS dataset, since you will either see the patient in there or in a death index (unlike, say, US where they may have just gone to another hospital).

Also, the scope here is more like a longitudinal vaccine study than a clinical trial. 50M people will provide a lot of robustness that you wouldn't see in a 1000 patient trial.

<comment><USER14> > you will either see the patient in there or in a death index

Or you won't see any new information for the patient, because the patient is lost to followup. Or - worse - you'll see new information, but it'll be invisibly erroneous, because random GPs don't work to the standard that physicians administering examinations in clinical studies do.

> 50M people will provide a lot of robustness that you wouldn't see in a 1000 > patient trial

Not if the 1000-patient trial is well designed, and the data of those 50M people is totally uncontrolled and unverified. This isn't warfare - Stalin's dictum has no place here. You can't overcome the flaws of a dirty dataset by adding more dirty data to it, especially when you literally cannot know either the magnitude or the nature of the inaccuracy, or even tell what's accurate from what's not.

<comment><USER15> >> Or - worse - you'll see new information, but it'll be invisibly erroneous, because random GPs don't work to the standard that physicians administering examinations in clinical studies do.

So you will take this into account and emphasize the more reliable types of tests, like blood tests. Or you'll find ways of learning which doctors who do the tests more accurately(or train doctors to do so) and which people are more consistent/reliable with their relationship with their docs. Or maybe you'll get a few hypotheses which are relatively likely and that would incentivize the researchers/google to do small clinical trials on them.

It's worth a try at least.

<comment><USER14> Even if it were - which is, for the aforementioned reasons, doubtful - <USER2> would not be worth turning over the medical records of 50M people to an unregulated private company without so much as a by-your-leave.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> People in the UK who want to complain about this could try the ICO who strongly regulate health information.

They could also look at any advertising material and report that to ASA (if it meets the criteria for being regulated).

That trust has a Caldicott Guardian who will be responsible - legally - <USER3> keeping patient data safe. I would have liked a quote from them, although I guess that quote would be something like "No patient identifiable data has been shared with DeepMind". That would be scary, I have no doubt that DeepMind would do a very good job of de-anonymising data, but I know that Google would have to be monumentally stupid to try that.

There are other data projects happening in the NHS - care.data (that dot isn't a typo!) is one that got a lot of attention. That allowed (after some fuss) people to opt-out. (It didn't allow people to specifically opt in to show their support, which is something I would have done.)

I'm a bit wary of Vice's reporting here. They don't seem to know what they're talking about (there's nothing about controls over patient data in the NHS, for example); they don't seem to have approached the Trust involved; they haven't done a good job of explaining what's going on.

There are some really bad failures or data protection in the NHS (especially around mass email! People using CC instead of BCC to a group of people using an HIV clinic, for example) and there are some historic abuses (selling data to insurance companies) that led to changes in the law.

So I don't know if this is terrible and deserving of anger, or okay and poorly reported, or a good thing with misleading reporting.

</comment><comment><USER16> The National Health Service (NHS) is the publicly funded healthcare system for England (source: Wikipedia)

Putting that here because I was confused about what NHS was in the first place (I'm French).

<comment><USER17> There isn't really a single NHS - there are four National Health Services for the four parts of the UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland):

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> best part of this is when we reach the skynet robot uprising they'll know exactly how to kill us the fastest

</comment><comment><USER19> There is no equivalent of HIPPA in the UK?

<comment><USER4> HIPPA stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The "Privacy" component of HIPPA is very limited in scope. Even with HIPPA the data being shared would be consistent with definition of "Limited" dataset.[0] At least in United States there is significant precedent for sharing such data, including even for marketing purposes as decided by Supreme Court case (IMS Health vs Sorrell).

[0][http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/institutional_review_board/hi...](http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/institutional_review_board/hipaa_research/limited_data_set.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is probably one of the reasons some may be opposed to nationalized healthcare... The government making a widespread decision to send your medical data somewhere without your permission.

<comment><USER21> but we don't really have the consent-at-scale technology for anything else, do we? tbh it's just this specific NHS Trust that made the call in this instance.

Personally, I see potential in ResearchKit to solve the consent problem re medical data

<comment><USER22> ResearchKit may be part of the solution for some things, although the auth and data management will be barriers for commercial providers for the near future.

I have a small team that is working with leaders in the space[1] to help many of the major EMR vendors support an open-standards based approach to medical record sharing.

We'll be seeking public feedback when some of the preliminary work is ready, but are very excited to get input from the community as we make progress.

[1] [https://dbmi.hms.harvard.edu/news/more-power- patients](https://dbmi.hms.harvard.edu/news/more-power-patients)</comment></comment></comment>


Is functional programming the opposite of OOP? - <AUTHOR> https://www.quora.com/Why-is-functional-programming-seen-as-the-opposite-of-OOP-rather-than-an-addition-to-it/answer/Henry-Story?share=1 <comment><USER2> Lisp is one of those languages that seamlessly merges both together, so I don't know how they could be opposites.

Having said that, I only use the OOP (defstruct et al) when coding something that would be easier that way - maintaining consistent records in a CVS file, for example. Nothing is stopping the code itself from being functional.

Maybe it could be said that some purely OOP languages might be opposites of some purely functional languages.

</comment><comment><USER3> They're both "magic fairy dust".

Melding code and data into an "object" is a natural thing to do --- in some cases. In others, it creates more problems than it solves.

Similar holds true for functional programming.

Bottom line --- there is no universal "right way" to develop software.</comment>


Hospitals Are Mining Patients' Credit Card Data to Predict Who Will Get Sick - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-03/hospitals-are-mining-patients-credit-card-data-to-predict-who-will-get-sick <comment><USER2> This might be a little off topic but I often read articles like this, and elsewhere, speculate on the "future" where so 'n so is able to see exactly what you purchased on your cards for some nefarious reason.

So here is my question: Do stores REALLY pass on an itemised list to the credit card processor? Because it was always my understanding that all they passed upstream was the amount and the name of the establishment.

This article claims: "Imagine getting a call from your doctor if you [...] make a habit of buying candy bars at the checkout counter"

I don't think that data exists outside of the specific convenience store where you purchased the candy. The CC company would know that you spend an extra $1 at that place, but how do you tie that into bad eating habits? Maybe they purchased an apple or a cup of coffee.

I'd really love some insight on this topic, and I will happily admit that maybe my information is either out of date or just flat out wrong.

<comment><USER3> I'd pay for an itemized list of all the stuff I've bought at the grocery store(s) over the last 6 months. I'd love that level of insight into budgeting what is my family's third biggest expense.

FWIW, none of the stores I go to have loyalty cards, though I'm pretty sure that they could do matching based on hashed card values or the name they get back from the card. (That's could, not that they do. I'm not sure if PCI would look at them sideways for hashing card values and using that as a key for a data store)

<comment><USER4> Just curious, but what country/part of the country do you live in? Virtually every store I walk into either has a loyalty points system, a credit card, or both.

<comment><USER5> I've suspected loyalty points programs are just an accounting trick. You're creating your own currency which doesn't always get used up, and you can devalue whenever you need to make your quarterly numbers.

And if your program really catches on, you can get other retailers to sign on, creating a side business, or spin it off as a separate business if someone is willing to pay you for it (it's easy to segment off from your core business).

<comment><USER6> In general, store points and so forth are something that stores hope you'll perceive as being of greater value (and hence encourage loyalty) than they'll every have to actually deliver on.

The norm with grocery stores though seems to be more in the vein of giving instant savings to card holders. Some chains (Safeway out West is one of them I think) have so many and such deep special prices that I have a card even though I only shop there on vacation sometimes.

(Interestingly, Shaws--which is an Eastern US chain now owned by European company I believe--discontinued their card in this vein a few years back.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The next step is "health insurance" (as we call it in the US, though it's in actuality no such thing) carriers mining your credit card and loyalty program data and hiking your rates if their model predicts you're going to need more or more expensive care.

The problem is that unhealthy lifestyles (drinking, smoking, fast food, _& c_) are disproportionately found among the lower socioeconomic strata, creating yet another penalty for being poor.

<comment><USER5> The funny thing is that the insurance industry is obsoleting itself.

If they perfectly assess risk, your annual premium will just be your annual cost plus all of the administrative costs of insurance, so just self-insure. We're getting closer and closer to that, further eliminating any value that anyone gets from insurance.

<comment><USER8>
      If they perfectly assess risk, your annual premium will just be your annual cost plus all of the administrative costs of insurance

Uhh, no. That's not how insurance works.

The idea of insurance is pooling risk. So if you're perfectly healthy you are in essence paying for other people's treatment.

However, if you happen to run into very expensive health issues it's you that profits from the premiums of other people.

If insurance works as you describe it it wouldn't make sense at all and everybody would individually be responsible for her entire medical cost. With partially ruinous consequences for the individual.

<comment><USER9> > If insurance works as you describe it it wouldn't make sense at all and > everybody would individually be responsible for her entire medical cost. > With partially ruinous consequences for the individual.

I think that's his point.

<comment><USER10> The exact costs will never be calculable in advance.

We are never going to reach a point where we can accurately predict whether someone will be hit by a bus or shot.

<comment><USER5> But we're getting better and better at it.

And better at real-time charging and paying for insurance in micro-increments. Predicting over the course of a year is hard, over the next microsecond, not so much.

Going to the gun range? Your insurance premium just went up by $6/hour. Speed in your car? Slam on your brakes suddenly? Driving quickly in heavy traffic? Drive at 3AM on Saturdays?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> How are hospitals incentivized to prevent disease? I thought it would be the insurance companies who would do this, but they wouldn't be allowed to as it would also let them prescreen customers. Perhaps it could be insurance companies who pay hospitals for being good with disease prevention? There's an interesting interaction there.

<comment><USER12> Capitation of member lives is one mechanism that's been tried. That's the theory behind HMOs, though some (notably Kaiser) seem to be markedly more effective than others.

The story behind how Kaiser healthcare was founded (providing health services for workers on the Hoover Dam) is pretty interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> If they're accurate enough, can they be legally forced to inform the patient when there's a high probability that the patient will get sick in the future? You know, "prevention is better than cure"

How long before someone sues a hospital for 'negligence' for knowing the future and not letting the patient know?

</comment><comment><USER14> How do they know what specific items were purchased? Is there any way for a consumer to see their own data on that? Also, seems like there would be a lot of false positives as I don't consume or use everything I buy with my card.

<comment><USER15> They mentioned rewards cards, like the kind used at grocery and drug stores.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Can insurance companies legally access credit card transactions? Like the fact that you shopped at a specialty medical store for a pre-existing condition?

</comment><comment><USER17> I am beginning to think about how well non profit health insurance companies would work.

<comment><USER3> Lots of health insurance companies are technically non-profits. Doesn't change their behavior. They accumulate huge amounts of excess reserves, and pay their executives like they're a for profit company.

<comment><USER17> That is not what I am thinking of, of course.

<comment><USER18> What are you thinking of?

<comment><USER17> Those that don't do such abuse, obviously.

<comment><USER19> I think this[0] is what you are looking for

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> How can they tell whether I've been buying cigarettes or carrots at the grocery store?

My credit card statement just shows a store name, timestamp and amount. They'd presumably have to be colluding with the grocery chains to get the sort of information mentioned in the article.

<comment><USER7> From TFA, emphasis added: "The company purchases the data from brokers who cull public records, _store loyalty program transactions_ , and credit card purchases."

Store loyalty programs _do_ track SKU-level purchases. There was a case years ago where a patron tripped and fell at a store, and filed a personal injury suit. The store pulled up that person's loyalty program records, noted that they'd been purchasing a larger than average amount of alcoholic beverages, and insinuated at trial that the patron might have been drunk.

Guess who won that case.

<comment><USER21> Who won that case?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I don't understand this. How does my credit card data tell hospitals what I buy? Personally, I can't get anything beyond a date (dubious accuracy) and the amount spent.

<comment><USER23> If you buy something at a liquor store, you're likely buying alcohol. If you buy something at McDonald's, you're likely buying fast food. Do you pay for a gym membership? Pretty much every store has an itemized list of everything you're buying - though only some of that is currently exposed to your credit card processor.

Obviously, some purchases are more obvious than others - but it's safe to assume that if there's a profit to be made regarding selling more-specific information about each purchase, then businesses looking to increase their bottom-line will seek to opt-in to selling that information.

What I expect to see is for it to star as an opt-in choice by consumers. Want a lower health-insurance rate? Opt-in to this program where we see where you're eating and if you're going to the gym. You're starting to see it in the auto-insurance industry where insurers will give you a safe-driver discount provided the device you attach to your car confirms you're a "safe-driver". But eventually I'd bet it will be a requirement for auto insurance. They're pushing to mandate auto "black-boxes" in every car. Right now, that data requires a court order to obtain in an accident, but how does that change when every car is connected? Does that data live with the vehicle, or is it sent to a remote location "for the safety of the data in case of a crash" or whatever spin they put on it?

Here's the car-dongle I mentioned: [http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot/](http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I heard some people at a local research hospital speculating about this months ago... seem pretty bleak.

</comment><comment><USER25> Don't use credit cards. Problem Solved \o/

</comment><comment><USER26> privacy what privacy

</comment><comment><USER27> I see a lot of people asking about how they get the data. One way is through huge data brokers that buy and sell data from retailers, merchants etc. One big company that has a huge trove of customer purchase information is Acxiom.

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

<comment><USER28> Acxiom is partnered with Facebook/Twitter and owns LiveRamp.

[http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/05/14/data-broker-acxiom- mo...](http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/05/14/data-broker-acxiom-moves-to-tie- physical-world-to-online-data/)

"The data-gathering has stirred privacy concerns. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2010 that Rapleaf, the former parent company of LiveRamp, had amassed databases tying people's real names to privately shared information in their Facebook profiles, as well as data in their voter-registration files, real-estate titles, shopping histories, and other records. The company was censured by Facebook for the practice, which involved pulling data from apps against the social network's rules."

<comment> bjelkeman-again It is interesting. In Sweden this would be illegal to do, unless you had consent from each individual at the time of data collection to do that type of data assembly and analysis.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This seems promising. When it comes to healthcare, prevention is nearly always more efficient than treatment, and early detection of problems is very important. If this can be turned into more accurately determining who needs to be screened for lifestyle-related problems like arteriosclerosis, blood pressure, diabetes, etc, that would be amazing.</comment>


Show HN: MacUpdater 1.5 released. Keep all your apps updated - <AUTHOR> https://www.corecode.io/macupdater/index.html <comment><USER2> Not affiliated, but this is a clean, compact and efficient app. I've got 2 Macs, and keeping the apps updated on both of them (including non-MAS apps) was a bit of a chore before this. Now it's something a hardly have to think about. Highly recommended.</comment>


The Mystery of People Who Speak Dozens of Languages - <AUTHOR> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/09/03/the-mystery-of-people-who-speak-dozens-of-languages <comment><USER2> For those who were not born with the linguistic equivalent of a "silver spoon in the mouth", which is immersion and exposure to several languages in early childhood, learning another language is achievable. No need to be a polyglot (6 languages) or hyperglot (11 languages). It just takes time and effort. Just throw away all concept of deadlines for progress and fluency and enjoy the failure and process. Ignore all "fluent in X time" charlatans, there is no magic process for the standard "I took Spanish for 4 years in school" adult language learner. Just get started.

I have heard some people carry on conversations in two or three languages simultaneously, and I am in awe of Mezzofanti.

> "On one occasion, Pope Gregory XVI (1765-1846), a friend of Mezzofanti, > arranged for dozens of international students to surprise him. When the > signal was given, the students knelt before Mezzofanti and then rose > quickly, talking to him 'each in his own tongue, with such an abundance of > words and such a volubility of tone, that, in the jargon of dialects, it was > almost impossible to hear, much less to understand them.' Mezzofanti didn't > flinch but 'took them up singly, and replied to each in his own language.' > The pope declared the cardinal to be victorious. Mezzofanti could not be > bested."

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

<comment><USER3> > I have heard some people carry on conversations in two or three languages > simultaneously, and I am in awe of Mezzofanti.

This is the norm here in Morocco: Lots of people speak a Berber dialect as their primary language, followed by Arab and French (both compulsory in education). Not only are most able to participate in 3 communications in their 3 languages, they also practice code-switching a lot - it's not uncommon to have all 3 languages in a single sentence.

> Just throw away all concept of deadlines for progress and fluency and enjoy > the failure and process.

The second part is, IMHO, the most important: Fail, fail, fail - and laugh about it. One does walk away from "talks", both parties laughing and "agreeing", with both parties being aware that communication failed completely.

<comment><USER4> _" Fail, fail, fail - and laugh about it."_

One not only needs a tolerance for failure, but a tolerance for humiliation. Some native speakers will treat people with a poor grasp of their language as if they were children or idiots.

I've definitely acquired a lot more empathy for people who struggle with English once I tried my own rudimentary language skills in other countries. These people who have difficulty putting together a few words in English might actually be far more intelligent and educated than the native speakers they're trying to communicate with, yet they're often looked down upon.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why, in such a context, a language is counted just as any another one? Mastering a small set of very different languages (let's say Chinese Mandarin, Arabic, and Hungarian) seems far more impressive to me than mastering more languages all pertaining to the same family (let's say 20 Romance languages).

In France during a gig in the linguists' world I heard that Claude Hagège, a local authority, has a fair command of 80 languages. WP EN credits him with "about 50" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Hag%C3%A8ge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Hag%C3%A8ge)

<comment><USER6> Every time there is an anecdote of someone speaking so many languages, there is no evidence on Youtube or anywhere else. I mean spontaeous fluency, not reading a story or telling two jokes. Like in this case, he speaks only French fluently on Youtube.

Now, for example, Martina Hingis, a former tennis player for those who are too young or too nerdy to know, speaks five languages according to Wikipedia. Well, she actually has interviews on Youtube showing impressive fluency in English, German, Swiss German, French, and Czech. I am absolutely fascinated by this.

<comment><USER7> Well for Martina Hingis that's not too surprising:

\- Czech parents (and lived there till ~7) \- moved to (German-part of) Switzerland: the local language is Swiss German, but school is in German (i.e., everyone speaks both of those) \- everyone in Switzerland is taught one of the other official languages, usually German in the non-German speaking areas, and French in the German speaking areas (fluency will vary, but for instance I had 7 years of German by the end of high school) \- everyone learns English these days ;)

I would expect that most children who moved to German-speaking Switzerland at a youngish age would be fluent in at least 4 languages...

<comment><USER8> Yet many end up speaking in English between themselves, because they don't bother to continue learning the other canton languages after the compulsory period.

It is ironic that I know better French than some Swiss German and Swiss Italian friends, and better German than some Swiss Romande friends.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Some totally anecdotal points.

It seems like it's far easier with early exposure to languages. I speak six languages, and don't find languages too difficult, which I attribute largely to having grown up speaking two languages from two different language families, and being exposed to a third one fairly early. Thanks to that, it's completely natural to me that ideas are expressed differently in different languages. When I encounter people who speak/write a foreign language poorly, it usually looks like they think of a sentence in their own language, and then replace the words individually with words in their target language. It's not so much a difference of skill level as it is a difference in the basic way of thinking.

I've also watched some videos along the lines of "see me speak 10 languages", and those are almost always less impressive than the title. They usually show a person fluent in 3-5 languages, and then saying introductory basic things in the others. That's very respectable and I don't want to play that down, but it's also not "wow, s/he's fluent in 10 languages!" like people might think from the title.

One more thing that keeps me wondering is the practical limit of how many languages you can maintain. Personally, with six languages, I already feel I'm pushing it. I use four languages in day-to-day life. If I don't read/speak either of my other two for a while, I feel my skills deteriorating. Personally it seems like maintaining seven languages would take a deliberate, considerable time investment, and more than that wouldn't work.

<comment><USER10> > It seems like it's far easier with early exposure to languages. I speak six > languages, and don't find languages too difficult, which I attribute largely > to having grown up speaking two languages from two different language > families, and being exposed to a third one fairly early.

I think it's more along the lines of: Your first/native language isn't a problem, your second language is difficult, and with each beyond that it becomes easier to change how you think to fit the next language. It's just, being exposed young breaks that second-language hurdle early enough you don't really remember it being extra difficult.

I'm not fluent in anything besides English (though know a small bit of Spanish and Japanese), so take that above with a grain of salt. But the difficulty curve seems similar to programing languages, where the more you learn, the more you recognize underlying concepts across languages, making further ones easier to understand.

<comment><USER9> > Your first/native language isn't a problem, your second language is > difficult

I don't think so - I rather think this is exactly what early exposure gets around. Growing up with two languages, you understand and speak two even before understanding concepts like language learning, or there being more than those two languages. The second language isn't difficult at all, it's just the same as your native language. Or it's like having two native languages. But there's no second-language hurdle in that case (though it moves to the third one).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I have seen a lot of people who claim to be masters of a gazillion languages on YouTube or whatever but if I watch them in a language I know their skills are much more elementary than advertised. So I'm kind of skeptical here.

<comment><USER12> So, this is one thing I like about Gabirel Wyner -- in his book, "Fluent Forever", he's got a section in the first chapter where he talks about how he defines fluency, and he fairly openly acknowledges that he personally sets a very low bar. It's basically just being able to engage in small talk without too much hesitation, with no expectations placed on developing a large vocabulary, or mastering every verb tense, or any of that.

I suspect that's what's happening with a lot of people who cultivate a reputation as hyper-polyglots: When they say "fluent", they mean, "about on par with a 4-year-old, only more literate". When everyone else hears fluent, they think they mean, "masters of the language".

(edit: I pick 4 years old because that's about on par with the benchmark Wyner is using - in his book, he seems to be using 1,500 words as the benchmark for a working vocabulary. I believe that's about average for a native English- speaking 4-year-old.)

<comment><USER13> I didn't really get that from his book -- I thought he was saying you pick the top 1500 words (actually I think its 600 in his book) and learn how to pronounce / spell / and memorize them using Anki, and then start speaking with someone on iTalki etc and go from there. I have used this method to learn Italian and now I am doing it with French. I think the method works. Fluency is a loaded term in my opinion - from this article it seems to be defined as C1/C2, but in reality you can get by with a lot less, you need a handful for verbs and a large amount of nouns

<comment><USER14> I have learned basic conversational german and spanish by doing just that - basically just drilling 2000 of the most common words in the language into my brain with complete disregard for any grammar, conjugations, etc. Then, I spend some time learning common conjugations, sentence structure, etc, and then I start talking with people where I can.

I've had much better luck with this system than with what I was forced to use in school to learn French, which was basically slowly build up all of the skills at once(learn a little grammar, a few words, at a time).

<comment><USER13> I agree, the few things I think are really valuable in that book are the following

* learn pronunciation/spelling first

* learn the top words using images and space repetition

* study every single day

I think this method is by far superior to anything taught in high schools in the US, which is very sad given a large portion of our population speaks Spanish and I think they could change the curriculum a bit an a lot more students would leave school bi-lingual

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It gets easier with each one.

I think the secret is to expose the person to multiple languages at a very early age.

Its like having kids: the first is an impossible leap, the second is much harder than anticipated, the third gets easier and after the fourth its just a big mass.

<comment><USER16> >Its like having kids

I have 2 kids. Everyone I've spoke to who has 3 or more has said that the jump from 2 to 3 is as big as the jump from 0 to 1.

<comment><USER17> I have three kids. When I am working one on one or even one on two, it's noticeably easier than when I have all three with me and am trying to assist them all with their needs. You play zone defense rather than man on man and as a result you are always stretched a little thin.

<comment><USER18> Ages matter. If the oldest can help out, it scales better.

But all pretense of democratic rule must be jettisoned once the kids outnumber the parents.

<comment><USER17> I agree, and watching larger families in my community (where my three kids is a "small" family), it's obvious that older siblings take a significant role in helping the younger. That said, the demeanor of kids matters a lot, as my oldest (teenager) is significantly more of a challenge than my other two. She by herself takes more energy than the other two combined.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've always admired these people, and secretly suspected that people who speak more than a few languages have a superlinguist genetic trait that makes them more likely to pick up a new dialect or language. The common denominator seems to be the rapid introduction of new languages at a very young age.

</comment><comment><USER20> _Some four hundred respondents provided information about their gender and their orientation, among other personal details, including their I.Q.s (which were above average). Nearly half spoke at least seven languages, and seventeen qualified as hyperpolyglots. The distillation of this research, "Babel No More," published in 2012, is an essential reference book—in its way, an ethnography of what Erard calls a "neural tribe."_

The answer is IQ. I knew that before even reading the article. Same for speed reading, memorization, etc. anything that is cognitive has a large IQ component. I dunno why it's so hard for researchers to get this. Instead we hook subjects to machines to look for brain patterns or we try to look for any other explanation besides the most obvious one, IQ.

<comment><USER21> I don't think IQ tests are precise because intelligence is an abstract concept. It makes sense that they are searching for something corporeal and consistent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This languages teacher has good info about practicing dozens of languages: [https://www.youtube.com/user/laoshu505000](https://www.youtube.com/user/laoshu505000)

</comment><comment><USER23> Though you would say Amoureux des langues and not de langues in French.

</comment><comment><USER24> Speak and understand dozens of languages at what level?

Could they understand a complex news story about economics and finance in all those languages? Read a novel? Write an essay on a complex topic?

I'm skeptical.

You could be mistaken as a native in six languages if you just make small talk with a perfect accent and intonation.

Someone who really knows a language has a (passive) vocabulary of some 25,000 words. A proper hyperpolyglot should have 11X then, once per each language. Yeah, sure!

<comment><USER12> > Could they understand a complex news story about economics and finance in > all those languages? Read a novel? Write an essay on a complex topic?

Those skills can't even be assumed in native speakers.

For example: [https://nces.ed.gov/naal/](https://nces.ed.gov/naal/)

<comment><USER24> They can be assumed in high IQ native speakers, though.

These hyperpolyglots are supposed to be high IQ.

If you have a high IQ, but look like a low IQ illiterate in a dozen additional languages, then I'm afraid you're a phonyglot. This is because there are ideas that you can think but cannot say in those non-native languages; and if someone else were to say those things for you, you wouldn't understand what they are saying.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I believe this applies to programming as well. One programming language is about equivalent in terms of mental effort to learn as a new language - actually they're called languages too. There are polyglots in our world today, who know C, C++, Java and C# as well as French, English and whatever else, who I think deserve as much accolades as those linguistic hyperpolyglots.

<comment><USER26> Not at all. Learning a new programming language (let's say being able to "converse" in a new programming language) is not even close to the difficulty of being able to converse in a new human language. I know (I've coded professionally) C, C++, C#, JavaScript, typescript, Ruby, python, scheme. I can read and understand Rust, any c-like language, Scala, brainfuck and many others. I could confidently say that I could understand pretty much any programming language.

On the other hand I can speak Spanish, English. I can "converse" in French (formally studied), Portuguese and some Italian. I'm learning Mandarin right now. I studied Latin for several years. Human languages are so much harder because (among many other factors) their grammars are so much complicated, also languages evolve in time. Computer languages they are all very similar and their grammars and orders of magnitude more simple (they have to be in order to fulfill their goal of being mapped to instructions on a Turing Machine). I could confidently say that no matter how much I try, I probably would not understand any human language unless I dedicated a non-trivial amount of time and effort to learn it. And that just for getting to a colloquial level of dialogue. If I ever wanted to be productive professionally reading/writing it would be way more hard.

<comment><USER27> That's probably because in computer languages we invent our own dialects as the core is pretty feeble: "Jane get ball, ball is red. Red ball goes down hill." So that becomes "getBall()", "dropBall()" and so on where with a heavy helping of English, or whatever human language you prefer, you can slather on top a lot of semantic meaning that isn't there otherwise.

If you only had to learn basic grammar and fifty words you could be fluent in a hundred languages in a month.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm a web developer. I'm forced to write code in dozens of languages.

</comment><comment><USER29> Glad to see that Esperanto count as living language.

<comment><USER30> Of course Esperanto is a living language.How could anyone doubt that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> the basic skill of language is a conservative function... if you are aware of linguistic rules [grammer syntax], you are aware of the "algorithm" and variations of said algorithm...next is the strings [words] and the variable type [accent , timbre, pause etc.] how many languages do you speak?[rhet], how many high level source versions do you know/speak? BASIC, LISP, APL, ASM are all very old digital languages that the ancients speak, and i remember my first TI sinclair 1000 and the basic source code, it was a hurdle but also a nucleus of concepts, it was shockingly easy to learn additional coding languages compared to the first one, and going further i believe this contributed to the ease, and desire of learning how a computer/object code device actually operates, then i learned ASM and hex macros, and the need/use for compilers and libraries, i was 11 by the time i was designing digital circuits...."the whole point being, spoken languages utilize the same underlying mechanisms"... if your daily dealing involve symbols , abstracts and translation of these to relay concepts you are primed to learn a "new language" easily... mathematics, schematics, stoichiometry, feynman diagrams, are all languages, as well as english french spanish etc.. Sooo..."how many languages do you speak"?...</comment>


Ask HN: How to create income from software licenses? - <AUTHOR> I want to create a library that can be used in applications.
Users would compile it into their desktop/mobile applications.
Could I create a business model where users pay for a license to use the library, but the source code is available on Github?
Would the app stores remove apps that use the library without a license?
Do you know of any successful businesses that use this type of model (public source code with paid for licenses)? <comment> chupa-chups I'd recommend to prepend "Ask HN: " in the title. This both makes it easier to spot as a discussion and also puts it under the "ask" tab.</comment>