Why read books if we can't remember what's in them? - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/books/review/Collins-t.html <comment><USER2> Key phrase: "reading creates pathways in the brain, strengthening different mental processes."

I've read a boat load of business books and I don't remember a lot of the specifics in the books but because the books often reenforced a lot of the same thoughts from different angles, I've got well formed mental pathways in my head, which help me in all kinds of situations. Same thing happens if you're a regular consumer of mixergy videos.

When faced with a decision, instead of thinking "Peter Drucker said to do this", I think "The right approach is probably... " because that is how my brain is now "wired" to think. It's kind of like self-brain-washing or creating marcos for your brain. You are what you read.

<comment><USER3> Could this be why incorrect facts may be recollected as true after proved false? Pathway for "false" not "rewritten / erased" but "pre-empted" by possibly "less robust" "true," to say this colloquially?

<comment><USER4> Obviously there are at least four people smarter than me here, because I can't for the life of me figure out what in the world you're trying to say.

<comment><USER5> I think what katovatzschyn is saying is that, if you've already decided something is true, it's encoded as 'true' in your brain and hence more easily remembered as such, even if you later discover that it's false.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My key take-away from the article was this quote:

"There is a difference," she said, "between immediate recall of facts and an ability to recall a gestalt of knowledge. We can't retrieve the specifics, but to adapt a phrase of William James's, there is a wraith of memory. The information you get from a book is stored in networks. We have an extraordinary capacity for storage, and much more is there than you realize. It is in some way working on you even though you aren't thinking about it."

IMO, this quote demonstrates a phenomenon I've long suspected to hold with the books that I read. The essence of a book's or an article's content is captured by a few key ideas and phrases (e.g., 'gestalt of knowledge', 'wraith of memory' in this case), but merely knowing these phrases is not enough. You need to read the entire book to have a sensation of the ideas getting fleshed out. The article on 'metrosexuals', the pamphlet on "the third estate", and the book on 'positioning' are other examples I can think of where this phenomenon plays out.

A rich 3-dimensional idea in the author's mind gets transformed into words. The words themselves are just information. You then fight with the words to reconstruct the idea with all its original potency in your mind. It is not necessary for you to recall every little detail of it unless you are an academic or specialist in the field.

<comment><USER7> I experienced this on my recent college exam on US history. The students have to write an 2-3 page essay and risk losing 40 points out of 100 points on the exams.

I had a little outline, not as complete as other students, but when I started writing, details just flow out of me. By the end of the exam(1 hour and 15 minutes), I written 4 pages.

Then again, I got a 98 on my world history exam weeks earlier and I barely study. I taken notes over the professor's lecture though. I think I have a knack for history.

<comment><USER8> _The students have to write an 2-3 page essay and risk losing 40 points out of 100 points on the exams._

Don't you mean they can gain up to 40 of 100 total available points? I do hope Academia hasn't adapted 'innocent until proven guilty' to mean 'knowledgeable until proven ignorant.' If that's how your professor presents it, he's doing the class a disservice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> A lot of the comments here about memory, recall, and learning are dealt with in Daniel T. Willingham's _Why Don't Students Like School_ ([http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/047059196X?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/047059196X?ie=UTF8&tag=thstsst-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=047059196X)), which describes a lot of things, including how we move from a state of no knowledge to shallow knowledge to deep knowledge in particular problem domains. People with no knowledge and who have some introduced tend not to retain that knowledge well; people who have shallow knowledge tend not to connect that knowledge to other knowledge; and people who have deep knowledge can fit new information into existing schemas, webs, or ideas much more effectively than those who can't.

It's not an easy process, moving from one state to another, and it's also not a binary one. Willingham's focus is on how teachers can do this more effectively, but he also describes how people in general can or should.

I'm guessing that we can't remember books because many books give us relatively shallow knowledge and because most books have too many details for us to remember the finer points of them. But this probably changes over time: when I used to read fiction as a teenager or just after I started college, I mostly remember whether I liked the book or not. Now I'm in grad school for English and tend to remember the plots, how characters express themselves, the main conflicts in the novel and what those main conflicts signal, etc. So in reading _Emma_ again this week, I realized that many of Austen's characters are actually judging themselves when they judge others, because their views of what is "right" or "proper" is mostly about preferences (and I actually wrote a post on the subject: [http://jseliger.com/2010/09/29/jane-austen-emma-and- what-cha...](http://jseliger.com/2010/09/29/jane-austen-emma-and-what- characters-are-doing)). Now I'm likely to remember when Emma admits she's wrong and so forth.

Granted, I've read the novel before, but that happens with other novels too.

Finally, I now often write blog posts about books or take notes on them using Devonthink Pro as described by Steven Berlin Johnson: [http://www.stevenberlinjohnson.com/movabletype/archives/0002...](http://www.stevenberlinjohnson.com/movabletype/archives/000230.html) . This dramatically increases retention.

<comment><USER10> Just to emphasize jseliger's last point, taking notes, specifically, writing reviews on books has helped me retain what I read more than I could have possibly imagined.

While I'm reading I try to keep myself in a frame of mind of a book reviewer. What will I want my audience to know about this book? What do I agree with or disagree with? What are the highlights? I sometimes take notes while I'm reading, but more often I just try to maintain that mindset.

When I'm done I write a quick 3 to 7 paragraph review and post it on GoodReads. Knowing that my review will be public forces me to take an objective look at my thoughts on the book, are they intelligible, consistent, relevant?

Writing the review also makes my conversation about the book more interesting and confident. And the more I talk about a book, the better I retain the information in it, so it's a double benefit. I've also found that reading the review a couple years later will quickly bring back more of the book than I get by just flipping through the pages or wracking my brain to remember what I read.

Writing a review on a book doesn't take long, maybe 20 minutes per book, it helps my writing skills and helps me read less passively. It's also pretty fun.

<comment><USER11> And you might also be doing a public service: I suspect that reading book reviews may be a good way to get a solid 20-30% of the benefit from the book's factual content in less than a hundredth of the time it takes to read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm a little disappointed with the approach this article takes to it's main thesis, which is that the "majority" don't remember what they read. He writes "anecdotal evidence suggests" twice in the only part that justifies his own experience. Is this really the case? (Not that I'm going to get better than anecdotal evidence here.) There's a false dichotomy there too where either you retain everything or nothing.

For me I still remember the plot lines of books I read 20 years ago and why they were formative to my character. Is that really that unusual? Given these were mostly fiction and science fiction books, but the conceptual spaces they opened up for me are so key to who I am now it would be bizarre if I just "forgot" them. Just to cite one instance, the Dune series of books got me thinking about the intersection of politics, economics, the expansion of consciousness, ecology, the point of human existence, and other subjects. Surely other people here have had those same experiences and remember them?

<comment><USER13> I have definitely had similar experiences and can remember fiction and non- fiction I read from when I was in jr high school like I'd just read it yesterday (24 now). I can recall the plots and what I took away from each.

This article and most of this thread is just bizarre to me.

<comment><USER14> You're not alone. I'm baffled by the premise of a book's memory gone after a month.

Even junk fiction, like the 30+ mostly generic Alistair MacLean thrillers I read in high school 25 years ago, are easily recallable.

I'm also skeptical at so many comments here agreeing with the article. Perhaps it's a selection bias. I talk books with lots of people and no one has mentioned this phenomenon.

<comment><USER15> I agree, I would never forget a book after only a month. I know that I have an above-average memory but can't imagine that most people would forget them in such a short time.

If people did, the literature section of the average pub quiz would be a heck of a lot harder than they are now :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Okay, I'm just going to go ahead and say it then...

"Perjury" , "Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay", "Taste for Freedom: The Life of Astolphe de Custine". Anyone else notice how ponderously "literary" these books are? Is that how the author's choices run?

Because frankly, they all sound really, really boring. Perhaps it's a case of the author picking things to read because they think they "should" be reading them, instead of reading what they actually _want_ or would _enjoy_ reading. I know, I know, YMMV, but it seems to me like a lot of this is rationalizing the author's choice of "weighty" material.

I notice all the comments on here by people who are baffled by the idea of forgetting what one reads cite books that are more mainstream, less "important" and "literary", and more accessible - and probably enjoyable.

tl;dr the author may be forgetting what he reads because he picks boring reading material

</comment><comment><USER17> I liken learning to throwing cooked spaghetti against the wall: some sticks, some slides off. The key to being smarter is to make more stuff stick to the walls, whether you can do that by making the knowledge more "sticky" or like what I do, which is to throw even more against the wall.

To twist a phrase from Glengarry Glen Ross: _"ABL - Always Be Learnin'."_

<comment><USER18> "For the more one reads the fewer are the traces left of what one has read; the mind is like a tablet that has been written over and over. Hence it is impossible to reflect; and it is only by reflection that one can assimilate what one has read if one reads straight ahead without pondering over it later, what has been read does not take root, but is for the most part lost."

[http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/c...](http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter3.html)

<comment><USER19> I'm not sure about the tablet analogy, but regardless this is great advice. It's not enough to just read something. It helps tremendously to be engaged while reading -- to take notes, and discuss ideas with your friends. Then, after you've finished, come back in a few days, and again in a few weeks to reflect on things. The amount of text and information contained in books (and on blogs, on HN, in emails, etc) is overwhelming, and it's asking too much to try and remember it without reflection or repetition.

This reminds me of something my Latin teacher, who was an ancient history buff, used to always claim -- that many Roman citizens could go listen to a speech for an hour, then recite almost the whole thing from memory. Enviable to be sure, but remember that the vast majority was illiterate, and even for those who weren't, chiseling letters into stone tablets was no easy task.

<comment><USER20> I could be mistaken, but didn't they use scrolls and wax tablets for most things?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Two reasons:

Reading is (or can be) a form of entertainment, so it doesn't matter.

Recall and recognition are two different things. For example, you can learn to recognize a face and still be terrible at describing it. The same applies to other forms of learning I'm sure. I guess that is what the fuzzy remarks about "reading changes you" and "recalling the gestalt" refer to.

</comment><comment><USER22> Memory and recall are not matters of direct lookup; our brains are not key- value stores. We usually don't request a memory by timestamp, but rather, memories more often than not make themselves known to us--absent any request or intervention on our part--after being triggered by other associated sense perceptions (consider the memories invoked by the smell of leaves on an early fall day, the sound of a song you haven't heard in a decade).

Anecdotally, at least, I very rarely (if ever) recall the details of a text by attempting to actively recall some specific fact, date, historical accident, or the like, but this by no means suggests that I have no memory of something I've read because it is so often the case that details I'd completely forgotten about return at the most unexpected times, triggered by the most unexpected stimuli.

<comment><USER23> "Anecdotally, at least, I very rarely (if ever) recall the details of a text by attempting to actively recall some specific fact, date, historical accident, or the like, but this by no means suggests that I have no memory of something I've read because it is so often the case that details I'd completely forgotten about return at the most unexpected times, triggered by the most unexpected stimuli."

Ideas from books I've read often jump into my head when it is relevant to the conversation at hand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I had the same problem, and sometimes it's embarrassing to say you read a book but don't remember anything about it. I'm happy I'm not the only one.

I loved the one of the sentences in post "You are all what you read". I would also add "We read what we want to be".

(now starting to forget the post)

<comment><USER25> I am the same way. I read to further my knowledge... sometimes. Other (read: most) times, I read because I enjoy the immersive experience. Taking things from that and putting them in long-term memory isn't really part of the agenda. If it is, I take notes. That helps!

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> "I totally believe that you are a different person for having read that book," Wolf replied.

"It is in some way working on you even though you aren't thinking about it."

"It's there," Wolf said. "You are the sum of it all."

Although I intuitively believe these statements are true, they seem vague and unconvincing as an explanation for the phenomenon. Wolf is essentially saying: "It's all in there, trust me." It may not have been the intent of the article writer to get into the specifics of the neuroscience involved, but I was hoping for a little more of an explanation than this.

</comment><comment><USER27> Silly.... If you can't remember what you had for lunch last Monday, why eat?

<comment><USER28> Funnily enough, I feel more this way about food than books. I absolutely despise spending money on food because you eat it, and then it's gone! At least books are free via library and I enjoy them more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Same is true for movies. I don't remember most movies I watch. Eg. there was this one movie with Morgan Freeman, he worked at a car shop, smoked cigarettes, and he was diagnosed with cancer, and there was another big name in the movie, and I don't remember much after that. [After looking it up, it was Jack Nicholson and the title is 'Bucket List']. There's probably thousands of movies like this floating around in my head.

<comment><USER30> Oddly, I don't remember movies if asked to recount the exact plot/scenes, but I seem to have an uncanny ability to remember that stuff when watching it for the second time, to the point where I don't enjoy watching movies more than once.

Some people love watching movies multiple times... I wonder if this has anything to do with memory.

<comment><USER31> It's the difference between recall and recognition. In general, everyone is better at recognition than recall. The joy in watching movies over and over again, could be:

There is something in the specifics (fine details that typically splits through the gaps of someones recall/recognition) that brings great joy. Others enjoy looking for things they may have missed. Others wait long enough for the recognition to fade enough in between viewings.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Why must everything end up being a utilitarian pursuit? I don't think it is surprising to many that the brain is plastic enough to absorb certain details subconsciously, but isn't it enough that the book engages us during the time we read it. Ideally, we would like all books to have a long lasting impression on us, but that question is on a slightly different note than the question being posed in the article.

</comment><comment><USER33> For the brave enough who wants to get better at reading, I can recommend (see Disclaimer below) Mortimer Adlers' "How to Read a Book" ( <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_a_Book> ). In the book, he talks about how to read a book properly (in summary, as suggested in the article, read TOC first, take notes, become active etc.) and the books one should read from the Western culture. Britannica sells the compilation with the title "Great Books of the Western World". (I am not in US, so excuse me if this is just common knowledge there, and many houses in US are filled with this collection.)

Disclaimer: Unfortunately, although I liked the book, I have been unable to apply the methods he suggested, due basically to "leaning".

</comment><comment><USER34> Google link to bypass paywall:

[http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&...](http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=reading+creates+pathways+in+the+brain,+strengthening+different+mental+processes).

</comment><comment><USER35> I've posted this quote before, but it seems especially relevant:

"Education is what is left after all that has been learnt is forgotten." -- James Bryant Conant

</comment><comment><USER36> I do remember much of what I read. I also have (what I take to be) an unusual quirk in that I'm very risk averse in reading--often I would rather reread a book I know I enjoy (and have gotten insight from) than risk an unknown. At first I thought that my retention might come from the rereading, but I'm not sure that's the case, since I have plenty of examples of remembering things after reading them once. In fact I think the rereading is caused by the retention: if what you read sticks in your head, a negative experience or a waste of time is that much more costly.

</comment><comment><USER37> My oldest boy (he is ten) just finished reading his first novel, which for him was quite an accomplishment. What my wife and I noticed after he finished the book was his writing skills improved significantly.

</comment><comment><USER38> I have a poor memory, and it's difficult for me to describe books to friends after having read them. But I know for a fact that they shape me. It comes out in the way I behave and the opinions I hold.

</comment><comment><USER39> If the book contains no ideas next month I hardly can remember about what it was.

If author of the book actually bothered to put some ideas in then I remember those ideas and usually the book in which I encountered them for many years. vide Iain M. Banks "Use of weapons", Orson Scott Cars "Ender's Game", Vernor Vinge "Fire upon the deep" or Henry Kuttner novels, Terry Pratchett "Nation"

If you don't remember the books you've read then change the books you are reading to some that have actual content not just crafty words.

</comment><comment><USER40> This phenomenon of not remembering what I just read is familiar to me from the moments where I'm about to take an exam after a course. I usually go through the course material two or three times before taking the exam. Just before taking my place in the exam room, I test my self: "what were the five key points in chapter 3". Oh I can't recall them, I'm in trouble!

Fortunately the exams (at least in my university) did not focus on the student's ability to remember exact sentences or enumerate the "five bullets on chapter X". Like in real life, most of the exams required me to remember ideas and their implications, not exact phrases.

To sum, its not essential to be able to recall and speak out some random facts from a book. Its more important to comprehend what ideas were present in the book and what consequences those ideas might have on X or Y. Us humans are not computers but beings capable of creative thought.

</comment><comment><USER41> > "A certain amount of knowledge you can indeed with average faculties acquire > so as to retain; nor need you regret the hours you spend on much that is > forgotten, for the shadow of lost knowledge at least protects you from many > illusions."

\--William Johnson Cory

</comment><comment><USER42> hm ... I don't have trouble remembering things in books I've read ... but that reminds me, why do we read the New York Times if it's filled with forgettable, inane rubbish? :) Seriously though, I rarely remember the jibber jabber I've read in rags.

<comment><USER43> I think for most people, reading newspapers and articles in general falls into the glancing/skimming type of reading. It's not surprising to not remember something in that case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Reading is good, but you shouldn't read a lot. You need to control yourself. Reading is addictive, but not-Reading is addictive too. I have been working with JavaScript lately and I found that as my code grows in size, I needed better patterns and methods. I read a book (OOP JavaScript). It was amazing. I liked it, read it again. I found out two other books and carried on reading.

After a while, I found myself addicted to reading. I always find myself telling "There should be a better approach, let's sharpen more our skills". But sharpening doesn't seem to have an end, actually it doesn't.

Bottom of the line, balance between reading and work. But never stop learning.

</comment><comment><USER45> Another point to add to this, I read many articles online every day and given the vague task of recalling these articles and what I took away from them I couldn't. But if I'm discussing a topic or listening to a talk on something everything relevant I've read feels front of mind again and allows me to draw new conclusions from what I've read that I wasn't really able to earlier without them all front on mind.

Really handy when, In a lot of topics relating to the kind of topics frequently on hacker news I can have long and insightful conversations with people where I have plenty to contribute myself.

</comment><comment><USER46> For non-fiction: Remembering key concepts is a lot easier if you try to apply what you've learned to other articles, books or even the news you read.

Try to actively remember what you recently read and how it fits with what you're reading now. Which point does the author make? Does it concur with what you've read before?

Active recall and the application of recently acquired knowledge to novel ideas garantuees remembering key concepts for far longer than otherwise. Also, thinking about key concepts in connection with various topics makes your brain rewire the information and you'll remember it more easily ever after.

</comment><comment><USER47> _My reading has achieved unprecedented levels of unverifiable productivity_

I have a terrible memory for arbitrary facts, but great for things I understand (thus, I seek the reasons behind the facts.)

Then I could then work it out from first principles, so I didn't need to remember it - a kind of data compression. But it's also true that understanding things is exciting and engaging for me, and therefore memorable. And in practice, I don't consciously work things out from first principles anyway; I just know them. They have become part of me, not as facts, but as part of the way I think.

</comment><comment><USER48> [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/books/review/McInerney-t.h...](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/books/review/McInerney-t.html) could make an interesting companion.

</comment><comment><USER23> I can't relate. Snippets of books I read years ago often pop into my head at various times. On the other hand, I'm often stumped to remember where I put down my notebook five minutes ago.

</comment><comment><USER49> I asked a similar question on HN, and got some interesting replies, here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=664383>

</comment><comment><USER50> There is an easy analogy with food or exercise. The experience of eating a single meal or exercising a single day is forgotten, even while permanent changes to the body slowly accumulate.

Some people in this thread cite books they vividly remember from childhood. I suspect this is a result of the huge impact on a younger brain. In contrast a mature avid reader might have read 1000 books and an additional one is just not going to re-wire things as much even if the experience of reading it is richly rewarding.

</comment><comment><USER51> As long as you can vaguely remember where you read X thing, you can always go pull the info back up. That's part of the reason I aggressively use social bookmarking services (namely, Diigo).

I also find it's helpful to have a high-level understanding of many things, especially when it relates to technical "stuff". If you have some understanding on how/when to apply an approach or technology, you can always dig up the details when it is pertinent.

</comment><comment><USER52> This guy has some defect of memory. I remember plot, character, lines, ideas from books. Not all of it, but all the good bits.

<comment><USER7> It is probably not a defect of memory but a difference in the way minds work. What you have done is committed the _typical mind fallacy_.

One example is imagination. Some people can have really vivid imagination, being able to count the strides on a tiger. Others have no ability to do imagery at all. Most are probably in-between.

In my case, I can't really impose my imagination over reality as if I am viewing a movie. Let just say they like viewing at reality and imagination every other frame.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I was happier when reading books. I understand that there might not be a causal effect here, but I believe that having something extended to occupy the mind is beneficial. Blogs, Twitter and online articles don't seem to have the same effect. Time to start reading again, even if I don't remember any of it.

</comment><comment><USER54> An analogy would be traveling in the brain jungle, where your conscious mind might not be able to recall the specific routes, your foot nevertheless leave marks in the jungle that make later traveling on the same paths easier or possible.

<comment><USER54> All in all, answers to problems like this become very obvious once we separate our so-called conscious mind and the inner subconscious zombie that in fact does most of the mentally/bodily processing.

For example:

1\. Do you know all your vision can "physically" see at any moment is only about a thumbnail's size at an arm's reach, yet your inner zombie construct a vivid 3D environment.

2\. What if I lower your house's keyhole by 2"? You would still reach for the old spot then realize something is wrong. But who's remembering the old location? Not your conscious self (otherwise every moment you type a key you have consciously validate). The memory keeper is your inner zombie.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I'd say it depends on what and how one is reading.

It's not the same case when I read a programming book with examples, in contrast to novels. I tend to remember the former better because I'll usually try out most examples from the book.

</comment><comment><USER56> How much effort do you put in to reading Hacker News? If it feels easy, then you likely aren't doing much to change your brain.

Unless maybe you put in a bit of effort for years on end...there may be hope for some of us.

</comment><comment><USER57> When I saw the title I thought it was about Bayard's "How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read." (<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1596914696>)

</comment><comment><USER58> the book "How to Read a Book" describes the technique in his conclusion in excellent detail. It is essentially about _owning_ the information you are consuming.

Personally I think this applies to non-fiction works only. At least in my personal reading. My brain doesn't need to store the details of fictional works. It seems like it actively discards "entertainment" items in favor of knowledge I need to pay the mortgage and feed the kids. I am much more deliberate with that information.

</comment><comment><USER59> I only get this on the link: "For free access to this article and more, you must be a registered member of NYTimes.com."

</comment><comment><USER60> Why bother reading this article :)

<comment><USER61> What article?

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain

</comment><comment><USER63> If you read a book a couple more times, you'll remember a lot more.

<comment><USER45> I know someone who does that, reads it so fast the first time that I don't think they fully take it in then will go back and reread if it's worth it.

Personally I like to go at a pace where I can make all the connections and take what I want from it the first time, then move onto something else.

<comment><USER64> This is essentially the approach of "How to Read a Book," recommended above. Successive re-readings with increasing focus and slower pace build a deeper impression of the books in mind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> "Reading, after a certain age, diverts the mind too much from its creative pursuits. Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking." \-- Albert Einstein

<comment><USER66> What is the source of that Einstein quotation? (I have already done the obvious Google search, and I see a lot of claimed Einstein quotations in those words, but none with citations.) I ask, because although there is a whole book of Einstein quotations that has gone through several editions,

<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691120749/>

there are many Einstein quotations floating around the Internet that Einstein never said.

Einstein is on record as describing himself as an avid reader when he was a teen studying physics:

. . . I worked most of the time in the physical laboratory [at the Polytechnic Institute of Zürich], fascinated by the direct contact with experience. The balance of the time I used in the main in order to study at home the works of Kirchoff, Helmholtz, Hertz, etc. . . . In [physics], however, I soon learned to scent out that which was able to lead to fundamentals and to turn aside from everything else, from the multitude of things which clutter up the mind and divert it from the essential. The hitch in this was, of course, the fact that one had to cram all this stuff into one's mind for the examinations, whether one liked it or not. This coercion had such a deterring effect [upon me] that, after I had passed the final examination, I found the consideration of any scientific problems distasteful to me for an entire year. In justice I must add, moreover, that in Switzerland we had to suffer far less under such coercion, which smothers every truly scientific impulse, than is the case in many another locality. There were altogether only two examinations; aside from these, one could just about do as one pleased. This was especially the case if one had a friend, as did I, who attended the lectures regularly and who worked over their content conscientiously. This gave one freedom in the choice of pursuits until a few months before the examination, a freedom which I enjoyed to a great extent and have gladly taken into the bargain the bad conscience connected with it as by far the lesser evil. It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wreck and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty. To the contrary, I believe it would be possible to rob even a healthy beast of prey of its voraciousness, if it were possible, with the aid of a whip, to force the beast to devour continuously, even when not hungry, especially if the food, handed out under such coercion, were to be selected accordingly.

"Autobiographical Notes," in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, Paul Schilpp, ed. (1951), pp. 17-19 © 1951 by the Library of Living Philosophers, Inc.

I know that citation is correct because I grew up with that book on the family bookshelf (as my late father studied the philosophy of science during his undergraduate education, just when the book was published). Reading can be good, Einstein thought, and maybe we should check the source of the quotation attributed to Einstein that discourages reading, to see exactly in what context it was said by Einstein, if it was said by him at all.

<comment><USER67> Well he does say "past a certain age".

On the other hand, Einstein did most of his greatest work by the age of 25, and all of his great work by the age of 35, so perhaps we should be following the example of the younger Einstein rather than the advice of the older Einstein.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Because we get the gist of them; we experience books the way we experience life. We learn from both, regardless of whether we memorize specifics and details.

</comment><comment><USER69> I don't relate at all - I believe I remember the content of every book I've ever read, and the main takeaways of it.

<comment><USER70> What about names? I cannot remember the names of main characters from a book I read last week.

<comment><USER61> I often can't even remember the names from the previous chapter.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Why do exercises if we can't stay in shape?

</comment><comment><USER61> Maybe try reading more memorable books? I remember "Lord Of The Rings" :-)

Don't know the books he mentions, but the titles alone sound a bit like "I really should read this to prove that I am an intellectual".

<comment><USER69> I did get a bit of that vibe</comment></comment>


A Probabilistic Theory of Deep Learning - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.00641 <comment><USER2> I am well versed in the usual theories of learning (PAC, SQ-learning, learning with membership and equivalence queries, etc.)

Can anyone comment on how this relates to those standard models? There does not appear to be any mention in the paper of the standard learning models, and as a result I'm inclined to think this paper is not worth reading.

<comment><USER3> On a veeeery quick skim I think it's a Bayesian generative model for deep learning architectures. I thought Zoubin Ghahramani's group already had done some similar work, but :shrug: it's not my field.

<comment><USER4> To clarify, it has been studied in Zoubin Ghahramani's group [1] (and also more recently in Ryan Adam's group [2]), and it's most widely known through Radford Neal [3] who's won a lot of competitions using the Bayesian approach to NNs.

[1] [http://mlg.eng.cam.ac.uk](http://mlg.eng.cam.ac.uk)

[2] [http://hips.seas.harvard.edu](http://hips.seas.harvard.edu)

[3] [http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~radford/res- neural.html](http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~radford/res-neural.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> 56 pages! They should really reorganize this into 10-16 pages to get the basic ideas and results across.

<comment><USER6> What a strange attitude! There's plenty of zero-cost bits available to allow for articles of all sorts of lengths. For example, the "Foundations and Trends" journals (e.g. Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, or Foundations and Trends in Optimization) publish articles that are usually at least 100 pages long. These articles tend to be well-respected and highly cited.

Longer articles have many advantages in allowing for a more in-depth explanation, and it is certainly not the case that every reader wants papers shoe-horned into an artificial page limit.

<comment><USER5> > There's plenty of zero-cost bits available to allow for articles of all > sorts of lengths.

Straw man - i wasn't talking about cost, hard drive space, or any relation near what you're referring to.

> ...articles that are usually at least 100 pages long. These articles tend to > be well-respected and highly cited.

Another straw man - why does length (short or long) correlate with quality again?

> Longer articles have many advantages in allowing for a more in-depth > explanation

Ah the real comment. Ok. I definitely agree - longer usually means more space to explain.

> and it is certainly not the case that every reader wants papers shoe-horned > into an artificial page limit.

So be it. There's usually an appendix or supplementary materials that can offer expanded derivations. Often the authors trim a lot of the fat for the published paper and put a longer version in a book/thesis.

> What a strange attitude!

As a writer of publications i want more space and agree, but as a reader of publications (way more than i write) there's just too much out there to spend my time going through 50+ pages. I can put in the time for 10-20 pages and if i still want more i'll check out other publications, appendix, supplementary, thesis...whatever. It's an important and necessary skill for academics to be able to concisely present their work - not just for publications, but for grant applications, presentations, etc.

<comment><USER6> If you don't like to read long articles, don't read them. I like to read them; they tend to be much easier to understand than artificially shortened articles. It seems to me that complaining that somebody wrote a long article because they take too long for you to read is exactly analogous to saying that since you only like to read short stories, nobody should write a long novel because it would take too much time for you to read.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Does anyone know if there is any code available for this paper? Would be extremely interesting to see comparisons of the EM-algorithm mentioned with regular SGD in terms of speed and precision.

</comment><comment><USER8> What is the hypothesis? How was the hypothesis tested?

<comment><USER9> From my reading of the first twenty or so pages, it appears to be a theory of how neural networks model images (the running example). The authors claim that popular neural network architectures can be reduced to particular cases of their model.

If this model can provide an explanation for the small noises impacting NN performance on images (from karpathy.github.io, posted to HN earlier today) then that would be rocking.

Nonetheless, it does not appear to be an experimental paper, rather providing a mathematical theory of some particular classification problems.

<comment><USER10> > If this model can provide an explanation for the small noises impacting NN > performance on images (from karpathy.github.io, posted to HN earlier today) > then that would be rocking

This paper [0] does a pretty good job of giving an explanation for that.

[0] [http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6572](http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6572)

<comment><USER9> Honestly, that abstract makes me more upset. If these are due to NN's nature as linear classifers, then we are all in trouble, given that almost everything useful is based off linear models. Given the title of the paper though, I should probably be more hopeful :)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


If you find a dead bald eagle, you are legally bound to mail to gov't - <AUTHOR> http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-to-make-your-dead-eagle-a-legal-eagle

<comment><USER2> This article has several glaring errors, and the title to the post came from outer space.

Falconers with appropriate licenses and wildlife rehabilitators are also allowed to possess eagles and eagle parts.

The article is inconsistent -- at the beginning the author says only Native Americans can possess eagles/parts, then at the end he says "Go ahead and pick up a dead eagle." You can't have it both ways. It is absolutely illegal for a regular citizen to disturb an eagle, dead or otherwise. Picking it up is "possession."

Same goes for all migratory, non-game birds, technically speaking; they are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

If you find one and want it sent to the Repository, please call your state Fish & Game office to send someone out.

<comment><USER2> I don't seem to be able to edit my post, but I wanted to clarify that the term 'possession' has specific meanings in Fish & Game code.

However, the law does bend for a regular citizen who finds an injured live raptor. They can take to a vet or rehab with no legal consequences.</comment></comment>


How to Go Viral (and Not Regret It) - <AUTHOR> https://inbound.org/blog/how-to-go-viral-and-not-regret-it <comment><AUTHOR> Jeff Deutsch explains how he published a post that went viral, what went good, what didn't and some good takeaways that could be used to go viral with your next article.</comment>


Show HN: Finite Automata Simulator Written in QT/Graphviz - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/wkoszek/flviz <comment><USER2> For those wanting to actually build NFAs (and test them as they go), PDAs and other defined machina, try jflap: [http://www.jflap.org/](http://www.jflap.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Didn't know about JFlap. Even though I don't work with NFA and DFAs anymore, I'll check it out.</comment></comment>


The Rise of Coffee - <AUTHOR> https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-rise-of-coffee <comment><USER2> Coffee (and tea) have some antimicrobial action. They made it safer to drink the water, and did not have the disadvantages of the other alternative, alcoholic drinks.

<comment><USER3> That's because you have to boil the water.

<comment><USER2> Various compounds, including caffeine, that are present in coffee beans have antimicrobial properties. Additional Maillard reaction products that have antimicrobial properties are created by roasting. Coffee is also pretty acidic - IIRC, dorm cafeteria coffee turned chem lab blue litmus paper a pretty red.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Article is from 2008

</comment><comment><USER5> On my desktop, approx. 1/5th of the screen is taken up by a giant top banner for American Scientist, and two paragraphs don't fit on the page. Why do people design websites like this?

<comment><USER6> Sometimes the designer was paid too much and indulged in make my logo bigger cream.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgcX0y1Nzhs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgcX0y1Nzhs)

/s

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm so glad I'm not dependent.

<comment><USER8> It's pretty easy to break through the physiological symptoms of caffeine withdrawal, but more difficult to stick to not drinking it, I find.

<comment><USER9> The headaches are pretty bad.

<comment><USER10> I used a product called Wean Caffeine to successfully avoid the headaches. It steps you down by 10mg every three days. For anyone wanting to quit, I highly recommend.

[https://www.weancaffeine.com/](https://www.weancaffeine.com/)

<comment><USER11> It's a shame they start at 100mg. I think I'd need to start at 200-300mg. I guess I'd have to buy three packs and then use regular caffeine pills to fill in. Gets a little pricey though.

Such an awesome idea though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The huge variety of unique flavors in coffee from different origins is quite amazing and even now just beginning to be explored. You can now create specific flavors in real time by roasting, grinding and brewing every cup robotically with advanced algorithms at www.sevacoffee.com

<comment><USER13> That machine is very interesting! If you own one of them, would you mind sharing how roast chamber works? I've thought a bit about how that could be done in a fully-automated fashion, but I'm curious to see what solution they came up with.

<comment><USER14> Roasting immediately before brewing is not a great idea.

I've been roasting my own beans for 20 years, and one of the first things I learned is that hardly any beans are at their best right after roasting. Freshly roasted is OK, but the beans are outgassing for some time after that. 2-3 days rest after roasting improves the flavor of just about any coffee, especially the fruity dry process Ethiopians I like.

Feel free to email me (address in profile) if you'd like to talk about home roasting - always happy to kick it around with anyone interested.

Also visit [https://www.sweetmarias.com/](https://www.sweetmarias.com/) for lots of information about green coffee and roasting, grinding, and brewing equipment. (I am not affiliated with them at all, just a long time customer.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Any basic budget advice says to cut starbucks out of your life and make your $5 latte at home, but why stop there?

Caffeine pills work out to $0.05/cup-equivalent, aren't going to make you take bathroom trips, aren't going to give you bad breath, and aren't going to stain your teeth. I usually keep a few in my pocket in case I get randomly drowsy in a meeting or if I'm driving far. I haven't looked back, and I used to pull my own espresso and roast my beans.

<comment><USER16> How do they not make you take bathroom trips? Caffeine is a diuretic.

<comment><USER17> This probably affects people differently.

I know people who can have coffee and fall asleep immediately afterwards, and have little to none urinary symptoms at all; and other people who'll not sleep and / or need to pee frequently.

<comment><USER18> Personally, I find tea to be a much stronger diuretic. Even herbal tea (zero caffeine). Coffee used to cause diuretic symptoms, until I reached the point where I drank it every day. I drink tea most days now, but the diuretic effects never subsided.

/rant. Bodies are weird.

<comment><USER19> Note that herbal tea also has zero tea in it usually and so shouldn't be lumped in with tea either.

Perhaps your symptoms are psychosomatic?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Invitation to YC Hacks? - <AUTHOR>

The YC Posthaven blog post about YC Hacks says invitations will be sent by July 7. I was just wondering if anyone here obtained an invitation already, or if YC will send the invitations all at once before the end of today. <comment><AUTHOR> [http://blog.ycombinator.com/yc-hacks- august-2-3-2014](http://blog.ycombinator.com/yc-hacks-august-2-3-2014)

</comment><comment><USER2> As YC usually does... All acceptances and rejections will be sent out today at the same time.

<comment><USER3> Hmm never recieved an email. Did anyone else?

<comment><AUTHOR> The invitations were sent a couple of minutes ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I got an acceptance email 4 minutes ago.</comment>


Deep Dive into Math Behind Deep Networks - <AUTHOR> https://towardsdatascience.com/https-medium-com-piotr-skalski92-deep-dive-into-deep-networks-math-17660bc376ba <comment><USER2> That's not a "deep dive" that's the disappointingly barest minimum.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would like to see someone explain the math behind recurrent neural networks. Feed-forward neural networks are fairly straight-forward, and there are many, many blog posts explaining them already.

<comment><USER4> I think this resource could be helpful:

[http://colah.github.io/posts/2015-08-Understanding- LSTMs/](http://colah.github.io/posts/2015-08-Understanding-LSTMs/)

Essentially, RNNs and feed forward networks are very similar - RNNs are just "unrolled through time" and every timestep shares the same weights. The activations are slightly different as well, but the core concept is the same as feed forward networks; it's not a completely different concept or idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Backpropagation section was just a list of formulas, and "it's because of the chain rule".

</comment><comment><USER6> isn't it just gradient descent?

<comment><USER7> yes just like a big chunk of what ML is.</comment></comment>


What's a conditerator? - <AUTHOR> http://tierratemplates.com/blog/2009/09/whats-a-conditerator/

<comment><USER2> Wait, how is this any cleaner/better than a ternary statement? Beyond that the initial ugliness comes from using conditional markup in the first place. The only thing that is going to fix that is abstracting yourself from markup entirely.

<comment><AUTHOR> Conceptually its the same as a ternary statement with the addition that the output is looped over if the expression evaluates to an array.

Conditional markup is necessary somewhere in the system - this puts it in the templates in more compact form that won't break like the multi-line block in the example.

If you put the markup in the controller then you blur the line in the MVC architecture.

<comment><USER2> Ok, the syntax does not exactly lend itself to clarity. If you're going to be parsing why not add key:value pairs so you don't have to use the back tick? Something like:

{@ users ? before: "
Users
" each: "
{fullname}
" after: "

" else: "No users found" @}

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> While the first example that uses separate if and foreach structures is more lines of code, I find it easier to read. It quickly makes sense to someone with just a basic knowledge of common code structures.

I prefer to use something that is more readable, even it is more lines of code.

</comment><comment><USER4> Oh, dear.

</comment><comment><USER5> Do not want.</comment>


RIP, Nokia (1865 - 2014) - simba-hiiipower http://pandodaily.com/2012/06/16/rip-nokia-1965-2014/ <comment><AUTHOR> Is this a serious piece of writing or just trolling?

> 2003-2008 = back when euro was worth real money.

1 euro was worth between 1.1 and 1.5$. Now, it is worth 1.25$...

> Rather than spend its resources on building an OS that depended on novel > interfaces and sensors,

Like the first (and best) GPS phones?

> that allowed for outside development

Like symbian and the nokia owned qt creator.

> If Nokia had gone with Android[...] Windows Phone, on the other hand [...]

Aren't you forgetting the numerous other hands that are symbian and its successors: tizen, meego and meltemi?

> Elop [...] clear-eyed

Humm. Choosing to ditch their own system to use another one may have been a bold and smart move, but still developping 2 or 3 different systems while trying to integrate an external new (and unproven) one seems to me like increasing the problem rather than solving it.

<comment><USER2> > Is this a serious piece of writing or just trolling?

Note the author. All his articles are like this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "If Nokia had gone with Android, the best that it might have achieved was to become an also-ran—another in an endless stream of me-too commodity smartphone makers."

No. Nokia could've been Samsung, which has the lion's share of the Android market. And Android Lumia would be the prettiest Android handset on the market.

<comment><USER4> I have to agree. My friend bought a Samsung SII the other day, and I was mighty impressed. However, we soon saw a number of shortcomings, and none of it was really the phone hardware or even Android itself.

Instead, it was the way that the phone software UI was put together. It was awful. So bad, in fact, that my friend replaced almost all of the software widgets and components with his own - by the end the phone looked amazing, and virtually nothing like Samsung/Telstra's UI.

And this is where Nokia could win. By producing amazing, kick-arse phones (which we actually know they can do!) and putting on Android, with a compelling feature-set, I believe they'd wipe the floor with Samsung, et al. Probably not so much with Apple, but they could yet compete head to head with them.

The innovation just isn't there. I don't see it with WP8. There's just not enough compelling reasons for me to go back to Nokia. And I was so badly burnt by the last phone I used, that I'm unlikely to go back without a good reason!

<comment><USER5> _However, we soon saw a number of shortcomings, and none of it was really the phone hardware or even Android itself._

Seems like there's a tremendous opportunity for the right group to prosper. I'm not sure that's Nokia.

Apple combines several factors:

        - A culture of good programming that works well
        - A culture of good design
        - A company where the efforts of different parts are well aligned
        - The ability to market

If Nokia can do all of the above, they would win. History has shown that they aren't this company.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> While I certainly wouldn't call Nokia's position anything but worrisome, I think it might be a little early to start planning the funeral.

One of the benefits Nokia has by going with Windows Phone is the relationship it now has with Microsoft. I'd be very surprised if Nokia's tablet offering isn't front and center in just about every piece of marketing MS does.

The biggest issue that Windows Phone has currently is a lack of third party applications. I really do think that standardizing the platform across Phone/Tablet/PC will help in a big way with this problem (not pushing them to higher numbers than iOS/Android, but much, much closer than they are today).

<comment><USER3> For the average non-tech user, is the lack of third party apps really that big of an issue? In all honesty, all they need is Facebook, Twitter, Angry Birds and sudoku, which WP7 has. You're really not at a loss for apps when it comes to the popular 1st tier apps.

The bigger issue, from my personal experience seeing people pick up and use a WP7 device, is that it's awkward to use compared to the grid of icons in iOS and Android. They're utterly confused and have no idea how to even begin. Metro, as executed by MS, is simply not intuitive. The starkness of the white on black text is cold and unfriendly. Interaction paradigms they learned from iOS and Android are slightly different in WP7, which results in frustration around every corner. The pure icon based menus make it a guessing game on which icon does what. From my personal experience, regular people have a much easier time switching between Android and iOS. WP is just too different.

<comment><USER7> "For the average non-tech user, is the lack of third party apps really that big of an issue?"

Yes - [http://paidcontent.org/2010/09/09/419-average-number-of- apps...](http://paidcontent.org/2010/09/09/419-average-number-of-apps- downloaded-to-iphone-40-android-25/)

<comment><USER8> That was written almost 2 years ago when it was thought to have mattered. I have about 7 apps installed on my phone, 2 of which are angry birds and angry birds space. I have the kindle app, facebook, and a weather app which sucks.

Any really strong selling app for iPhone, will make it to Andriod which will make it to Windows.

The number of apps in your market is not really important when you have the web.

[ADDED] This may not be as true for Apple users because of the smaller screen size and slower web. For me, I have the LTE Galaxy so I just go right to the web. It is almost as good as my laptop due to the larger screen and LTE. I would guess when the new iPhone comes out, apps will probably become even less important.

<comment><USER9> I hate it when people say 'just use the web'. Just because _you_ have a great data connection, doesn't mean everyone does. I have a terrible[1] data connection where I live. I have quite a few apps which I need to work with only intermittent connectivity to fulfil their main purpose: Mail, Theodolite (Photos with telemetry), Outdoors GB(Offline maps), Numbers(Spreadsheets), Sketches, Collins French<->English, Billings (Time charge app), Dropbox (Files favourited for offline access), Fill That Hole... and more I can't be bothered to list. If these required a data connection to launch them they would be useless to me and therefore it would be pointless to own a smartphone. I know there are probably web equivalents with offline storage for one or two of these (although how do you know if a web app is really offline capable?) but its unrealistic _at this point in time_ to say that the web can replace native apps feature for feature for most users especially with the current local database size limits for web apps.

The whole assumption of a constant connection thing really gets on my nerves and there are plenty of native apps which are hobbled by it. There's nothing more frustrating than launching a native app which logically should be self contained only to have it sit there with the UI blocking for ages while it tries to access something on a crap data connection. For example, I truly hate the CalMac ferry app because it should just cache the timetable data in a CoreData (or a web app with offline database would work well too), its probably <100k of timetable data and it yet it tries to redownload a _PDF_ for my ferry seemingly every time I try to access it......Grrrrrrr (timetable stashed in dropbox instead).

[1]About 1-3 bars of 2G signal. No 3G signal within 100 miles in every direction from where I'm sitting.

<comment><USER8> Note, I didn't say _just use the web_.

I told you what I do which is what everyone else will do. I don't need to tell them, it will happen on its on.

The vast majority of people who can afford smart phones live in areas where there is consistent internet.

In heavily populated areas the trend toward improving internet connectivity will continue. Eventually the productivity gains from creating apps will only be useful in specific situations.

Areas now that are still hard to use internet are improving in most cities. Places like metros, basements, etc will all have internet some day.

If you are stuck somewhere very rural, you will be increasingly fustrated.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Nokia won't last until 2014. They are declining too fast. They went from 45% market share to 18% in China, one of their strongest and biggest markets, last year alone. This year they will probably fall way below 10%. Nokia will most likely be acquired by the end of this year or in the first half of next year (or go bankrupt otherwise).

<comment><USER11> Who are they losing marketshare to in China?

<comment><USER12> It seems to domestic Android players like Huawei and ZTE: [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2011-07/22/content_129...](http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2011-07/22/content_12960107.htm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> (One person's anecdotes do not a trend make - I know) I can offer an Indian perspective - When I was first shopping for a good phone in India in 2008 or so, every single person (techie) said "Nokia" without hesitation. From the savviest Tecno-geek to the manual laborer at a construction site -everyone had a Nokia.

Fast forward to 2011 late/early 2012; virtually NONE of the techies I interact with recommended a Nokia. Infact, I haven't heard even one of my friends/acquaintances purchase a new Nokia; it is always Samsung/HTC/iPhones or rarely Blackberry. On the lower end, the flood of cheap Chinese phones in the Indian market means no cheap Nokia's.

Nokia was a name many people swore by in India, now not so much...I am afraid the end is near for them.

</comment><comment><USER14> Nokia get rid this problem by doing some encouragement to develop in their _old_ J2ME/Symbian platform in such country that still have good market share like Indonesia. In Indonesia, Nokia encourage developer to develop games in their platform in a contest named "Developer War", and now it has 4 episode/chapter.

<comment><USER15> _old J2ME/Symbian platform_

No. Just... no.

I'm really pleased that Symbian is dead (or on life support). It is, so far, the worst platform I have ever had to deal with. Eclipse-based IDE for €300-1300, partner-only premium APIs, completely unusable multi-gigabyte emulator (if you needed to run two instances, you had to install... two copies in different directories!), awful documentation, terrible system libraries, and quirky Symbian C++ dialect... it was quite an experience, but I will never miss it.

Anything we have today is better than Symbian.

<comment><USER16> For an hobbyist like myself, PyS60 was nice, though. Easy to install and really fast to code something up. Is there anything like that for Android?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't think it's necessarily game over for Nokia, but they've got to drastically rethink their game plan.

They burned through cash getting the Lumia phones ready, gorgeous as they are, which is a gamble not yet to pay off. They're using the third horse in the race, a platform which it's creators have yet to successfully manage into the mainstream consciousness. Too many flaws to stand next to Android and iOS, but not completely down yet.

Lets not forget Nokia is still one of the biggest mobile handset companies in the world, they've got a solid brand name appreciation in areas of the world yet to be opened up.

Essentially they've still got chips left on the table, it just depends on the next run of cards whether they grow their stack or not. But lets not get in the way of a snappy headline.

<comment><USER18> _I don't think it's necessarily game over for Nokia, but they've got to drastically rethink their game plan._

Flash their back catalogue of 800s with stock ICS, call it the Nokia Lumia A, sell them for $200 a pop (sans contract). That'll stem the bleeding and give them time to come up with their _real_ Galaxy-killer.

<comment><USER17> I'd imagine they can't, under terms of their agreement with Microsoft, but that might not be forever so maybe they will. But is the market ready for yet another Android handset? It's a thin share of the pie as it is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> If Nokia actually dies, Microsoft will pretty much have to buy them in order to ensure that they don't lose their (rather shaky) grasp on the mobile market (more of a foot in the door really...) That would make Microsoft the third company producing an entire mobile ecosystem of its own after Apple and Google. It's interesting to observe that the technological trend towards ecosystems is also happenning in the business sphere, albeit with some delay.

Also, I would be sad to see Nokia go - I always liked their well-built (dumb) phones.

</comment><comment><USER20> I met a Nokia developer evangelist at one of the events and asked him about some of the map features. The dude told me that he would get back but never bothered to. I'm not judging a company by one individual's behavior, but it surely gave me a negative impression about their developer evangelism.

</comment><comment><USER21> Windows 8 preview is good..may be not windows7 killer with PCs..but surely can compete with Android OS in mobile devices....only problem with Windows 8 is free development tools..hope MS looks into it..else it may loose the race before it starts....

and saying 'RIP Nokia' is very bad...i feel Nokia is still the best with its hardware and looks..i like Nokia 900 looks n hardware rather S3....

Android would have been better option...but they can switch to ANdroid as well when Windows 8 is not helping..there should be no worries about that...</comment>


Show HN: Salsa subscription service - <AUTHOR>

HombreSalsa.com is a monthly salsa subscription service I'm testing out. The site is terrible, I know. But it's my anorexic version of an MVP.
Hopefully I can sell some salsa while helping independent salsa brands gain some exposure. I'd love any feedback, both positive and negative. Thanks!
Brandon <comment><USER2> Site probably shouldn't be live in its current state, might wanna consider moving it to a more private url.

Edit: good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed. It's in pretty bad shape. I've thought of making a landing page and putting forth some effort in collecting emails, all while setting up a weekly newsletter about the company, behind-the-brand of salsa brands we endorse, and recipes. That way I can get the logistics and whatnot figured out too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I think you need to add some information. Who you are, why you are doing this, where you are, what you will be sending a customer, how you will be sending it, the ingredients used and so on. Presumably anyone who is willing to pay $30 a month is already interested in salsa so play up to that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great advice. I'll see what I can do on my ultra-basic GoDaddy site that costed me a whopping $1.17. I may even setup a landing page, or just take the existing site and put some more work behind it. This may be too minimal even for an MVP, especially when offering a more luxurious service.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Awesome! I have started working on a food subscription service as well! Curious Chocolate: [http://curiouschocolate.com](http://curiouschocolate.com). I would suggest maybe building out your site to be more than just a small landing page. Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Your chocolate looks fantastic! I'm not a bacon fan, but I do love chocolate…and I agree. The site is pretty terrible. My goal is to just get some sales upfront and improve the site with the profits. I've gotten some sales, but it hasn't been great. Much still to do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I used to be in this monthly subscription space..we did supplements though.

How big are the jars? $30 seems a bit high.

<comment><AUTHOR> $30 is a bit steep for most salsas, although the thought here is that the salsa we buy is top of the line. I don't see a reason for subscribing to Tostito's salsa when you can buy it anywhere, so we're aiming for family owned, authentic salsas.

Jars are a bit larger than your average salsa jar. Examples of companies we've bought from: MyBrothersSalsa.com is where out first shipment came from. 3 jars + shippings was $26, so not much margin for us there. I'm also looking at GreenMountainGringo.com so I could potentially widen the margin a bit without skimping on quality. Lots of salsa brands to be scouted, and the salsa taste testing process is well underway!

<comment><USER5> Got it. What you can also try to do is get smaller samples of Salsas from those companies. That's what we did with supplements - we got the samples and for the supplement companies we were another distribution channel / marketing opportunity as we had members who could buy the full size product through our site after trying the sample.

So maybe its worth a shot seeing if you can get smaller samples of salsa so you'll have better margins.

If you want some insight or help I'd be happy to answer any questions or chat. We did everything from getting samples, customers, shipping stuff and more.

firstname.lastname@example.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Great! I appreciate the help. I'll send you over a brief email :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Redefining SaaS.

<comment><USER7> FaaS? Food as a service?

Edit: Ah, I see. Salsa as a Service == SaaS</comment></comment>


My startup idea: ClipArena.com - I made it in one week. What do you think? - <AUTHOR> http://www.cliparena.com

<comment><USER2> Wow, nice idea and executed excellently. One week? I gather you are a webdev in your day job then? XHTML Strict, jquery etc...

A couple of suggestions: For about 20 secs I couldn't figure out what this site was. Maybe a helpful tagline close to the logo? The vertical list of arenas next to the videos jerks a bit as I hover. A little unsettling. Some extra margin or padding for those boxes should fix it.

Try some viral angle - "Tell a Friend" or something. Maybe a Gabbly box to chat with anyone else who is on at the same time.

Best of luck. I hope you don't get porned.

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you for your time and suggestions. yes, i was a webdev in my day job before i quit

you're right - some tagline should be fine.. any ideas?

for viral angle: i plan to make generated code for embeding arena into a web site

gabbly looks interesting, i didn't see it before. thanks for information

cheers

<comment><USER2> I just read about <a href="<http://madkast.com>">MadKast on TechCrunch..you should definitely look at that to put a "Share this" widget! :) It's beautiful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Nice concept, nice design. Great job vuknje.

But there is a bug in there. If you click multiple times fast enough(or if the same arena is opened in multiple tabs before i start voting ), it accepts each click as a valid vote.

Do not depend on UI components/client side script for validation.

And in UI, it says "New Arenas (1 - 10) " although it shows only 1-3 (/new.php)

Hope this helps. All the best vuknje.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks for feedback!

i fixed a bug you've found.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Just a thought: do the winners in each category bubble up to the top? It'd be cool to try and "challenge the #1 spot" with your own video.

</comment><comment><USER5> Feature request: Please change the UI so it doesn't look so Web 2.Oh :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> hmm.. but it would take me an additional week.. it's too much time in a web2.0 world ;) btw, your site (altruistiq.com) looks awesome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Honestly, it looks GREAT! and it works great! I love the concept. Kind of HotOrNot+Video mashup. Sweet.

[get rid of that "sexy " stuff. Look at dailymotion.com .Now they are working hard to get rid of the porn content.Reason, they didnt care about it in the beginning ]

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your feedback. Hmm.. there is a difference between "sexy" and "porn".. but, maybe you're right..

<comment><USER4> Eh, wait until traffic builds a bit before you clean up your act. Porn often makes for great seed content, so long as you don't let it erode your brand.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Nice layout. Easy to use. Good Luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Its fantastic & very entertaining.

A true testament to what can be achieved with skill, knowledge, and an idea.

Well done.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, dude.

<comment><USER9> vuknje, there is a typo on the url in your profile info. fyi.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks - i fixed it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> btw, myyearbook.com has implemented something similar. At least your site doesn't give me motion sickness.

</comment><comment><USER11> I see no way to vote. (FF2)

</comment><comment><USER12> I like the idea a lot. I have no idea how you vote for a clip, though. You should make that dead obvious.

<comment><AUTHOR> There are big green "vote" buttons under each video. They disappear if you have voted, and result is shown.

<comment><USER12> OK, it's not adblock. There are now no voting buttons I can find anywhere on the site, either on the home page, or on arena pages. I tried in Firefox (2) and in IE (7).

<comment><AUTHOR> I've found a bug. It should work now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Looks gorgeous. Where's the business model? You can't have a business without a way for it to make money.

<comment><USER12> All you need is a regular audience of visitors and you can make money. Take PlentyOfFish.com for instance. Revenues of more then $5 million per year, all ad-driven.

<comment><USER14> Adsense has been terrible for me every time I tried it. What's the typical per user return that you guys see?</comment></comment></comment>


Ijk – Transforms arrays into virtual DOM trees - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/lukejacksonn/ijk <comment><USER2> What makes Hiccup so nice in the Clojure world is that Paredit can be used here which is the tool you're already using to manipulate data structures.

For example, with Paredit, you can create an element and then move it prev/next/up/down a tree with muscle memory you're already using for the rest of your code.

When I re-entered the Javascript world, I tried arrays-for-html but realized it's unbearable without manipulation tooling. I think something like JSX makes more sense at that point since I find you're more likely to already be using an HTML manipulation tool like Emmet which is more pleasant than hand-editing array structures.

<comment><USER3> evil-lisp-state (used by default in Spacemacs) is a paredit-like thing that seems to work with parens, braces, and brackets in any language I happen to be using. I've used it with Python and Javascript without really thinking about it.

I've never used paredit in emacs, but I suspect that it might be amiable to working on Javascript as well.

More annoying to me would be all of the extra quotes and commas I need compared to Hiccup implementations in Clojure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like the syntax, but I have to say that I prefer JSX. The real advantage of JSX is that it's very similar to HTML and developers have been reading, mentally modeling and reasoning about HTML -> DOM translation for decades.

<comment><USER5> The real problem with JSX is that it's _almost_ HTML, but not quite, so you constantly have to fight against your assumptions about how it should work.

At least JS is really just JS, and developers have been reading, mentally modeling and reasoning about JS -> execution translation for decades.

<comment><USER6> For an alternative to JSX that's actually real HTML, but also real JS and requires no compiler, checkout lit-html: [https://github.com/Polymer/lit- html](https://github.com/Polymer/lit-html)

It lets you write HTML templates as JS template literals:

        let post = (title, body) => html`

${title}

${body>
`;

But unlike using innerHTML, it stamps DOM from <template> elements, and only updates parts that change, actually doing less work than VDOMs.

Lots of editors have automatic support for inline HTML tagged with a tag named "html", so you'll get syntax highlighting in say, Atom. And VS Code has a plugin that adds intellisense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> aaron-lebo Reminiscent of Breve.

[https://github.com/cwells/breve](https://github.com/cwells/breve)

I don't see a huge advantage over hyperscript (hyperapp and mithril both use it), but that _is_ a ridiculously small codebase.

The JS hate is kind of funny around here, because when you dig into stuff like this, you realize that JS is very lispy in ways (it's easy to build up trees of HTML dynamically). In the mid aughts on r/programming people would rant and rave about the kind of stuff Smalltalk's Seaside could do. Now that's possible, most of the disadvantages have been worked out, and people hate it.

Can't win, can you?

<comment><USER7> It's basically hiccup ([https://github.com/weavejester/hiccup](https://github.com/weavejester/hiccup)).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This synatx is called JsonML and I'm maintaining a stable and highly usable implementation: [http://adriansieber.com/shaven](http://adriansieber.com/shaven)

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool implementation. What is JSON about it though? What made you decide to pass children before props?

<comment><USER9> > _What is JSON about it though?_

"JSON" originally stood for "JavaScript Object Notation" \- the restrictions on double-quotes and unquoted keys are arbitrary extras on top of that concept, but otherwise JSONML is, technically, another JavaScript Object Notatation for Javascript that is also a Markup Language.

Admittedly, the use of the term JSON these days implies that your syntax will be parsable by a JSON parser, which JSONML might not be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Glimmer VM uses an IR that looks very similar to this and based on the same premise, code as data. [https://engineering.linkedin.com/blog/2017/03/glimmer-- blazi...](https://engineering.linkedin.com/blog/2017/03/glimmer--blazing-fast- rendering-for-ember-js--part-1).

</comment><comment><USER11> I guess it would be useful for programmatically building the DOM tree. But for writing DOM fragments, pug[1] is also an option. I happen to like the clean- looking syntax. Transposing their example:

        body
          h1 Hello World
          input(type='range')
          input(onclick='console.log') Log event
          ul
            li 1
            li 2
            li 3
          unless false
            span Hidden

[1] [https://pugjs.org/api/getting- started.html](https://pugjs.org/api/getting-started.html)

<comment><USER12> Looks a lot like slim [1] or even it's grand-daddy HAML [2]

[1] [http://slim-lang.com/](http://slim-lang.com/) [2] [http://haml.info/](http://haml.info/)

<comment><USER13> PUG used to be called 'Jade', and was basically HAML-for-nodejs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Terse is definitely the right word.

</comment><comment><USER15> Interesting approach. I did something similar a while back, took a more function-based approach: [https://github.com/undecided/tg](https://github.com/undecided/tg)

At that point, I hadn't really done much react-style apps - will have to see how well that works with React!

<comment><AUTHOR> I got it working with preact.. didn't try with react!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Also [https://github.com/Jador/react-hyperscript- helpers/blob/mast...](https://github.com/Jador/react-hyperscript- helpers/blob/master/README.md)

which is even more terse

<comment><AUTHOR> We have something like this for hyperapp ([https://github.com/hyperapp/html](https://github.com/hyperapp/html)). The aim of this variant was to experiment to see wether it is feasible to rid of view dependencies (either `h` or precompiled tags like `h1` etc.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Looks awesome. Makes me wish I still used LiveScript because of the \string syntax and other features that would go great with ijk.

You refer to h but what is it? I searched around but obviously something called h is hard to find.

<comment><USER16> [https://github.com/ohanhi/hyperscript- helpers](https://github.com/ohanhi/hyperscript-helpers)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> 2010 strongly echoes in my head: [https://github.com/jed/fab](https://github.com/jed/fab)

</comment><comment><USER18> You guys should check out [https://www.celljs.org](https://www.celljs.org) if you like this type of approach

</comment><comment><USER19> nevow.stan did that back in 2004 :)

[https://github.com/twisted/nevow/blob/master/nevow/stan.py](https://github.com/twisted/nevow/blob/master/nevow/stan.py)

<comment><USER3> nevow.stan uses objects to represent its ast. This isn't the same because it misses the point: objects aren't data in python (or most places, since objects are rarely printable/readable).

Practical Common Lisp demonstrates a spiritual predecessor that works on data from 2003[0]. I'm sure there are much older implementations floating around for CL and Scheme but I don't care to look for them. This is a common idiom in lisps.

[0] [http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/practical-an-html- generation...](http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/practical-an-html-generation- library-the-interpreter.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Improve it a little bit more by by removing the single quote by turning the html tags into functions that accepts 2 arrays: the attributes and the child elements, by this time you will come across with elm in which expressing the html document tree fits perfectly in the language syntax and semantics.

<comment><AUTHOR> We already have something similar to this at hyperapp.. it is [https://github.com/hyperapp/html](https://github.com/hyperapp/html). But yes, as mentioned by @masklinn, the drawback is you then have to define every element and then import all those definitions. With ijk you can write dependency free views (no import of h or h1, h2, etc.)

<comment><USER21> Not necessarily, you could have `h.h1` and `h.span` and `h.myCustomElement` just by using Proxies from Ecmascript 6

[https://makandracards.com/makandra/44070-javascript-hash- obj...](https://makandracards.com/makandra/44070-javascript-hash-object-with- default-value)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Love it, I see this replacing my express templates. Well done.</comment>


Pretend Climate Change Is Caused by Aliens - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/opinion/aliens-climate-change.html <comment><USER2> The ever war loving American government will attempt to declare war on aliens instead. Leading to more weapons manufacture, leading to more anthropocentric climate change.

</comment><comment><USER3> I knew it! I KNEW IT!

Aliens are terraforming (or rather exoplanetforming) earth to make it habitable for them!

<comment><USER4> So... if we _eat_ the aliens, then climate change would stop? Now that sounds entirely reasonable to me.</comment></comment>


Latest Shipment of Avalon ASICs Could Increase Network Hashrate By 500% - <AUTHOR> http://thegenesisblock.com/latest-shipment-of-avalon-asics-could-increase-network-hashrate-by-500/

<comment><USER2> ASICs are going to rid a large amount of pools. GPU mining and FPGA mining will fade out, because the value returned will be so minimal compared to these monsters. There is a finite amount of bitcoins released for a set amount of time. The power consumed/bitcoin return ratio on GPUs/FPGAs as the difficulty rises due to the ASICs will just leave people frustrated.

GPU mining had one benefit. Once you gave up, you could at least resell the video card or play games. ASICs are basically trash. The FPGAs can be recycled on ebay.

For those uninitiated: Assume I am on an i7 2600k and you are on a Pentium 2 clocked at a fine 200mhz. If we are mining in the same pool (just us), I will probably do 99.99% of the processing, and receive that return. You probably spent more power than me with your outdated technology, and only received 0.000001% of the payout.

<comment><USER3> I think the tech has gone CPU > GPU > FPGA > ASIC.

Makes me wonder what will come next.

<comment><USER4> You do realize the whole premise of an application-specific-integrated-circuit is to do one thing the best. If properly architected, an ASIC that does the most SHA hashing with the least transistors will be the best miner, inherent to the technology.

<comment><USER5> That doesn't mean the designs cannot be improved... And once somebody releases an improved design, the older ASICs become far less useful.

<comment><USER6> At this point, an "improved" design would have to mean algorithmic improvements to a hardware SHA algorithm (i.e. not likely).

Improvements that you can actually count on would be die shrinks, but these will provide returns in accordance with the tail end of Moore's law. Compared to the multiple-order-of-magnitude improvements from the CPU -> GPU/FPGA -> ASIC jumps, these improvements likely won't even be worth writing home about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Will these things be good for anything else once faster/better miners are introduced?

<comment><USER8> Miners of this type can be pointed to other cryptocurrencies that use the same proof-of-work function.

<comment><USER9> You would expect anyone else in the world to avoid compatible proof-of-work functions for exactly that reason.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I for one, look forward to all the cheap 6990s that are about to hit eBay.

</comment><comment><USER11> And Butterfly Labs still hasn't shipped their orders from Day 1. There will be an awful lot of people who will never see a return on their investment from this venture.

<comment><USER12> It looks like they're shipping orders up to Oct 2012 now: [https://forums.butterflylabs.com/blogs/bfl_jody/](https://forums.butterflylabs.com/blogs/bfl_jody/)

Or am I reading that wrong?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Doesn't the reliability of bitcoin stem from it being very difficult for any one entity to control over 50% of the computing power in the network? News like this makes it seem like a state sponsored actor could do it without too much trouble.

<comment><USER14> It's easy to get over 50% of the hashing power: just buy it. Bitcoin is especially vulnerable during technology transitions; e.g. in July 2010 a single Radeon GPU was more powerful than the entire Bitcoin network so you could have performed a 51% attack for $300 plus some epic hacking.

<comment><USER15> Right, but of course Satoshi's argument is that it would be far more valuable for you to have just used that Radeon to mine ;)

<comment><USER16> > Right, but of course Satoshi's argument is that it would be far more > valuable for you to have just used that Radeon to mine

Value depends on personal desire... Not all people want the same things.

<comment><USER15> That's why we use money to exchange goods and services ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The flood of newly minted BTC will likely cause exchange rates to crater. Hopefully the increase in available BTC will stabilize prices as individuals/small groups will have to expend more capital to influence prices in their favor.

The next six months are probably going to be a little crazy, hopefully it'll drive BTC out of the hands of speculators and into the hands of actual users of the currency.

<comment><AUTHOR> The creation rate of BTC is fixed every 10 minutes. More ASIC power does not equal more BTC.

<comment><USER18> Not quite. The difficulty is set to average that a new block is found approximately every 10minutes. However, if lots of capacity is added all at once, the difficulty might not change for several days, and blocks will be generated at a faster rate during that time, as it is only updated every 2016 blocks.

[https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty)

<comment><AUTHOR> Somewhat splitting hairs... it's adjusted to 10 minute blocks, and there's also a huge variability in how frequently they are discovered. Even if the average was 10 min, there are blocks found within the same minute, or with 30+ minute gaps.

<comment><USER19> Variability wouldn't matter if the average over time was alright. But it's not just spitting hairs: BTC generation is significantly ahead of schedule. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5780861](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5780861)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Would a quantum computer be able to solve these kind of problems instantly?

<comment><USER2> The difficulty would rise to compensate for the advent of quantum computing. The danger of quantum computing in bitcoin is holding the 51%+ computing power and being able to forge transactions in the 'books'.

Source: [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/6062/what- effects...](http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/6062/what-effects- would-a-scalable-quantum-computer-have-on-bitcoin)</comment></comment>