Mozilla announces an open gateway for the internet of things - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/06/mozilla-announces-an-open-framework-for-the-internet-of-things/ <comment><USER2> I'm a fulltime IoT software consultant, and I wish we'd see more of these initiatives. A few thoughts:

1\. The problem isn't the transport layer, it's the application layer. The transport layer is mostly solved via MQTT, COAP, Thread, etc. Sure, we can improve there, but the real problem is the application layer. So I applaud Mozilla's attempt to bring something into this space.

2\. Bootstrapping this will require a substantial number of hardware vendors to sign on, both at the edge and at the hub layers. IMHO this is why Google Weave [1] never took off in it's original incarnation. Bootstrapping this like they did with web stuff isn't enough, because this isn't the web.

3\. Devices are only part of the problem: We need a software services layer, too. Think time services, IFTTT-like orchestrators, media services, etc.

4\. JSON is a non-starter long-term: it sucks for small devices. They need a binary format that is easy to parse.

5\. Request-Response isn't the right pattern for most use cases.

6\. The Property/Action/Event concept is a solid start.

7\. For the love of everything holy, add versioning!

[1] [http://internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/feature/Google-...](http://internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/feature/Google- takes-on-IoT-with-Brillo-and-Weave)

Edit: Grammar.

<comment><USER3> In re #4:

> 4\. JSON is a non-starter long-term: it sucks for small devices. They need a > binary format that is easy to parse.

ASN.1?

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

> ASN.1 is similar in purpose and use to protocol buffers and Apache Thrift, > which are also interface description languages for cross-platform data > serialization. Like those languages, it has a schema (in ASN.1, called a > "module"), and a set of encodings, typically type-length-value encodings. > However, ASN.1, defined in 1984, predates them by many years. It also > includes a wider variety of basic data types, some of which are obsolete, > and has more options for extensibility. A single ASN.1 message can include > data from multiple modules defined in multiple standards, even standards > defined years apart.

<comment><USER4> Asn.1 is great, and I see a lot of folks relearning the hard-earned lessons of it. The only problem is that there are no good open source implementations.

<comment><USER3> ASN1SCC?

from [https://essr.esa.int/project/asn1scc-asn-1-space- certifiable...](https://essr.esa.int/project/asn1scc-asn-1-space-certifiable- compiler) :

> ASN1SCC is an ASN.1 compiler that was developed for ESA to cover all data > modelling needs of space applications.

> The compiler is targeting safe systems and generate either Spark/Ada or C > code. Runtime library is minimalistic and open-source. The tool handles > custom binary encoding layouts, is fully customizable through a code > templating engine, generates ICDs and automatic test cases.

[https://github.com/ttsiodras/asn1scc](https://github.com/ttsiodras/asn1scc)

> This repository contains the complete source code and tests of the ASN1SCC > compiler ; an ASN.1 compiler that targets C and Ada, while placing specific > emphasis on embedded systems: no black-box run-time library, portable code > able to run under any OS (embedded or otherwise), no dynamic memory used > anywhere, etc.

See also blog post about it: [https://ttsiodras.github.io/asn1.html](https://ttsiodras.github.io/asn1.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> People who dismiss this effort so quickly should actually spend a little time to discover what is actually happening here. It is really disheartening to see so many negative comments about Mozilla without any substantial deeper comments about this specific project.

To me the big news here is not the gateway, it is the "Web Thing API" that you can read at [https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/](https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/)

This is a W3C draft about something that is badly missing currently: a common language that devices can speak.

"This document describes a common data model and API for the Web of Things. The Web Thing Description provides a vocabulary for describing physical devices connected to the World Wide Web in a machine readable format with a default JSON encoding. The Web Thing REST API and Web Thing WebSocket API allow a web client to access the properties of devices, request the execution of actions and subscribe to events representing a change in state. "

This is meaningful work that can impact you in a big way. Don't dismiss it too quickly.

<comment><USER6> Trying not to dismiss it, but IoT is, frankly, a total mess. Consider that:

\- It's mostly done by companies that use hardware as a delivery platform for their cloud services, trying to vendor-lock you, in delusion that they'll be The Next Platform. This results in an extremely user-hostile ecosystems.

\- Said companies develop IoT devices with little or no regard to security and protection of user data.

\- The business strategy of tying everything into my butt means things are not interoperable _by design_. I don't see much incentive for IoT vendors to accept standard protocols that go against the core of their business.

\- Now W3C wants to tie IoT into the web. The web is a total clusterfuck. JavaScript is not a language suited for this task, and _its ecosystem_ is doubly not suited to working on this.

Maybe I'm just grumpy, old (by web standards; I'll be 30 this year) programmer who desperately tries to turn an unstoppable tide. One who believes IoT should stand for _Intranet_ of Things. I can believe this is "work that can impact me in a big way". I'm not convinced this impact will be in any way positive.

<comment><USER7> > _The business strategy of tying everything into my butt_

Do you, by chance, have a browser extension that automatically modifies instances of "the cloud" into "my butt"?

<comment><USER6> Indeed I have; it's for display only, but it tends to modify contents of text boxes too, so I miss it sometimes when I _edit_ comments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I imagine it will get cancelled, like Persona and Firefox OS did. The interesting, large side projects seem to go that way.

<comment><USER9> Maybe someday Firefox will finish implementing HTML5...

<comment><USER10> You do know it's a living standard and they offer as much support as anyone?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The actual announcement, linked in the article: [https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/02/06/announcing- project-...](https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/02/06/announcing-project- things-open-framework-connecting-devices-web/)

</comment><comment><USER12> Can't this already be accomplished via XMPP? The protocol already exists, you just need to register devices to services. I know people don't love xmpp, but it seems like this is already an open source gateway that can manage IOT. Why do we need to create a "new open standard"?

[0] [https://xmpp.org/uses/internet-of- things.html](https://xmpp.org/uses/internet-of-things.html)

<comment><USER13> People don't love XMPP for a lot of reasons. Some of those reasons apply to IoT. Some reasons, like having to maintain state, are IoT specific.

Besides that, bandwidth and code complexity is a very real concern. MQTT, a lightweight message passing protocol, has become the de facto default.

<comment><USER14> So true. We switched to MQTT (abandoning websockets and other protocols) to save (a lot of) network bandwidth.

<comment><USER15> Do you mean you were using MQTT over websockets before, and you've since moved to pure MQTT (still over TCP), without websockets in between? Are you sure websockets were the cause of your network bandwidth issues?

<comment><USER14> I'm on a different team, AFAIK we where using simple JSON payloads on websocket connections. Dropping websockets and switching to MQTT saved a lot of bandwidth. I can ask for precise numbers or details if you wish.

<comment><USER16> I'm interested.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> IOT is pointless for a lot things. For some even a hazard.

I laugh to myself when some business people think their IOT widget is the best thing ever. Then I tell them why it's freaking insane or stupid. They look at me like I am a luddite. Thankfully, that is minority of my interactions. Still there are enough of them that it's far from a non-existent issue.

Just connecting something to the internet does not make it better or you just want to monetize with software activated features. A lot IOT devices provides no additional value. A lot of times it decreases the objects value. It makes vulnerable to hacking, and has more possible points of failure, and potential more overhead for the end user to maintain it.

I am not saying all internet connected devices are a bad idea. I just see a lot business people basically taking the latest hype Koolaid and mixing it with existing things. Then they think it's the greatest idea since sliced bread, and that everything will be connected to the the internet. It's one thing to throw many things at the wall to see what sticks for some people that is one way of discovering what works. However, I hate how pervasive some of the IOT hype is getting. I was talking with someone the other day that literally thought that any device that could not connect to the internet was useless for today's society...

Any ways I am sick of hearing about IOT. The fact Mozzila is even trying to get in on this madness is disheartening.

<comment><USER18> I just worked on a pool-pump-controller IoT device. Its connected value was, you could manage it without visiting the pool pit. Your service guy could check on it without driving out to your house. And you could get push notifications when something goes wrong.

Some things, especially automation-control things, benefit greatly from being IoT.

<comment><USER19> In theory I agree, but in my experience the 'IoT' bits are less reliable than the underlying physical component that's being monitored.

What's more likely? A brushless motor fails, or my wifi password changes when I replace my router, I move my router and its out of range for the pool pump, the pool pump pushes out a bad update, the pool pump company goes out of business, some IoT specific electrical component fails before the actual pump fails, or something of that nature.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I wonder why they don't use HTTP2 Server Push instead of Web Sockets. And I wonder why they don't want to use MQTT.

Can you think of any good reasons?

<comment><USER21> HTTP2 server push isn't really designed for the kind of two way communication needed in IoT use cases, it's mainly designed for web servers pushing CSS files down to a web browser before they're requested.

MQTT isn't a web protocol and the goal here is to give things URLs on the web. But I'm aware of some Web of Things implementations using MQTT over WebSockets to benefit from the QoS features.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Restful? I thought it was dead and graphql was the new silver bullet for everything? On a serious note though this is seriously needed and I actually like the start of this API I would mind curling a device and seeing how easy it is to write 2 lines of code to email me if it dies without really having to read documentation and this is the real intent of the idea behind rest, discoverable network apis self documenting because they use links and http standards so I don't have to go look up some companies specific error codes.

</comment><comment><USER23> _> It's important to note that all of this runs on your own gateway in your house. Google or Amazon can't see when you turn on the light using your voice._

Is the RPi gateway capable of local speech recognition that can compete with Siri, Alexa, Google? That seems unlikely, unless it has a dedicated processor for that purpose.

<comment><USER24> I would guess not, but Mozilla will probably wrap this in with [https://voice.mozilla.org/](https://voice.mozilla.org/) <\- that project at some point.

Personally, I'm not one for using Pis as computers, because I have always running computers at home anyways. I'm quite confident my computer can handle adequate voice recognition, though most companies today have avoided developing solutions that run locally.

<comment><USER25> It's pretty nice that an RPi only consumes .35W though. :)

EDIT: Fixed typo

<comment><USER26> You're out by an order of magnitude. 35W over a 5V USB power connection would be an insane 7 amps.

<comment><USER27> It was off by two orders of magnitude, not one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Here a tutorial from Mozilla about setting up the gateway.

[https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/02/how-to-build-your-own- priv...](https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/02/how-to-build-your-own-private- smart-home-with-a-raspberry-pi-and-mozillas-things-gateway/)

</comment><comment><USER29> How does this compare to Home Assistant project ([https://github.com/home- assistant/home-assistant](https://github.com/home-assistant/home-assistant))

</comment><comment><USER30> Google leads me to [https://webofthings.org/](https://webofthings.org/) , "web of things", seems related to Mozilla's Gateway mentioned here, i.e. use http/www/internet to connect all IoT devices.

The web of things started in 2007, somehow it does not gain any traction, is this gateway using the same conception: [https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/](https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/)

Both are referring web-of-things and nodejs/json etc

</comment><comment><USER31> Have any of Mozilla's projects outside of Firefox actually survived for any length of time? Thunderbird? Is Bugzilla still around? I can't think of anything else.

<comment><USER32> Mozilla's MDN is the only reliable place (outside of the w3c documents themselves) to get web documentation

<comment><USER33> MDN is rapidly becoming Mozilla's core product to me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> What I keep failing to see is how does IOT improves anyone's life. It can simplify peoples lives but does it improve? Mozilla could have an important role, which I think is more important than standards. Right now I only see this fad as let's sell some gadgets that will get us free data about millions of people so they can get inside the house at the sound of their favorite tune.

<comment><USER35> I think "improve" is a very subjective and lofty standard to hold these things to. I think "simplify" is correct, and most people would see simplification as an improvement.

There is definitely something magical about leaving your house and having your lights shut off and your door lock automatically, then coming home after a long day and having your door unlock and lights come back on.

It's not such a drastic improvement or change, but it feels like attention to detail. IMO, reducing the number of things I have to think about on a daily basis to live my life is an improvement.

<comment><USER36> >There is definitely something magical about leaving your house and having your lights shut off and your door lock automatically, then coming home after a long day and having your door unlock and lights come back on.

I can see how it would feel that way if one didn't know too much. Google home devices were caught with their microphones stuck open constantly uploading within weeks of release.

What makes you think you won't get a doorlock that gets stuck in an open/close loop and just oscillates, allowing a burglar to just stick their shoulder against the door and wait for the bolt to retract? Are you going to remember to check after every firmware update? Are you even going to know if a firmware update is issued?

Will it still be magical if you get declared a legacy customer[1] and your door is programmed to unlock and stay unlocked? Will you even follow IoT news close enough to be confident that this hasn't happened to you?

Myself, I'd prefer a door lock that locks only when locked, and unlocks only when the correct key is inserted into it. I've /certainly/ seen one too many crazy software errors to believe in a stove that has the ability to turn itself on and off.

[1] [https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2453441/revolv- use...](https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2453441/revolv-users-revolt- as-googles-nest-bricks-smart-home-hub)

<comment><USER37> Denial of service attack potential is nice as well: pay $x or we won't unlock your door. As long $x is somewhat lower than what it would cost to replace the lock or fix the damage to the door you might have a buyer.

<comment><USER38> _Back in the kitchen he fished in his various pockets for a dime, and, with it, started up the coffeepot. Sniffing the-to him-very unusual smell, he again consulted his watch, saw that fifteen minutes had passed; he therefore vigorously strode to the apt door, turned the knob and pulled on the release bolt._

 _The door refused to open. It said, "Five cents, please."_

 _He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. "I 'll pay you tomorrow," he told the door. Again he tried the knob. Again it remained locked tight. "What I pay you," he informed it, "is in the nature of a gratuity; I don't have to pay you."_

 _"I think otherwise," the door said. "Look in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt."_

 _In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing it he had found it necessary to refer to the document many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip._

 _"You discover I 'm right," the door said. It sounded smug._

 _From the drawer beside the sink Joe Chip got a stainless steel knife; with it he began systematically to unscrew the bolt assembly of his apt 's money- gulping door._

 _"I 'll sue you," the door said as the first screw fell out._

— from _Ubik_ , Philip K Dick, 1969

(Dick failed to foresee the convenient ability to have everything automatically debited from your Alexoori account. That, and the annual applobe variation so you can't unscrew your door with a knife.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Seems like OGC SensorThings API, but there are sections that are related to events and actions. As far as I know, the creator of OGC SensorThings API going to publish a second standard about the events also. Check it out :[https://github.com/opengeospatial/sensorthings](https://github.com/opengeospatial/sensorthings)

</comment><comment><USER40> Unfortunately, it doesn't say how it'll be secured. With everything in your house, using normal https is still a problem.

<comment><USER41> > using normal https is still a problem

Care to elaborate?

<comment><USER14> I'm not sure what the original commenter meant; however TLS is useful only when talking with your own server. What about other connections? NTP, DNS etc are all unencrypted (read: unsigned). Google "DNS client CVE" for instance. Or what about SSH? It may not be accessible from the Internet, but still exploitable from an infected host in the LAN. Someone has to keep all that software updated. In those conditions, I would never connect a RaspberryPI or similar to my door / gate / car / ...

<comment><USER42> How is SSH exploited from an infected host within the LAN?

<comment><USER14> If you connected an IoT device in the same network of an infected PC, the infected PC can talk to the IoT device directly if you do not block traffic somehow (eg. a firewall). Are there open ports with buggy services? Probably not today, what about in ten years?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> rather unrelated I have just seen this article on _Smart-Home Privacy_ , by Gizmodo¹ which at the bottom reads:

 _" This story was produced with support from the Mozilla Foundation as part of its mission to educate individuals about their security and privacy on the internet."_

Considering the timing of both the announcement & Gizmodo piece, suddenly the line "story was produced with support from the mozilla foundation" sounds just like another ad. I wish Gizmodo / Mozilla would be clear of what Mozilla contributed. Especially because Mozilla positions itself by accepting donations.

¹ [https://gizmodo.com/the-house-that-spied-on- me-1822429852?re...](https://gizmodo.com/the-house-that-spied-on- me-1822429852?rev=1518027891546)

</comment><comment><USER30> So mozilla wants to part of the new "Web of Things".

[https://iot.mozilla.org/gateway/](https://iot.mozilla.org/gateway/)

[https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/](https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/)

</comment><comment><USER44> I'd like JS to be as far away from my embedded devices as possible.

</comment><comment><USER45> In engineer speak, what will this let me do?

<comment><USER5> The gateway is a proof of concept for the "Web Thing API" [https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/](https://iot.mozilla.org/wot/) that will let you chat with all the things in your home. It is an open alternative to the closed HomeKit and Android Home ecosystems.

<comment><USER45> Ok so for a typical IoT device I have the software on the device that talks to some server/service on the Internet, and an app on my phone to control the device. This replaces the server/service? What about the app? Does that mean I can create my own devices and an Amazon Echo or Siri will eventually be able to talk to it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Whats the business model behind that kind of activity?

</comment><comment><USER47> But IoT IS based on industry standards. Rest/Json are NOT the preferred way, it's MQTT/AMQP. Interfacing with a company owned API like Siri/Google is always going to be dictated by the said company. I don't see anything here that Mozilla CAN influence

<comment><USER48> MQTT is messaging protocol. Is there standardized messages for controlling devices?

Also, there can be different protocols for talking to devices and for talking between computers, gateways, and services. Most home automation devices don't speak Internet protocols and need a gateway as bridge and implement more complicated controls. Devices need to worry about low power, bandwidth, and limited processing power. Might be good idea for security if devices aren't available on Internet routed protocols.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> what does this mean?</comment>


Apple is testing its own phone service - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/3/9089911/apple-mvno-phone-service-being-tested-report

<comment><USER2> I know this is borderline socialism, but I wish the federal government would mandate that wireless spectrum holders could no longer sell DIRECTLY to consumers, in the same way that car manufacturers can no longer sell cars directly to the public (and have to go through dealerships).

Imagine, for a second, if AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile had to split their companies into the arm that maintains the towers/infrastructure/etc and the arm that resells to consumers. These two companies would have no formal relationship, and would have to form new contracts which put a dollar price on spectrum access, which the retail arm then resells to consumers with bundled phones/support/value-adds/etc.

Now smaller companies can fairly compete and even larger companies like AT&T's retail arm could utilise multiple pieces of infrastrastructure to improve their service area and signal. Essentially you're unbundling the retail business from the core infrastructure society now relies upon, but you aren't nationalising them, they're still privately owned, and the shareholders would just get shares in each of the split companies.

There are multiple examples of this already: roads, railways, airports, electricity/gas/water, and so on. But this time you're accomplishing the same thing without the need for nationalisation.

Right now having the retail and infrastructure parts of the business together in single companies is actually hurting the US's competitive landscape, since the retail part will only expand the infrastructure just as much as they NEED to and barely more. However, if the infrastructure part made all of their money from just infrastructure, they'd have more motivation to keep pushing that forward, rather than looking at retail changes to accomplish the same thing. Giving the infrastructure part singular focus/mission/task.

<comment><USER3> Sounds like BT Openreach, the last mile provider of BT Group, selling to BT Retail and BT Wholesale on the same terms as any other ISP or phone company in the UK.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Gnod – Global Network of Discovery - <AUTHOR> http://www.gnod.com <comment><USER2> I dunno how old this is but I feel like I've been using it to discover music since I was 15 or something? Years ago I discovered Camera obscura via Belle and Sebastian and fastball and I've been listening to them ever since.. I also thought it was called the Global Network of Dreams. It's a pretty awsome tool.

<comment><USER3> Yup, your feeling is correct. When I wrote my first self-learning discovery tool, it was the one that asks the visitor for 3 bands and then suggests other bands based on what it learned so far. And for some reason I called it "Global Network Of Dreams" at that time. Glad it worked for you!

<comment><USER2> You are cool. Thanks fo being cool.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The music discovery gave me some new bands that don't have a lot of listeners.

Thanks! I'll be back for more.

</comment><comment><USER5> Visited, could not discover any content or interactions on my iPhone. What's supposed to be happening?

Edit: on second reload, I can now touch the different spikes to open website sections. Cool little animation :-)

</comment><comment><USER6> I like it. The initial UI is confusing, but also intriguing. The author reco it gave (David Liss) was good.

If you have 3 people working on this, presumably you have an actual product on the way, care to share more?

</comment><comment><USER7> In desktop Firefox (on Windows 10), the text on the map doesn't spread out, so you end up with a bunch of names written on top of each other.

Checked it in Chrome and it seems like a cool idea.

<comment><USER3> Really? I can't reproduce it. For a specific map? Which version? Do you have any add-ons active?

<comment><USER7> It's at least the movie and literature maps, with Firefox 54.0.1 (32-bit) on Windows 10 (64-bit). I am on a Windows Insider Preview build (16241.1001), so that could be it. Still broken with all add-ons disabled.

Working fine in Firefox 54.0.1 on my Debian laptop.

<comment><USER3> Is it giving you an error in the console? "names written on top of each other" sounds like the script is executed partly and then stopped.

<comment><USER7> The console reports: Error in parsing value for 'left'. Declaration dropped. Error in parsing value for 'top'. Declaration dropped.

A little debugging shows that a NaN is getting into the item properties and then propagating through the calculations until it gets to the style.left= line where it fails, preventing the item from moving.

Resizing the window will make everything start working.

<comment><USER3> I see. I have some ideas what it could be. But since no Win10+FF combination I tried shows this behaviour, it's hard to debug. If you like, shoot me an email. Maybe we find a bug in the Win10 preview or Firefox.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's like a modern Zombocom.

</comment><comment><USER9> Cool project. Can you share more on how you created the site?

<comment><USER3> It's completely written from scratch. On top of a typical LAMP stack.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Your website is confusing.

<comment><USER11> More specifically, in Firefox on Android it shows some kind of multi-colored star with no descriptions.

<comment><USER3> That's correct. When you click the rays of the star, descriptions of the different Gnod sections should appear though.

<comment><USER11> I did. I must admit though that clicking 8 or something rays without having a single clue where they'll take me got old really really fast IMO.

I'm no UX-er but I think this is what is described as mystery meat navigation.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hans Reiser: former genius, convicted murderer and future mad scientist? - <AUTHOR> http://tacomaconfidential.typepad.com/the_murder_book_2008/2010/10/hans-reiser-former-genius-convicted-murderer-and-future-mad-scientist.html <comment><USER2> Hans Reiser is above and beyond all a fucking psychopath. It is obvious to me that the cloning story is just a ploy for him to make some money. It seems ridiculous at first glance, but it has a chance of working.

You see Hans knows very well that he had a huge groups of fans and supporters and that those supporters were not very smart and supported him even after the evidence against him got more and more obvious and incontrovertible. I remember that even after he led the police to her body there were huge discussions on slashdot and some people were still talking about how he was still somehow unfairly treated by the justice system and Nina somehow brought this about on herself.

Psychopaths are very adept at using people, and I bet Hans just feels that there still are some people he can use out there. The problem is that after he showed her body to the police even his most ardent fans would have to admit that he killed her.

So he comes up with this story that he wants to clone her to give her the happy childhood that she missed. (Notice that he did not say that he wanted to give her her adulthood which she missed because he killed her).

Obviously a smart and practical person like him knows that this will not work. Even if cloning were possible, you would create a different person. It would be a different person with the same DNA but a different person nevertheless.

So yes, he is just a psychopath that wants to get another bunch of money from the fools that used to believe him.

<comment><USER3> For those who don't appreciate exactly what psychopath means, see <http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html>

<comment><USER4> An interesting read, but I will note that the linked article is from Robert Hare's own website, and it reeks of pop-psychology and pop-science (lots of anecdotal evidence, and claims of him being a misunderstood pioneer, not much in the way of actual verifiable arguments or even proper citations). I know that the idea of the psychopath, the unrepentant criminal or person without the ability for empathy, has become popular recently, but I am skeptical of some of the claims I've seen about the nature of the condition itself, the diagnosis of the condition, how common it is, and the possibility of any sort of rehabilitation.

<comment><USER5> It's on his site because he asked the author apparently if it is ok to reproduce it, but it's written by one 'Robert Hercz', it was the cover story of the Sep. 8th 2001 issue of Saturday Night magazine.

That's not exactly a scientific publication either, but it is not as if he wrote it himself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I can tighten up the headline: "Hans Reiser: Delusional."

It is obvious he lives in a totally different world than the one most of us live in. I would call it "anti-world" because really bad things happened when it collided with "normal-world".

</comment><comment><USER5> Poor kids. Nina is out of it, Hans serves his sentence in jail, and those kids are left without their parents and very little understanding of what the hell happened to their lives in a way that will ever make sense to them.

Seeing their father in the news like this isn't going to help them at all, it's bad enough to see their father as a former open source contributor turned murderer of their mom.

Yes, that's a 'think of the children' argument, but in this case it is very specific children that I have in mind and I think it is a valid point.

</comment><comment><USER7> Reiser could have been out of jail for several months now, if he had accepted the first deal he was offered:

        Judge Goodman essentially confirmed the nature of
        the crime from the bench. He said that he initially
        agreed — prior to Reiser's trial that
        began in November — to accept a voluntary
        manslaughter plea deal. Goodman said he would have
        given Reiser the minimum, three-year term. The
        maximum for that heat-of-passion crime was 11 years.

        Reiser refused the offer, which required him to
        produce the body and explain the crime, the judge
        said.    Had he accepted, he would have likely been
        released next May, the judge said. "That deal was
        rejected by Mr. Reiser. He chose, if you will, to
        roll the dice," Goodman said.

        Defense attorney William DuBois said, "It's beyond
        me" why his client did not accept the original
        offer.

        The judge said he would have approved the deal to
        bring immediate closure to family and friends of
        the victim, and to prevent the young Reiser boy,
        who is now 8, from having to testify. The judge
        said it would have also spared taxpayers the
        expense of a trial.

<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/07/judge-says-reis/>

I agree with DuBois. Consider the three possibilities:

1\. Gamble with a trial, get lucky, and win. Get out as soon as the trial is over, end of April 2008.

2\. Take the involuntary manslaughter deal. Get out May 2009.

3\. Gamble with a trial, and lose. 25 to life. Make a deal then, and maybe get that knocked down to 15 to life.

Would anyone here have rejected the deal in his situation? Remember, you _know_ that you are guilty, so going to trial means you are betting that you did such a good job of hiding the body and other evidence that they won't get a conviction.

<comment><USER8> Well, he _did_ do a good enough job of hiding the body. The evidence against him was circumstantial. Given what we know about his character, I have no trouble believing he believed he could explain it away. People have been found not guilty due to reasonable doubt on evidence stronger than in his case.

<comment><USER5> > The evidence against him was circumstantial.

The evidence was actually pretty good. Yes, there was no body which makes it circumstantial but the total body of evidence was such that it would have been very surprising if he had walked. Car seats don't go 'missing' just like that, cars don't suddenly get flooded and large bloodstains do not suddenly appear, and definitely not all around the moment when a person suddenly disappears.

Most explanations of these circumstances would stretch credulity considerably.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> FTA: He proposes that in 12 years, when he is released, that he be allowed to clone his wife and provide her with the good childhood she missed.

There is a fine line between genius and madness. Where is the remorse for his actions?

<comment><USER10> _Where is the remorse for his actions?_

Weird? Yes. Uncomfortable? Yes. Not living on the same planet as the rest of us? Yes.

But perhaps that's his way of showing remorse. Give her another chance at life, one that he took away.

<comment><USER11> "Give her another chance at life"

The "her" you refer to no longer exists, and never will again (at least in this sector of the multiverse).

What he would be giving "another chance at life" to would be a wholly distinct organism that happens to share the same DNA.

<comment><USER12> And this wholly distinct organism would no doubt wind up having a totally screwed-up life.

Just imagine... you're a perfectly normal young girl growing up in a middle- class household -- you probably told that these people raising you are your aunts and uncles. But then one day your family decides you're old enough to be told the truth -- you're a clone of their mother, who was murdered by their father. Your purpose in life is to be happy in order to make up for the long- dead woman who shares your DNA.

No thanks, I'd much rather take the genetic lottery. And this is why I oppose human cloning -- I can't think of any circumstances in which growing up as a clone of someone else (probably someone much older) wouldn't suck.

<comment><USER13> Ever see Anna to the Infinite Power? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_to_the_Infinite_Power>

Other than the specific circumstances of the mother being murdered by the father, that's kind of close to the plot of this movie.

The movie also some pretty weird ideas about what cloning is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Without a massive boost in senility, a lobotomy or way too many psychoactive drugs, isn't it kind of hard for one to become a "former genius?"

<comment><USER15> Dunno...

Is "genius" some kind of IQ score that is measured abstractly? Can one be a "genius" behind bars or homeless? Or is "genius" measured by actions, as in inventing something like a filesystem? If the latter, does one piercing insight net you the genius title for life, or must one keep it up?

I can see how one definition of the word "genius" might be the _realization_ of creative and intellectual potential, and one could consider this type of genius a temporary title that must be "renewed" through ongoing and active creation and intellectual activity.

This particular definition seems to be in harmony with widespread HN values, namely that it is not enough to have ideas, one must also manifest them to earn full admiration. In which case, Mt. Reiser might well be a former genius for the purposes of ongoing realization of creative and intellectual potential.

<comment><USER16> Exactly. A functional description of genius, i.e. one that is applied to subjects meeting certain criteria, is the only description that makes sense. Let's not forget that genius does not describe a particular brain configuration, but rather a specific perception/archetype that exists in some cultures.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Maaaaaaaybe we'd better look over that Reiser FS source code, just one more. Just in case.

</comment><comment><USER18> Reiser's lack of awareness of the feelings of others is extremely disturbing.

I hope somebody saves this article and mails it to the parole board.

W T F

</comment><comment><USER19> Hans Reiser lecture (video) on the Reiser4 file system at Stanford in October 2005. <http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/permlinks/051026.html>

</comment><comment><USER20> ReiserFS: The filesystem with killer performance.

</comment><comment><USER21> How can someone can contribute to such a big part of the open source community and take someone's life? It's like being bipolar on some level.

I didn't know about this guy until today and now I'm freaked out about reading open source projects discussions :P</comment>


Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S - <AUTHOR> http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/tesla-adds-titanium-underbody-shield-and-aluminum-deflector-plates-model-s <comment><USER3> "We believe these changes will also help prevent a fire resulting from an extremely high speed impact that tears the wheels off the car, like the other Model S impact fire, which occurred last year in Mexico. This happened after the vehicle impacted a roundabout at 110 mph, shearing off 15 feet of concrete curbwall and tearing off the left front wheel, then smashing through an eight foot tall buttressed concrete wall on the other side of the road and tearing off the right front wheel, before crashing into a tree. The driver stepped out and walked away with no permanent injuries and a fire, again limited to the front section of the vehicle, started several minutes later. The underbody shields will help prevent a fire even in such a scenario."

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

<comment><USER4> Sounds plausible I Guess but I wonder how Tesla in this crash description circumvented Sir Isaac Newton's laws of motion and the bodily damage the driver should have incurred on negative G's.

<comment><USER5> The longer something takes to slow down the less acceleration it experiences.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is what you get when a company/group/effort/community is lead by a "benevolent dictator" \- someone with an absolutely pure vision of what they want their output to look like and the autonomy and strength to make it so no matter what.

I love this... I actually love that it probably pissed off Musk to no end the amount of attention the fires got and out of spite he went totally over the top and added ballistic plating to the bottom of the car as a super- constructive "fuck you" to everyone that bitched about it.

I am picturing this same thing happening at Chrysler or GM and I think 9 out of 10 CEOs would just let the whole non-issue blow over and go back to business - and the 1 CEO that would try and push for a ridiculous over- engineering solution like this would probably get shot down by the board.

That's why I like this, it's going way above and beyond because he can and because he believes in the vision he is selling so firmly that there is no wiggle room: "My cars are the best and goddamnit, I'm going to make them the best."

<standard disclaimers about personal viewpoints and preferences>

Just want to focus on the pursuit of perfection that I find so energizing - <USER2> put another way, if you had someone this passionate running each of the major airlines, I wonder what air travel would be like instead of the race-to-the- bottom experience it is now.

<comment><USER7> > This is what you get when a company/group/effort/community is lead by a > "benevolent dictator" \- someone with an absolutely pure vision of what they > want their output to look like and the autonomy and strength to make it so > no matter what.

Good explanation of Steve Jobs as well IMO

<comment><USER8> Unfortunately not. Apple's success was many times _despite_ Jobs. He was indeed a visionary, but 'benevolent' is the precise wrong term for him.

<comment><USER9> Well, not to other people, no. "Benevolent" would be the last word I'd choose to describe him.

But I believe Jobs was "benevolent" to the product itself.

<comment><USER10> Yup. Benevolent in this case has nothing to do with the person's personal treatment of others, and everything to do with the person being willing to serve the company/state rather than herself. The conventional dictators in failed states simply extract as much value as they can, at the expense of everyone else. A benevolent dictator uses her power to advance the cause. The way she does it might be suspect, even unethical or wrong, but there's no denying that it's to further the cause rather than selfishly extract-and-dump.

<comment><USER8> > Yup. Benevolent in this case has nothing to do with the person's personal > treatment of others, and everything to do with the person being willing to > serve the company/state rather than herself

Jobs made billions. Your sentence is subsequently nonsense.

<comment><USER10> Allow me to clarify. The difference between a failed-state dictator and a benevolent one isn't how much money they have in their banks at the end of it, but how much they grew their nation/state/company/organization/brand in the process. I think it's fine for a CEO to be compensated in the billions if he does it by making his company billions more. It's a question of the relationship the CEO has with wealth- does she help to create it, or is she just siphoning it into her pockets?

It's not always clear, but I think it's an important thing to consider. The size of a CEO's bank account alone is insufficient information for a meaningful answer.

<comment><USER8> > The difference between a failed-state dictator and a benevolent one isn't > how much money they have in their banks at the end of it, but how much they > grew their nation/state/company/organization/brand in the process

Are you joking? Is this your serious view of reality? That dictators are fine as long as they make the country as a whole richer?

<comment><USER10> I'm not making any normative statements about what is fine and what is not fine. I don't claim to have such moral authority.

All I'm saying is that different dictators achieve different things. Some 'dictators' enrich their countries, and some 'dictators' impoverish it. Similarly, some 'democracies' enrich their countries, and some 'democracies' impoverish them.

That's all I'm saying.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "However, to improve things further, we provided an over-the-air software update a few months ago to increase the default ground clearance of the Model S at highway speeds"

I know this is not specific to Tesla, but it's still really cool. :)

<comment><USER12> Is someone able to explain this more?

"Default ground clearance" means the distance between the ground and underside of the car, yeah? How are they able to control that with software?

<comment><USER13> Other responders answered well enough, but I'll add some additional info.

Tesla just started pushing out OTA updates to firmware 5.9 this week. One of the big improvements in it is bringing back the option to select a low height mode. When the problems mentioned in the article happened, they pushed out a rapid update that disabled the automatic low suspension setting entirely. Frankly, this upset a few of the vocal owners on the teslamotorsclub.com forums because they understood the risk and felt it was slight enough they preferred it versus the reduced handling and performance at a higher ride height.

The re-introduced low height is enhanced to allow the driver to set the speed at which it will change height. This is satisfying most if not all of those owners.

Driving a car that gets better as you own it instead of worse is a game changing model in my opinion.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why would Elon choose to post on Medium and not on the blog of Tesla? It would definitively bring more credence to post it on their official website. Until reading near the end I wasn't sure it was a Tesla employee/official or a third party story (and I use the term _story_ here and not _article_ on purpose because usually on Medium it is more _stories_ than _facts_ ).

<comment><USER15> Kimbal Musk is CEO of Medium and his brother. I guess that is enough to explain why :)

<comment><USER16> You're thinking of Me.dium, which turned into OneRiot and was then acquired by WalmartLabs. No relationship with Ev Williams's Medium. Also, Kimbal is on Tesla's board, so it's not just a family relationship.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Almost got the wording perfect! (under shield vs underbody shield)

1 point by utefan001 175 days ago | link

I am sure it is easier said than done, but it seems like the batteries simply need to be better protected. Something like a carbon fiber or titanium under shield.

<comment><USER18> Wouldn't carbon fiber shatter in an impact though? It's light, but it doesn't seem like a good material for a skid plate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's really difficult to emphasize how excessive this is. As a mechanical engineer, I knew just by reading the title that this is really excessive, because the titanium alloy used is definitely a marketing stunt.

Titanium has unbelievable tensile strength for its weight, but there's no good reason to make an "underbody shield" out of titanium except for publicity. It would make way more sense to use steel (and maybe you could make a case for something ultra light weight, like carbon fiber, but probably not).

<comment><USER20> " the shields prevented any damage that could cause a fire or penetrate the existing quarter inch of ballistic grade aluminum armor plate that already protects the battery pack"

Ballistic grade aluminum armor plate... If there is one thing Tesla does well it is publicity. I know there are high strength steels but it seems like they want something that is strong and light. If it sounds like something impenetrable to the average customer that's even better for Tesla.

<comment><USER21> > Ballistic grade aluminum armor plate...

That's from the same marketing phrase-book as 'aircraft-grade aluminium'.

Lightweight armour ( e.g. personal protection ) uses ceramic plates.

Heavy armour ( e.g. tanks ) still uses steel alloys with composite and plastic layers. There were a few AFVs with aluminium armour, such as the M113 and Sheridan, but ballistic protection was restricted to small-arms and light shrapnel. A Sheridan could be ripped apart by a 12.7mm DhSK.

<comment><USER22> A quick Google search indicates that it's used commonly in armored cars and military vehicles.

eg: [http://www.alcoa.com/global/en/products/product.asp?prod_id=...](http://www.alcoa.com/global/en/products/product.asp?prod_id=4307)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> In a sense, Teslas are the _least_ safe cars on the road, because I'd kill every single one of you in order to own one.

<comment><USER20> I would really love to drive a Model S. I'm not sure if all of the Californians on HN realize how special CA is for seeing awesome cars. I saw cars that I never thought I would see in person (in my lifetime) when I was in CA. Not only that but you would see them a handful at a time. I know of 4-5 Model S' in the Pittsburgh area but rarely see exotics.

<comment><USER24> [http://getaround.com/ModelS](http://getaround.com/ModelS)

I've driven it 3 times now and plan to do so again. $25/hour makes for a really fun weekend outing.

<comment><USER20> That site basically works for CA and Chicago. This just proves my point about CA having awesome cars everywhere. You can rent a Model S for $25!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> "An ode to passive/aggressive and hyper defensive writing"

Did this remind anyone else of when the smartest kid in the room was forced to apologize for something and you got the classic non apology apology?

Keep building great cars Elon and changing the world. Understand that we understand that there will be (I almost said bumps in the road) and that no one expected you to be perfect in every way from the very beginning. Trust someone close to you to help write these things.

"When you're doing something as new as we are with Tesla you're going to draw an outsized amount of scrutiny. Even though these fires were both in extreme circumstances, and that fires are sadly a regular occurrence for all vehicle makers, as a brand new concept it's not good enough for us to say 'We're as safe as any other comparable high end vehicle' We have to go a step further. And so today I'm announcing......" I mean I'm just throwing something together quickly but I'm trying to put some substance here vs sounding randomly snarky.

<comment><USER26> I'd be pretty damn actively aggressive if someone was trying to make me apologize for manufacturing a car that kept its occupant safe in a 110mph crash.

<comment><USER25> I think that's how he feels. And yet they've decided to add the titanium plate. Which is why maybe someone else should (help) write these.

<comment><USER26> Who? A PR drone who would say much while communicating nothing, and do so in the most boring, robotic manner possible?

Normal people don't spend their time thinking about how much more they would like it if an executive's statements conformed to the PR industry's self- serving standards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> People want to test this car to extremes, it is as if they are subjecting it it the coding equivalent of DDOS attack with some sql injection payload of a Stuxnet virus. Let's see what else the media find wrong with this car, e.g.:

 _' After flying into a cloud of paint and superglue the windscreen wipers failed to work resulting in a dangerous collision'._

(As if that happens every day and as if any other car would do better.)

If the naysayers keep up their petulant trolling then this car will be good for a road trip in Afghanistan some time soon.

</comment><comment><USER28> Elon is revealing too much hubris in his messaging. You can treat people around you like that, but lining up too many people against you is foolish.

His intent is to PR+burnish the added safety feature. Instead of selling it as an objective demonstration of the leadership tact that Tesla takes in ensuring driver security, he gets passive-aggressive.

Instead of laying out a tremendous history of safety as a foundation for a vision of the future of driving, he lords it as an accomplished achievement... which means the first time someone gets stuck inside the car and is burned alive, all these statements will bite him in the ass. It doesn't matter if that happened 100 times in gas cars the same year. Those manufacturers weren't overselling it.

In aggressively projecting strength, it expresses weakness.

<comment><USER29> tesla is weak. they are a huge underdog against the other car companies. they are david versus goliath. they are being cocky. that's what the small dog does :-)

there is a risk of a bad accident that could be bad pr. that risk exists with or without the arrogance. elon musk has a high tolerance for calculated risk. that's why he's a billionaire and you and i are 2nd guessing him on hacker news.

<comment><USER30> "elon musk has a high tolerance for calculated risk"

And perhaps he will be the survivor that is referred to when stories about survivorship bias are passed around. Or maybe he will crash and burn with that calculated risk.

"that's why he's a billionaire and you and i are 2nd guessing him on hacker news."

There are billionaires (or close to it) on hacker news btw.

Of course if one of those "billionaires" went out and said something like that that wouldn't go over to well would it?

Would you like a commenter on HN to say something like "well that's why you are driving a used Yugo and I am driving a brand new Lamborghini that I paid cash for?" as justification for why they know something or are somehow better than you are?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> On the website: "Welcome! We noticed that you are in Canada . Would you like to view the Canadian version of the site? Visit the Canadian Site" as a small unobtrusive banner along the bottom of the screen that disappears if I continue to scroll through the article. This is the BEST implementation of this geothing I have ever seen. Especially compared to Newegg's massive grey screen banner that asks me every fucking time and never remembers my answer.

</comment><comment><USER32> The biggest take away from that article for me is that they are offering the fix for free to current owners. How many other car companies would do that? Unless they where required to by law which is clearly not the case here.

</comment><comment><USER29> The risk of fire from collision was significantly higher that from conventional ICE. The figures Elon used included fires from electrical and mechanical failures, and even arson. Raising the car mitigated the risks in the short term. This is a long term solution. Kudos.

Here is full statistical analysis of why it was a real problem.

[http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/24190-Discussi...](http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/24190-Discussion- of-statistical-analysis-of-vehicle-fires-as-it-relates-to- Model-S?p=503252&viewfull=1#post503252)

</comment><comment><USER33> The post doesn't mention the titanium alloy or thickness of the shield, both of which make a significant difference. Pure titanium (Grade 2) isn't especially strong compared to aluminum or steel, but it is less expensive. Heat treated 6Al-4V alloy, AKA Grade 5 on the other hand, is the stuff used in military aircraft and the like.

</comment><comment><USER34> "This happened after the vehicle impacted a roundabout at 110 mph"

My pity meter regarding the resulting vehicle fire doesn't seem to be moving.

<comment><USER28> Let me send you an over the air update to your geek control unit. You're supposed to be cackling with joy along with Elon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Dear Internet, please make a tumblr of Tesla car gifs running over things. Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER36> Very, _very_ good idea.

Personally I think the ground clearance is still a bit on the low side.

It looks like it lost a bolt or something in the first impact image... oops.

<comment><USER37> I noticed that too but can't tell whether it's a plastic "rivet". If you look at the plastic fairings on your car, you'll see that many are held to the body with a snap-fit plastic connector. These are also used as blind fittings on many interior panels (such as door panels). They break and detach often enough that my local hardware store carries the more common ones.

<comment><USER38> Definitely a plastic rivet. It's too pointy to be a bolt, and you can see the thin 'head' separated from the flange which releases it.

<comment><USER13> Yep, I can confirm, there are hundreds of those throughout the car to connect pieces that are either cosmetic or not tied to the safety or performance of the car. For instance, the plastic shell inside the frunk is connected to the car with them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> "With a track record of zero deaths or serious, permanent injuries since our vehicles went into production six years ago, there is no safer car on the road than a Tesla."

I don't doubt that the Tesla Model S is a very safe car as tests have shown. With that said, how many deaths and serious injuries would have been expected considering the same number of miles driven with normal cars? Are Teslas actually substantially safer than other cars or are there just few enough out there that no serious injuries have happened?

<comment><USER40> Yes, they actually are in the 99th percentile of safety among all cars ever tested in the USA (per the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). So it's not just that most ppl 2 po'.

<comment><USER39> What I actually want to know is if you had the same number of other average cars driving the same distance as the Teslas, how many people could you expect to be killed in these cars.

Here is my crude estimation. If we consider that there are 3.2 * 10^-4 people killed in traffic per car per year[1] and that there are 20000 Tesla Model S on the road[2], then we get that there should have been about 6 deaths.

Now most of the Teslas have not been on the road for a whole year probably so I'm not sure how valid this estimation is.

This seems to be some indication that zero deaths is very low for this number of cars but to be sure I think one would need to make a more detailed estimate. Doing some statistical analysis would also be good.

[1] [https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=traffic+deaths+per+car...](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=traffic+deaths+per+car+in+the+us) [2][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S)

<comment><USER41> Thats a terrible metric if you consider that some cars cost more to insure not because of the vehicle or make but simply because of the kind of people that tend to drive it.

<comment><USER39> Of course, that's why I said it was a crude estimate.

On the other hand, since the Tesla S is a quite high performance car, you could expect it to get into more accidents than the average car.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Always impressed in the companys ability to push things further. They will do to some of the current manufactures what Apple did to Blackberry and Nokia.

<comment><USER43> I kinda feel Nokia self destructed more than it was destroyed by Apple. It was a sad journey to watch right up the the sale. But reminds me I should see what's the latest with Sailfish and Ubuntu Touch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> As soon as I have funds to do so, I'm buying a Tesla Model S. I'm amazed at the dedication to the process of building a superior product.

</comment><comment><USER45> You know what I love about Tesla? They continue to innovate and create change in the auto industry, most of all as a company they are powered by transparency.

Similar to other luxury auto companies they facilitate innovation. While luxury car companies strive to create beautiful, seamless and future-forward vehicles at a high cost, they can afford (similar to startups) to bring in new ideas to not only rule out competition but give them a market advantage. For example - recently McLaren came up with a way to introduce sound waves, instead of windshield wipers, wipers are a pain! (Not to say that the device generating the waves wouldn't be) Can you imagine toyota, chrysler, or ford doing something of the sort? Of Course not - it takes probably 20 hours for them to build one of theirs, where it might take Rolls Royce 6-7 months. However there are different profit margins and reputable name sake.

I like to think Elon has engineered his company nicely in between :), he surely got pissed off by the media and had fun adding that ballistic plate to the bottom

</comment><comment><USER46> I just had a thought that Elon Musk owning both Tesla and SpaceX, the next logical step would be an electric powered airplane or a chopper. It could be an airplane/chopper that would glide down to safety in case of a mechanical failure, or crash land on rough terrain without fear of catching fire. That would disrupt aviation industry like never before.

<comment><USER47> Musk has spoken about electric aircraft. It's inevitable and just a question of batteries.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> > _we provided an over-the-air software update a few months ago to increase > the default ground clearance of the Model S at highway speeds_

Let's just think about how awesome that is for a moment.

<comment><USER49> I was just about to write this....it's like Gran Turismo in real life!

This is one of those moments when we need to just stop, take a breath, and realize how truly epic and breakthrough this is.

Especially as someone that lives in a developing country...where the vast majority of the cars on the road are at least 10-years old....this is just mind-blowingly-awesome!

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> _However, to improve things further, we provided an over-the-air software update a few months ago to increase the default ground clearance of the Model S at highway speeds, substantially reducing the odds of a severe underbody impact._

This is the most crazy thing about the press release and I feel like it went largely unnoticed. Not that it is a bad thing at all but it really illustrates that we're totally living in a different world than what I grew up with. Cars are now largely defined by software.

</comment><comment><USER51> Are there any other car manufacturers that have similar levels of clearance? I'd be intrigued to see how they perform in the same test scenarios that the Teslas were run against.

<comment><USER52> The problem is the expectations for other car manufacturers are much lower in terms of safety. So these companies do not try to push the safety envelope any higher.

The exception would be Volvo.

<comment><USER20> Yep. Imagine there are plenty of gasoline cars that have the potential for the gas tank to be punctured, and well that seems like it could turn out much worse. The problem is that electric vehicles are scrutinized to the point that Tesla actually has to defend the one of chance that something punctures the battery pack. A lot of gas tanks are visible under a car with a thin layer of steel protecting them. The straps holding the tank in my Ford truck rusted through. I had the optional off road package that includes a skid plat for the gas tank. Without that plate it certainly would have dropped and I can only guess what might happen. However, that recall got nowhere near the media coverage Tesla gets for anything.

GM left bad ignition switches in the cobalt for something like 8 years. People died when the switched locked up.

<comment><USER13> Actually, in the particular case of an object such as the trailer hitch that can easily pike into the body of the car when struck, it is less likely that it would damage the fuel tank of an ICE than the battery compartment of the Model S because the gas tank on an ICE is at the rear, and the object would likely pike well before getting all the way back there. Since the battery of the Model S extends all the way to the front axle, there is a greater risk.

All that said, there is still the risk of the object striking some critical component in the engine of an ICE which is typically in the front. And the strike could easily damage something like a fuel line which could possibly start a fire.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53>
        "However, to improve things further, we provided an over-
        the-air software update a few months ago to increase the
        default ground clearance of the Model S at highway speeds,
        substantially reducing the odds of a severe underbody
        impact."

How can a software update impact ground clearance at highway speeds? Is this some special capability of the suspension in a Tesla or are more cars capable of this type of adjustment?

<comment><USER54> The ground clearance is controlled in software. I'm not sure if it's pneumatic or something else, but it's definitely under the control of some computer system somewhere in the car.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Cause and effect: A statistically insignificant number of fires in Teslas caused a disproportionate amount of news coverage (there was much less news coverage about Tesla's best-ever safety rating). This perception needs to be overcome, even if it means informed consumers having to pay for titanium underneath otherwise safe cars. Tesla is doing their part, but it's a shame to see so many outside factors driving up the cost.

<comment><USER56> I worry about the effects of this overdoing it on the eventual Gen 3 vehicle. Clearly, at least in general a luxury vehicle that costs $70-100K is going to have more wizbang safety features than a $35K mid-range car. However, if Tesla is advocating this shielding to make electric batteries less likely to catch on fire, and then the Gen 3 skimps on electric-specific safety features they could definitely get PR flak for it. On the other hand, if they want to maintain this super-safe image, it is going to push the price up (and my guess the timeout out) for the more general appeal vehicle.

I'm hoping that my current vehicle lasts just long enough (both in terms of mechanically, and my patience with it getting older) for Tesla to come out with something in my price range.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Nice move on their part. I think while the Tesla may be less fire-prone than other cars, Musk exaggerates it:

"The odds of fire in a Model S, at roughly 1 in 8,000 vehicles, are five times lower than those of an average gasoline car..."

What matters is the miles driven by cars, not the number of cars on the roads. It seems likely that other cars are driven longer distances, and Tesla cars are probably used by many owners as a second car.

<comment><USER58> Exaggeration, perhaps, but the majority of collisions occur on local roads rather than on highways, and as you say, the Tesla is more likely to be used locally than on long highway trips, hence more exposed to drunks running stop signs and so forth.

<comment><USER59> None of which has anything to do with vehicle fires, which is the topic at hand.

<comment><USER58> Vehicle fires are a potential result of collisions, no? They don't just occur spontaneously.

<comment><USER59> Sure they do. Vehicle fires occur spontaneously, due to sabotage (the most common reason), due to various acts of god, due to road debris, and due to collisions.

Anyway, two of the three Tesla fires were on freeways, not local roads. The third was under somewhat mysterious circumstances (Mexico).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Kudos for an engineering led solution. I have no idea what "ballistics grade aluminum" is (since nobody uses ALU for ballistics armour##), but Ti has more inherent toughness# and seems a better fit as a skid-plate.

# elongation and tensile strength.

## The ballistic standard for armour (RHA) is a 1/4 steel plate. Ballistic Alu is roughly 1/2 inch or double the thickness used here, in most applications.

<comment><USER61> Think tanks not people. Aluminum is far cheaper than what you would put in armor vests but still light and strong. Ceramics are arguably better overall, but combining the two is a net win. Anyway, ballistic grade aluminum actually does refer to something and is probably better for cars which don't have to deal with anti tank rounds.

EX: [http://www.cliftonsteel.com/aluminum-armor- plate.html](http://www.cliftonsteel.com/aluminum-armor-plate.html)

<comment><USER60> Yeah, I hear you but 1/4 inch is not bulletproof. Its like saying "ballistics grade sand". Which in sufficient thicknesses, is bulletproof =D.

 _" MIL-DTL-46027 is supplied as a 5083-H131 product. Ballistic reports are supplied for thicknesses over 0.499" per specification. Our stock range is 0.250" thru 3". Typical stock size is 72" wide x 144" long."_

Similar qualification for

MIL-DTL-46063 REV H OR LATEST

[http://www.cliftonsteel.com/aluminum-armor- plate.html](http://www.cliftonsteel.com/aluminum-armor-plate.html)

<comment><USER60> For more reference on mil-spec ballistic tests, see

[http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a481408.pdf](http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a481408.pdf)

Section 4, figure 4 (p.7)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Tesla will need to continue to fight this PR with the truth and improvements like this; for the big 3, the oil companies, and dealership organizations will continue to try to put them down.

They need us to help spread the truth, as much as we need significant improvements in the automotive/transportation industry.

</comment><comment><USER63> Did anyone else notice a screw coming detached from the titanium underbody shield after the impact of the three ball tow hitch, you can also see the shield bend on the impact of the concrete block and the hole where the screw was. It would be kind of ironic if this actually made the car less safe.

<comment><USER64> Plastic rivet, used to hold other plastic pieces to the underside of the car. Probably in this case it's holding on a plastic splash/aero shield, which is what bent. No big deal.

Damn things fall off all the time. Go look under yours, I bet you're missing a few. And you haven't crushed any alternators in the process.

I was actually pretty disappointed to see that--because I hate those things. I guess it was too much to believe that Tesla wouldn't have any of those damned plastic clips. I guess once I get my (rather unlikely) Model S I'll still have a reason to go to AutoZone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> There's another side for the story.. Car Dealers Could be "Napsterized"

[http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2014/03/24/tesla-raises-fears- that-...](http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2014/03/24/tesla-raises-fears-that-car- dealers-could-be-napsterized/)

</comment><comment><USER66> Assuming the underbody plate is only 2mm thick, the Model S is suddenly accelerating 5% slower. To put it otherwise, every acceleration now takes at least 4% more energy (> 0.01 kWh for an acceleration from from 0 to 65 mph). Sounds great for city driving.

<comment><USER67> Can we see your calculation and reasoning or did you make the numbers up?

<comment><USER66> Footprint is 2×5 m. Sheet volume is 2×5×0.002 = 0.02 m³. Titanium density is 4507 kg/m³. That gives 90 kg. Without the aluminium deflector.

Normal Tesla Model S curb weight is 2108 kg according to Wikipedia. Extra 90 kg is 4.2% mass increase => 4.2% more kinetic energy at the same speed => more energy consumption to accelerate. It also means, that the same force applied to the heavier Model S will accelerate it slower (a = F/m).

<comment><USER67> I appreciate the response.

I'm still skeptical about the actual energy usage. If the % more kinetic energy applies equally to battery energy usage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> "However, to improve things further, we provided an over-the-air software update a few months ago to increase the default ground clearance of the Model S at highway speeds, substantially reducing the odds of a severe underbody impact."

That is just so cool.

</comment><comment><USER69> Definitely the amount of effort Tesla is devoting to ensure the safety of passengers is highly appreciated. I was awaiting for their Cars to be launched in my country. Definitely I would buy one :) Keep rocking Tesla!

</comment><comment><USER70> An OTA update to increase the ground clearance at highway speeds. Wow. Just wow. I for one welcome the future and please give this man all the money he wants.

</comment><comment><USER71> love Musk's posts, esp "peace of mind", free retrofit, and that amazing crash that was walked away from.

but although there's "ballistic" grade alumimium, titanium that's usually found in "military" applications, and the steel "spear" braced in asphalt test, will it survive assault rifle fire? or anti-tank weapons? how about a tactical nuclear strike? i mean, is it _really_ safe?

<comment><USER72> Yeah I can already see the headlines.

> "Model S catches fire due to direct impact from nuclear missile".

Media goes apeshit and Musk responds by equipping Model S with anti-missile defense system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> "In short, if you ever run over a human head the car is designed to complete decimate it and break it into several pieces." Wow that's harsh.

</comment><comment><USER74> I'm guessing the actual titanium shield is relatively small, but either way I hope it's welded to the car well, as that stuff is valuable.

<comment><USER75> Titanium is more expensive than it is valuable. Most of the high cost of titanium products comes from the relatively very expensive purification process and difficulty machining.

<comment><USER76> "is more expensive than it is valuable" does not makes sense, since the value of something is what people are willing to pay for it. If it is expensive then it has a high value.

<comment><USER77> Not so. Expensive - how much it costs to make it. Valuable - how much someone else would pay for it.

So, if I was to spent loads on parts to make a relatively useless widget that fills a particular niche in my daily life, it would be expensive, but I wouldn't view it as valuable. It's only as valuable as it is expensive if there are lots of people who want it, which is not the case for custom work.

<comment><USER78> To expand further with example; a titanium under plate may cost $2000 to install(amort design, testing, manufacturing, etc.). But unless you happen to own a Telsa with a missing under plate it's value is less than $100 as scrap recycling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> until somebody drives Model S in Iraq and hits IED ...

</comment><comment><USER80> sounds more like a tank

</comment><comment><USER81> Long live Tesla and Elon Musk! People like him are the hope of humanity that we actually going forward (rather slowly but hey)...

</comment><comment><USER82> Elon Musk is the heartthrob of our generation, producing electric cars, space rockets, wish I was as successful.

</comment><comment><USER83> Curious that it doesn't mention battery swaps. Since this is a PR piece I'm assuming from lack of mention that you can no longer swap batteries after having the extra battery shield added.

Battery swap was always a gimmick -- you had to return to the same swap station later to get your same battery back or pay a huge fee. Come on.

It looks like they decided fires are worse PR than this gimmick is good PR.

<comment><USER28> Stop. You're harshing my myopautopia with all your fact checking. Please reaquire a position within the jerculus circulus.

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> "With a track record of zero deaths or serious, permanent injuries since our vehicles went into production six years ago, there is no safer car on the road than a Tesla."

I recall one Tesla caused death[1], and I'm sure there have been more. Not that I really think Tesla is any more dangerous than any other car in this regard though.

[1] [http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2014/02/07/tesla-driver- blames...](http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2014/02/07/tesla-driver-blames-fatal- crash-on-new-car-smell/)

<comment><USER85> Just checking... did you read that article? It says the car's "new car smell" caused the driver to suddenly fall asleep and kill a cyclist.

Not sure if the car was actually at fault there...

<comment><USER86> It actually says that the driver claimed that it was the reason.

"He told officers that the car had a strong, new-car smell that prompted him to use a baking soda car freshener in it. Jain told authorities that the smell caused him to fall asleep and there were no mechanical problems with the car..."

But you're probably correct that the car was not at fault, the driver was probably just grasping for straws.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER87> I'm sorry but my first reaction is "What a waste". Titanium is ridiculously expensive for various reasons. The best these engineers could come up with is to put a sheet of metal under the car? You got to be kidding me. I see why they have to use Titanium for it, anything else doesn't work, but it shows how far away this car is from reality and from true mass production.

<comment><USER27> My feelings too. However, as much as I like steel, I find it incredible that most cars use very heavy materials, e.g. steel, instead of aluminium, plastic, carbon fibre and titanium. Such materials are common on bicycles and planes.

Moving a tonne or two of steel around is a real waste, particularly when it rusts. At least with this wondercar the bottom is flat and aerodynamically sound, unlike all of those legacy vehicles out there.

<comment><USER20> Well, it's not like they can just redesign the entire platform at this point. Slapping some titanium on is probably the best move they can make right now. It should satisfy any government and customer concerns for a problem that was pretty rare to begin with.

As for the other materials we've been using them sparingly in vehicles. The new Ford F150 is using much more aluminum, enough to bring the weight down by about 900 pounds. Yet people are still criticizing aluminum as a material choice. It's not hard to see that aluminum, carbon fiber and other light weight materials are the future of vehicles. Yet some people are still afraid because they associate heavy steal with strength. That aluminum hood is the only part on my old truck that is not rusting through. Lighters, stronger, no rust. Where is the negative?

<comment><USER88> I think the concerns of the aluminum body panels on the new F-150 is specific to this segment (trucks). Utility vehicles are expected to take more abuse. Getting hit with tools/logs/ladders/etc. isn't uncommon and people are afraid their truck will look like a golf ball after a year.

The main drawback of aluminum body panels is that it's difficult (i.e. expensive) to make them. I would imaging fatigue (from vibrations, for example) is also a larger problem in this application with aluminum than it is with steel.

Citation on difficulties of fabrication (introduction paragraphs): [http://www.thefabricator.com/article/stamping/warm- forming-o...](http://www.thefabricator.com/article/stamping/warm-forming-of- alloys-in-the-auto-industry)

Additional considerations when designing dies for aluminum forming: [http://www.schulergroup.com/major/us/technologien/produkte/a...](http://www.schulergroup.com/major/us/technologien/produkte/aluminiumverarbeitung_systemanforderung_werkzeug/index.html)

A list of some cars using aluminum body panels: [http://www.paintgages.com/List-of-Car-Manufacturers-who- use-...](http://www.paintgages.com/List-of-Car-Manufacturers-who-use-Aluminum- Body-Panels-s/51.htm)

<comment><USER89> Land-Rover have been using aluminium body panels since 1948, and they can deal with untold amounts of abuse and still keep going. You just swap out the panels when they get too dented.

<comment><USER20> I _think_ that aluminum holds up better against dings like a car door hitting your door.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


PeerVPN – Open-source peer-to-peer VPN - <AUTHOR> http://www.peervpn.net/ <comment><USER2> I've tried a bunch of P2P VPN software, and while PeerVPN is quite OK, unless you really need to tunnel ethernet frames, I'd recommend cjdns: [https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns](https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns)

It's actively updated, and the software used for Project Meshnet. You can join the Hyperboria network, or just connect all of your computers isolatedly. I have it running on the computers I manage, from tiny OpenWRT routers to big servers.

I did the switch from tinc because certificates are a pain to generate and distribute, and because of security concerns: [http://www.tinc- vpn.org/security/](http://www.tinc-vpn.org/security/)

<comment><AUTHOR> cjdns looks interesting but it seems to be ipv6 only.

I submitted this story because peervpn looks like the easiest to setup by a wide margin. No certs required and very easy to start on a new machine.

<comment><USER3> Once running, cjdns creates a virtual ipv6 adapter.

To connect to other nodes, it uses either IP(v4 or v6) or Ethernet Frames. See: [https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns#3-connect-your-node-to- yo...](https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns#3-connect-your-node-to-your-friends- node)

I'm working on a Django Rest Framework frontend for it, Cirque: [https://github.com/jMyles/cirque](https://github.com/jMyles/cirque), which will make this easier to visualize.

<comment><AUTHOR> This isn't helpful for running software that only supports ipv4 though.

<comment><USER3> Ahh, I misunderstood your requirement.

Fortunately, CJDNS works for this use case as well. It is possible to use a "tunnel" to connect CJDNS nodes via an IPv4 virtual interface or to connect to a gateway to IPv4. This way, IPv4 software can connect both to other nodes and to the outside internet.

At the moment, I believe that this is only configurable through the UDP admin interface, but this is most definitely a feature that we'll build into Cirque.

[https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/blob/master/admin/README....](https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/blob/master/admin/README.md#iptunnel- functions)

<comment><AUTHOR> My personal usage case is to secure a handful of servers across datacenters for software that don't have encryption enabled.

If I use CJDNS to do this, it seems like I have a lot more steps to do. I have to copy everyone's pub key and setup ipv4 tunneling on each server?

With PeerVPN all I have to do is pick a single password and copy and paste it to each other server while only needing to change the static IP.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Original IPSec works like this too (in addition to the gateway mode). It's not called VPN, because it's just a feature you enabled in IP - you have the same address etc.

It failed to reach popularity largely because it used X.509 for keys and there was no PKI. And bad UI and NAT and some other nails in the coffin.

But there was point when there was a more or less credible bright future everybody running IPSec, no NAT and IPv6, and you wouldn't need firewalls because you could just configure who you want to talk to using IPSec security policy and strong authentication...

</comment><comment><USER5> This looks like OpenVPN with a peer discovery overlay. Or perhaps a bit like Hamachi, but without NAT traversal and automatic rendezvous/discovery service.

[Edit] Hmmm, the homepage says

> Automatically builds tunnels through firewalls and NATs

but I don't see anything in the code that would suggest that it can connect two NAT'ed peers directly. There's a relaying support and (I think) there's a connect-back like option for asking others to connect to you if you are NATed.

<comment><USER6> > but I don't see anything in the code that would suggest that it can connect > two NAT'ed peers directly.

Which is not really a problem IMHO.

I mean, most of the time these peer-to-peer VPN solutions are useful when you have boxes with a single public internet interface (this is what you get with most "cheap" hosting offers), and you want a private network between them. In this case no NAT is involved.

And of course, if you plan to connect your laptop to this network, then you are probably behind your ISP router NAT, so 1 NAT'ed peer connect-back will be useful here.

But 2 sides behind NAT configuration is a more unlikely use case. Either you are dealing with two "users" behind their ISP router - but in this case what are these guys trying to do? Some Hamachi-like usage? Considering it's linux only that wouldn't be all that useful. Then they will anyway need some STUN server so that's not really peer-to-peer anymore.

<comment><USER7> I'd argue to the contrary: a group of personal machines all behind NAT is the perfect use case for this, because you have many nodes and none of them is in a good position to act as a server. Exactly something like Hamachi, just more stable/better integrated with Linux. (maybe that has changed, but my experiences with Hamachi weren't great)

<comment><USER6> The point of my post was exactly to state that this case does _not_ exists... Because 1) a layer 2 virtual network between "user-like" hosts serves no real purpose, except for games (which is the main use of Hamachi). And since this is linux only, i doubt there is a real use case of gaming here. 2) if you have this setup, then you will need a STUN server anyway to bypass mutual NAT'd users. This is why, IMHO, there is no real need for mutual NAT traversal in these kinds of VPNs.

<comment><USER7> games, filesharing, access to streaming devices, cameras, ... VPNs for home users is far from solved (many routers support VPNs, but are not always that easy to set up, don't always work easily in both directions, ... Hamachi comes close when it works properly, but is also missing a few bits) This project might not be the best base (at last Mac support and some UI bits would be helpful), but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

And even for more technical users, it would be nice to have something for a quick connection that is real quick to set up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Nice, I'm currently using tinc for a personal project and always wondered why meshed VPNs aren't more popular, really glad alternatives are popping up.

</comment><comment><USER9> While this particular implementation of ethernet over UDP (true/false?) is not my first choice for several reasons, I congratulate the author for (a) keeping the code small and (b) thinking beyond Windows/Linux/OSX, i.e., enabling easy, fast compilation on *BSD, an OS which had networking before any of the others.

Almost all of the other P2P alternatives I have seen over the years fail on either (a) or (b).

</comment><comment><USER10> Seems to work great. Just built a Dockerfile to build and run it (I use Docker to build one-off binaries without littering my machines with junk libraries):

[https://github.com/rcarmo/docker- templates/tree/master/peerv...](https://github.com/rcarmo/docker- templates/tree/master/peervpn)

</comment><comment><USER11> Just installed this on three of my servers to give it a try. So far it seems to be working quite nicely and was a breeze to set up. Some more documentation and public mailing list/issue tracker would be good, though.

</comment><comment> mike-cardwell I've been using tinc, but it's a pain to add new nodes to the network. Definitely going to give PeerVPN a try.

</comment><comment><USER6> How does this compare to something like Freelan?

<comment><USER12> Freelan is more complex and has more fetures and uses, I've never tried it but I think it's not that simple nor lightweight unlike PeerVPN.</comment></comment>


Could AT2 be the answer to cryptocurrency's energy and performance problems? - <AUTHOR> https://www.computing.co.uk/feature/4017118/at2-answer-cryptocurrency-energy-performance <comment><USER2> I've always been a bit disgusted by the blind faith put into Bitcoin, the tribalism that comes with the newest Blockchain project, and now the obsession over consensus when it's really not the end all be all. The sustainability and energy concerns are too much for me. Regardless of if the energy needs of Bitcoin possibly promote the growth of renewable energy, it is still wasted resources and energy when there are more efficient solutions.

On top of the promise the cult of bitcoin see, most in the crypto sphere are just looking to get rich quick and get defensive because they are so invested in bitcoin or abc crapcoin instead of what made all of this interesting in the first place, decentralization, no central point of control or failure, trust- less, P2P, privacy and security.

I am extremely excited to see a principled company such as Maidsafe take the lead and blazing the trail to freedom by adopting such an innovation. Best of luck and I hope others see the potential past their bitcoin/blockchain goggles.

<comment><USER3> Deliberately wasting energy to achieve an orthogonal goal always struck me as a very 'unengineering' solution to a problem. Almost every other project is optimized for efficiency but bitcoin is the opposite. Sure, it was a clever solution to bombproof security at the time but I always felt this was its Achilles heel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Guerraoui said his team is working on "refinements and extensions" to support such functionality in the future.

When do they expect this work to be done?

<comment><USER2> I'd be interested to know this as well. In the case of the SAFEnetwork, I believe smart contracts wouldn't need to be part of at2 as they have BLS-DKG integrated into the system which can enable smart contracts that could interact with a wallet no problem. I'm certainly looking forward to how at2 works on a live network. AFAIK Maidsafe are the only ones to adopt this solution, so far. Could really disrupt the disruptors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Pretty exciting to see that MaidSafe has integrated AT2 into the SAFE Network!

</comment><comment><USER6> Excellent write up!</comment>


Building 64bit NumPy/SciPy/PyLab on Snow Leopard - <AUTHOR> http://blog.hyperjeff.net/?p=160

<comment><USER2> I was looking for exactly this. Thanks for saving me the research time...</comment>


Ask HN - anyone making money off of email lists? - <AUTHOR>

either through advertising or affiliate marketing? <comment><USER2> Sponsored email lists, ie the HN Digest: [http://www.newsletterdirectory.co/profile/hndigest/?utm_sour...](http://www.newsletterdirectory.co/profile/hndigest/?utm_source=15964-10340&utm_medium=footer&utm_campaign=sponsor- this)</comment>


The Icahn Report: Concerning the Annual Yahoo Meeting - <AUTHOR> http://www.icahnreport.com/report/2008/07/concerning-the.html <comment><USER2> Then stay at home dear Icahn! :)</comment>


It's not smart cities, it's better cities - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/infinitilabhkg/a-smart-city-its-not-just-about-technology-28c74fdc3d8a#.l2f944vg6 <comment><USER2> Let's hope the smart city doesn't get sponsored by Google or Facebook :/ at that point the city dwellers will be owned by the mega corporations.

[http://fortune.com/2016/03/21/obama-cuba-internet- google/](http://fortune.com/2016/03/21/obama-cuba-internet-google/)</comment>


The Word "Hacker" (2004) - <AUTHOR> http://paulgraham.com/gba.html <comment><USER2> OK, this is getting ridiculous. Is it Repost PG's Entire Archive Day or seomthing? Because so far today I've seen 3 (or is it 4?) reposts.

Normally there's about one a week.

<comment><USER3> I am surprised by the community reaction on the philosophy essay. It's not undeserved, I just couldn't expect him getting that much critic around here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Oh, come on. I hate to be that guy, but seriously? A repost from 2004, do people even pay attention to what they are upvoting on this site? I've seen so many old posts from Paul being posted lately, why?

<comment><USER5> I think those articles are a good reminder of what should be the spirit of HN

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> You should put (2004) in the headline, or it'll look like Karma Fishing.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have literally done an essay on this topic every year of highschool and the first two years of college. The same thing just added more words. This was always a reference xD

<comment><AUTHOR> Eric Steven Raymond[1], author of _The Cathedral and the Bazaar_ [2], also talked a little about this recently[3]

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond>

[2] [http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral- bazaar/cathedral...](http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral- bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/index.html)

[3] [http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Culture-hacking-Open- Sour...](http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Culture-hacking-Open-Source) Jump to minute 17:00 to hear him make a similar clarification of the word Hacker.</comment></comment>


PHP: The Right Way - <AUTHOR> https://phptherightway.com <comment><USER2> I thought this was going to be a link to a Python tutorial.</comment>


The True Story Behind PlentyOfFish.com -- Straight From The Horse's Mouth - <AUTHOR> http://plentyoffish.wordpress.com/2006/06/14/how-i-started-an-empire/ <comment><USER2> """I once again complained in my thread about my sites lack of SEO results it was September of 2003, I had 10k signups now and only a ~100 visitors a day from google and other 2,000 unique visitors a day from who knows where."""

So you guys were flat out wrong in the other thread when you said this guy got all of his traffic from SEO.

<comment><AUTHOR> I said what I said in that thread having already read this post and many others of his. His story is an SEO success story more than anything else. He has, I believe, largely transitioned from that being his primary source of traffic. His site is a social site, so of course at some point it becomes self-sustaining.

He's also not the most forthright guy, so he's not going to say "I'm an black- hat SEO guy who made millions". It doesn't sound as impressive. The MySpace guys were _spammers_. No one remembers or really cares how you get started, but it's important to know the truth if you want to accurately evaluate startup strategies.

<comment><USER2> K, I was just confused about the story. I think I even recall the POF guy saying that SEO is totally useless for dating sites. Who knows.

<comment><AUTHOR> Reading his blog for a long time I've learned he's extremely paranoid and highly competitive. So I listen very intently but always question his motives. On the one hand he wants to brag, but he also doesn't want to help the competition. It makes for interesting reading.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I think what most people tend to overlook is how great the name of the site is. It's funny, it's cynical, it's patronizing, but it sticks in the head. I just heared that name once maybe a year ago, and I might have heared of thousands of other sites, but I'm sure if I had to name one dating site, I would have remembered only this one.

</comment><comment><USER4> "Just goes to show you anyone can do anything."

Not to paint with too broad a brush or anything...

</comment><comment><USER5> You can see how absolutely horrible the site looked here.

Umm. The site still looks horrible.</comment>


A $20 Bike Made Of Cardboard Is Headed To Market - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/20-cardboard-bike-headed-to-market-2012-10

<comment><USER2> Made out of wood pulp. Even so, the 20-pound bike will, according to a story by Fast Company [1], support riders weighing up to nearly 500 pounds. It will also be waterproof and fireproof.

If that's true, I think there might be punch of other use cases for the material.

[1] [http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670753/this-9-cardboard-bike- ca...](http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670753/this-9-cardboard-bike-can-support- riders-up-to-485lbs)</comment>