How to Pick a Front End Web Framework - <AUTHOR> http://www.fse.guru/how-to-pick-a-frontend-web-framework <comment><USER3> As someone with an embedded C and C++ background, I have to admit, the world of web programming seems bewildering and alien with all its frameworks and workflow engines and module bundlers and virtualization and containers. Does anyone even write code anymore, or has web programming simply become a systems integration problem?

It's a testament to how awesome and diverse this field is that you can take two people, both think of themselves as professional programmers, and chances are each will be mystified by what the other person does day to day.

<comment><USER4> > Does anyone even write code anymore, or has web programming simply become a > systems integration problem?

Now we program in frameworks, not languages. The language just happens to be the framework's chosen expression.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I liked the article, but there's something I need to point out regarding CSS preprocessors. It's way more important than making CSS "a bit better".

Preprocessors allow you to achieve modularity and DRYness. They allow you to move the object-composition duty from the browser to the build process - <USER2> avoiding overloading the browser with composition (i.e. composing a class with SASS mixins or extends, instead of plugging many classes in a single HTML element). They allow you to easily express relationship through class names instead of relying on DOM hierarchy (separation of concerns). And, obviously, they allow variables! Common and centralized palettes, sizing definitions, typography definitions; also, "computable" definitions (e.g. deriving a shades/tints palettes via the built-in color management functions, or computing a typography scale from a base size).

If you have the time to learn CSS and a preprocessor adequately (and think about how to tackle common architectural issues having these characteristics in mind, isntead of borrowing solutions from e.g. OOP), then you might have clean, elegant and maintainable CSS (instead of a hairy jungle of rules that nobody in your team would want to mess with).

<comment><USER6> I hear what you are saying about clean and elegant css being possible with preprocessors that add abstraction capabilities. I have never ever seen it in practice, at least nothing on par with the abstraction abilities of code. Can you post a medium scale example of clean & maintainable css that we might study?

<comment><USER7> [https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/tree/master/less](https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/tree/master/less)

<comment><USER5> Bootstrap is quite the opposite of what I'd consider good CSS architecture (although it's obviously a great project). Way too much reliance on DOM structure.

<comment><USER8> On a larger scale (overall layout of a page) CSS reliance on DOM structure is a bad thing. But on a small scale (layout of a component) the cleanest markup is usually going to require coordination between the CSS and the DOM structure (and JS if the component has custom behaviors.)

This is true for basic html too. You could create a bullet list by adding a div with a class for the container and arbitrarily located divs with classes indicating that they're list items related to the container, and then use complicated CSS to pull it all together into a visual representation of a bullet list. Or, you could use a ul element for the container with direct child li elements for the items. Your visual style relies on the DOM structure, but overall it's a cleaner solution.

<comment><USER5> Why would you create a list with <div> elements? I understand your point; DOM structure has styling defaults and you have to play with it - 100% decoupling it's not possible. Still, trying to achieve decoupling between structure and styles doesn't mean that you should create bad mark-up.

In your scenario, I'd use a list element (<ul> or <ol>, according to the nature of the data) with a class (e.g. .my-list) and list item elements also with a class if needed (<li> with e.g. .my-list__item). No complications here. If somewhere along the way someone wanted to to a navigation area with exactly the same styles but with a different mark-up (anchors inside a <nav>), you could reuse or extend those classes to a <nav> element for the container and <a> elements for items. That's another "level" of DOM independence.

<comment><USER8> That's exactly how Bootstrap's classes for lists work. And they are tied to the DOM structure, though not necessarily to particular elements: .my-list has to go on a container element, and .my-list__item has to go onto children of that element.

The point I was trying to make was that at a component level, your CSS classes are usually going to depend on a particular hierarchy in the DOM elements that the classes are applied to, or they won't work correctly. How much of a dependency you have is a tradeoff; you can design your framework to minimize the dependency, but you're likely to create a more complicated framework in exchange.

<comment><USER5> > That's exactly how Bootstrap's classes for lists work. And they are tied to > the DOM structure, though not necessarily to particular elements: .my-list > has to go on a container element, and .my-list__item has to go onto children > of that element.

Not quite exactly. My solution doesn't require list items to be child elements of the list. Bootstrap's "list item" needs (by definition/rule) to be a "direct" descendant - a child element of a given type (a selector with "> li") of the list. They have classes for lists, and then style the list items via element and "descendancy" (i.e. .my-list > li).

If somewhere along the way you decide/are asked to change the mark-up in order to have an element for grouping list items (so, you'd have elements between the list and list items ), Bootstrap's way of creating rules wouldn't work anymore - list items wouldn't be child elements of the list, despite you wanting to keep the styling in them. Independently of how you solved this in the mark-up, if your rule was like Bootstrap's .my-list > li, then it wouldn't work anymore because list-items wouldn't be "direct" descendants of .my-list.

This might seem minor or unusual, but I assure it's not - this is the kind of changes in structure that happen very frequently and make DOM-tied CSS fail. And bear in mind the Tetris effect on this: your less-than-experienced team member might solve this with yet another rule, but a even more specific one (.my-list > .group > li) which will yield harder to maintain CSS (this rule is very specific; it would need even more specific rules to be overridden when necessary). If your development rule was "no DOM tying; just use classes), the problem of escalating specificity would've also been avoided.

> The point I was trying to make was that at a component level, your CSS > classes are usually going to depend on a particular hierarchy in the DOM > elements that the classes are applied to, or they won't work correctly. How > much of a dependency you have is a tradeoff; you can design your framework > to minimize the dependency, but you're likely to create a more complicated > framework in exchange.

I understand your point, but I don't agree with the notion that "but you're likely to create a more complicated framework in exchange" by minimizing the dependency on the DOM. You're likely, definitely, to create a more verbose CSS framework, with a way bigger amount of classes. But I don't think this is the same as complicated; it's more verbose, it may require you to write more code[1], but I think it's very predictable and easier to follow by team members with different expertise levels.

P.S. Also, bear in mind that BEM-like solutions also have hierarchy. Elements which belong to blocks. They just don't depend on a specific hierarchy on the DOM; DOM hierarchy is independent of styling hierarchy.

[1] I'd argue it will make you write more code _in the beginning_. Traditional DOM-tied styling will eventually catch-up and the code you have to write to overwrite "over-specific" selectors and similar issues will grow bigger.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> No matter how good you are now, your code when you've spent a year with a framework will be better. Consequently you should pick a framework (or language, or tool) and _stick with it until you actually have a good reason to move on to something else._ The benefits of jumping to whatever someone else recommends because they claim their choice is better for X, Y and Z reasons are likely less than the benefit of your own experience with a framework you've learned and understand.

90% of the speed of your code in terms of both writing and execution are a function of how well you write it, not the libraries you're using. Writing better code comes from practising (and thinking).

<comment><USER10> To be honest, I think the person who has spent a year with a framework and who is ok to use it on a day-to-day basis won't simply trust a random guide in a random blog.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm unique in that I've never done any web development whatsoever (all my work is in finance and HPC), so I know zero Javascript, no CSS, and only the most rudimentary HTML. This article reminds me why I stay away from the web dev space.

</comment><comment><USER12> I hate modern Web dev so much.

<comment><USER13> I love it. It wasn't even that long ago that I used to spend countless hours building everything with the sliding doors method and doing weird hacks to make things work in IE6 or (gasp) IE5. There was a lot less to know, and things were certainly simpler back then, but it was also extremely tedious.

Nowadays I can focus my effort on problems that are actually interesting. There's been an explosion, and with the variety, things have gotten complexed. I understand that it can be cumbersome to those entering the field, and a lot of the time it's total overkill for the problem. But... once you get over the hump, there's now a lot of really cool shit you can do on the web that was completely unrealistic or unimaginable just a few years ago.

<comment><USER12> Do you not find that you spend far more time now wrangling with new implementations of new frameworks for new concepts, only to discover later that you should've researched more, because you have a problem which an even newer implementation of a newer concept has solved and blah blah blah. The amount of time I've wasted in my life learning things to keep up with Web dev trends...

<comment> at-fates-hands Came here to say this.

Frameworks are great, but you have to spend a lot of time wading through the documentation and architecture. Why this is different than that framework and why this does something different than that framework, and why this framework solves something this other framework fucks up.

For a time I just started putting together my own stuff and then realized it was so custom, it was totally useless outside of a particular project. I've come around a little bit, but its frustrating when the whole industry jumps on a bandwagon, promotes the shit out of it and then some time later, they're onto something else and the cycle repeats itself.

The best example for this is Backbone.

It was one of the first JS frameworks I started fooling around with, along with Node and Express. Everybody thought this was the greatest thing ever. Now, less than a year or so after I first started dabbling with it, you can't find anybody still talking about it (even though its still a rock solid framework). Everything is now Angular, React and various other shiny toys. I would say the same thing about Knockout. People thought this was the next big thing, and now I can't find anybody promoting it anymore.

<comment><USER10> You can use Backbone and Knockout with React. React is not a framework per se. It just makes things less complex.

I'd encourage you to read this article if you haven't done it yet: jlongster.com/Removing-User-Interface-Complexity,-or-Why-React-is-Awesome

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm surprised that the "nothing complex / hack up a quick prototype" recommendation is Angular. I get that it's powerful, but there's so much deep magic inside angular [1] that I find even simple stuff takes significant forethought and wrangling.

As a substitute, why not Ractive.js? It's simple and does what you'd expect. You put

        {{#each foo:i}}
           <span class="{{classname}}"> {{foo[i]}} </span>
        {{/each}}

in one place, and

        ractive.set({
            foo: ['a', 'b', 'c'],
            classname: "output",
        })

in another, and things just work. No messing with insanity like:

        angular.element(myDomElement).scope().$apply();

/rant. Maybe I'm missing something deep here.

[1] Introspecting the parameter names of the callback function I passed in? _Really?_

<comment><USER10> No, you don't miss anything.

Angular is pretty bad in my opinion. You can check out my rant here: [http://www.fse.guru/2-years-with-angular](http://www.fse.guru/2-years-with- angular)

In my experience, those people who have tried it as a framework for "some web- related stuff we need urgently" find Angular really attractive. When they need to dive deep in the magic they just hire a consultant...

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I can confirm that the explosion of package managers (npm/bower), task runners (gulp/grunt), UI frameworks (foundation/bootstrap/skeleton), pre-processors (sass/less), JS frameworks (...), etc., that you can waste entirely too much time deciding between them.

As an aside, I've been working on a project that uses Angular 1.3, and I'm not entirely sold yet. I do like that modules are usually contained, but the dependencies are hard to reason about (plus there's all the black magic I'm convinced they had to use to get this to work). Everything about the application feels sluggish, because there's a ton of other JS frameworks being pulled in. So whatever you do, don't mix and match 10 of them. It's painful as a user

</comment><comment><USER16> After reading the article I think what the author meant is: How to get even more confused with the insane plethora of Front End stuff out there and give up life.

But I can't blame him. I've also tried to create lists, to reason it all. Several times, and to no avail. One thing he got right, an image at the very beginning with the word _chaos_ in the middle.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER17> > Full Stack EngiNerd. I use magic to make IT things work and keep people > happy.

Keeping people happy is a good thing[1]. But all those words make me cringe so hard.

\--

[1] - unless they are serial sex offenders.

<comment><USER18> If that kind of bio bothers you, stay away from Quora :-)

<comment><USER17> I've trained myself to mentally block those on Quore, like I've trained myself to mentally block ads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Rather than evaluate every framework under the sun to try and find the one that's perfect for your specific situation and needs, I would probably focus on finding something that's widespread, well-documented, has a lot of momentum behind it, and an active community. Right now that would probably be React or Meteor.

<comment><USER20> Seems odd to include Meteor, which is pretty controversial and might never take off, but not Angular, which has much, much higher usage than both of those two combined.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> How did this even make the front page? There's nothing of value here.

<comment><USER22> As a person not very experienced with JS there's literally no where that I know of that combines and explains modern day JS infrastructure.

<comment><USER23> Agreed. I'm a backend person who ends up writing UI from time to time, and this kind of material is gold.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> > Language Checklist > > When you have answered those high-level questions, > it's a good time to talk to your teammates and pick up a language!

No, No and No.

Please, just use something that's as close to plain javascript as possible. Your client will thank you because you don't have to reinvent wheels for the sake of programmer porn...

</comment><comment><USER25> Need to do something? Have a framework! Here, more frameworks. Frameworks for everyone!

</comment><comment><USER26> The way I chose in the past. Use a jobsite (in my case www.cwjobs.co.uk). Type in framework. Count number of jobs. If one is significantly bigger in the job market, this gives me more flexibility and job security going forward.

This has resulted in me going with AngularJS as there are 7-10 times the number of jobs advertised vs other frameworks.

My current role also uses typescript and was using it before the Ang 2 announcement. I do watch where the various technologies are going within the whole stack.

I also find articles like this interesting as they show movements in the technology stack that I should be aware of [http://angularjs.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/angular-2-survey- res...](http://angularjs.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/angular-2-survey-results.html)

I am currently using grunt, but feel I need to get into gulp.

</comment><comment><USER27> I recently tried to explain my setup to a friend and realized this is getting out of hand. I like the do one thing/pluggable UNIX philosophy as much as anyone, but saying "Typescript,tslint,gulp,jspm,Karma,mocha,chai,sinon,nightwatch,stylus,stylint,istanbul,react,skeleton,jsx,editorConfig,babel,Cordova" makes your head spin. Also getting them all to work together and play nice with sourcemaps and gulp tasks is a pain. Just setting up the tooling for the project BECAME the project. Sure it's IDE independent, pluggable and makes for clean development, but next week another thing will be shiny and I'll be doing more boilerplate. _sigh_

<comment><USER28> Yes, it can take a while to get things set up. But you really only need it once. I've used the same core gulpfile for at least a year across multiple projects. And when new things pop up that are useful to your workflow you can integrate them pretty easily. To me the benefits far outweigh the cost of learning or at least integrating most build tools and concepts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> IMHO, as an outsider, I reduce the less risky choices to 3:

\- javascript -> meteor + react

\- whatever language -> whatever language most popular framework + react

\- ruby -> elixir -> phoenix + react

Feel free to criticise.

</comment><comment><USER30> Or skip all that and go use React and Webpack.

<comment><USER31> How about...no...? React isn't the solution to every problem.

<comment><USER32> Not with that attitude it isn't.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I find it odd that he didn't include Jade in this long list of tools and technologies of modern web development as it's IMO the best tool hands down out there when it comes to HTML modularization/componentization and I can't imagine now developing websites or even web apps without it in my workflow.

</comment><comment><USER34> Shouldn't the meme be:

AUTOMATE

ALL THE TASKS

I feel like memes should be left out of serious write ups because if you do it wrong, or if you have an audience who doesn't normally consume memes, you will end up with what happened to me, which is my attention being focused on the wrong place.

</comment><comment><USER35> I use MithrilJs with Coffescript. Small and Fast.

<comment><USER36> What about RuniteJS? Or maybe AdamantJS?

I still use Browserify for almost everything.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Why would you want to include grunt or gulp? Shell scripts do the job just as well and can be run from npm. Bash is streaming, parallel etc etc. You can do everything you want with &, &&, |, and >

<comment><USER38> Do you have a demo repo so we can learn from this, sounds pretty great. How do I watch files with bash and recompile changes (for example)?

I'm certain it's all possible, and while grunt and gulp have lots of examples I never really like them.

<comment><USER39> Here's a couple of articles if you are interested in the gulp free approach:

[http://blog.keithcirkel.co.uk/why-we-should-stop-using- grunt...](http://blog.keithcirkel.co.uk/why-we-should-stop-using-grunt/) [http://blog.keithcirkel.co.uk/how-to-use-npm-as-a-build- tool...](http://blog.keithcirkel.co.uk/how-to-use-npm-as-a-build-tool/)</comment></comment></comment>


Pentagon to launch task force to investigate UFO sightings - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/13/politics/pentagon-ufo-task-force/index.html <comment><USER2> No mention of the Defense Intelligence Agency's AATIP [0]. Interesting to see how the UFO phenomenon is handled by the media - and Tom Delonge's involvement has always seemed a bit suspect to me. Is this the disclosure, slowly burning over time? Compelling ideas, but carefully managed perceptions.

At any rate this isn't new - letters, military, & Feds have kept various UFO programs for many decades. [1] The truth, as they say, is out there.

[0]: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Aerospace_Threat_Id...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Aerospace_Threat_Identification_Program)

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

<comment><USER3> Or maybe this is our generation's Project Blue Book. Exciting, regardless.</comment></comment>


Tablet PC fever is already cooling down, says Acer chairman - <AUTHOR> http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110824PD218.html

<comment> Apple-Guy Apple: best financial earning in the company's history with help of iPad.

Acer: "no profit" this year (translation: bleeding money).

Would I believe Acer that it has the successful strategy and market outlook?</comment>


Bitcoin exchange business embroiled in non-payment scandal - <AUTHOR> http://www.startupsmart.com.au/technology/bitcoin-exchange-business-embroiled-in-non-payment-scandal/2014081312980.html

<comment><USER2> I don't get people trusting shady exchanges with thousands of dollars at once.

Buy bitcoins in pieces and transfer them to your own storage ASAP.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the first things you do on a new Windows 10 PC? Any checklists? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious what some of the things are you do on a windows 10 PC.  I don't have a checklist but there are a few settings I usually end up modifying, or software I install. (such as winrar.) <comment><USER2> Ninite[0] (YC W08) is a useful site for setting up a Windows PC. It allows you to install (or update) your choice of around 100 apps and tools in 13 categories (including Compression, where you can select WinRAR) for Windows 10 (also 7 and 8) in one shot, like so:

\- You first check off the apps/tools you want from a checklist on the site -- they are grouped by category

\- You then download a custom installer which will install the apps/tools you selected from the checklist.

This custom installer will install the apps/tools you chose, using the latest version, skipping installing toolbars, skipping reboots, doing all the work in the background, etc. -- there's a description of all this on the page.

(There's also a pro version for managing multiple PCs)

[0] [https://ninite.com/](https://ninite.com/)

<comment><USER3> Ive written a tool which does all of the but instead uses the Chocolatey package manager. Useful for centralising software updates, uninstallers ect

Chocolatey Quickstart: [https://github.com/RoryCrispin/Chocolatey- Quickstart](https://github.com/RoryCrispin/Chocolatey-Quickstart)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't have a custom decrapification script because my reinstall frequency isn't high enough to warrant the effort of maintaining one, especially when you consider the rate at which Windows 10 behavior is changing these days. A Group Policy rule that works one day will be ignored the next.

So, I just spend a week or so resenting the fact my time has to be wasted because Microsoft has a veritable runtime monopoly in the form of DirectX, and it uses that to shove its anti-consumer, anti-power user, anti-customization singular vision down my throat.

Once that week is up, I've by then made all the usual registry hacks to Explorer, disabled all the invasive privacy crap, and otherwise made it a reasonably habitable experience.

</comment><comment><USER5> On Windows 10, I didn't use Mixed Reality or 3D printing or Xbox stuff or … So, I really wanted an image with non-essential items removed. I also don't like unnecessary items in my Start menu.

Summary of steps are:

A) Create Windows image with stuff I don't want removed

B) Create Windows settings and clean up script

C) Clean install using step A but do it with a local account [1]

D) Clean up Windows using script from step B

E) Rename PC

F) Connect to Microsoft account - this will bring over settings from your other Windows PC(s)

F) Install software using Chocolatey

Over time, as I make further changes to my setup, I usually apply them manually and then incorporate them into either step A or step B.

Steps for A:

      A1) Download ISO from Microsoft. For an example on how to do this, see instructions at: https://pureinfotech.com/download-windows-10-iso-without-media-creation-tool/

      A2) Create script for removing unnecessary items and then apply them to the Windows ISO image from step A1. I use: https://github.com/DrEmpiricism/Optimize-Offline to modify the Windows ISO image.

      A3) Use Rufus or similar tool to create bootable USB drive from image from step A2.

      A4) Clean install Windows.

      A5) When creating the image in step A2, you can add scripts that end up in c:\windows\setup\scripts. Run these scripts

Steps for B:

      B1) Use script from https://github.com/Disassembler0/Win10-Initial-Setup-Script and customize it to your liking

[1]: If you install with a Microsoft account, your user directory is the first five letters/numbers of your Microsoft account. When installing using a local account, the local account name, in its entirety is used.

edit1: fixed formatting.

</comment><comment><USER6>
        iwr https://chocolatey.org/install.ps1 | iex
        cinst -y totalcommander copyq neovim vscode firefox everything sysinternals nirlauncher smplayer vlc git tortoisegit conemu 7zip paint.net dngrep dbeaver
        Update-SessionEnvironment

        git clone https://github.com/W4RH4WK/Debloat-Windows-10
        ls Debloat-Windows-10/scripts/*.ps1 | % { . $_ } # YMVV

        git clone https://github.com/majkinetor/powershell_profile.d
        gc powershell_profile.d/setup -raw | iex

        code --install-extension ms-vscode.PowerShell ...

        Install-Module PSWindowsUpdate
        # repeat this as long as needs restart
        Install-WindowsUpdate -AcceptAll
        Restart-Computer

Then I go ad-hoc from there... That is for my daily machine. For specialized machines such as media center etc, the list is different...

<comment><USER7> Running all of those Debloat scripts:

\- Permanently disables Windows Defender (requires registry changes to re- enable).

\- Breaks the browser choice window. Skype. Time sync.

\- Disables services seemingly arbitrarily.

\- Disables SmartScreen.

\- Disables both automatic updates and the notification for manual updates.

\- Sets mouse speed/sensitivity/smoothing/pointer settings(???).

\- Disables accessibility features.

\- Reverts the volume slider.

My point is, it isn't "debloat" it is a fully opinionated default state for Windows 10, completely arbitrary, likely inconvenient, and potentially dangerous (SmartScreen, Windows Update, etc). Windows may also fail to update after this due to ACL permissions set on some files/registry keys/directories to keep certain features broken.

I do not recommend anyone runs this.

<comment><USER6> I don't run exactly all, but like I said, YMMV. That said, bunch of people I know run this all the time, me included, and besides some trivial stuff Windows runs at least x2 faster and feels snappier. Those scripts are meant to be inspected and applied.

Besides, what kind of engineers are we if we can't fix something done with the script ? You don't recommend experimentation, I can live with that if we don't do work together... Otherwise, perhaps you should try running what looks to you like arbitrary setup and see what path it takes you.

<comment><USER7> You suggested people run:

> ls Debloat-Windows-10/scripts/*.ps1 | % { . $_ }

So kinda are suggesting people run them all. Plus "run them all then fix all the stuff it breaks otherwise you aren't a true engineer" isn't a particularly strong argument for this.

People that know what they're doing don't need these kind of scripts (and would know better than half of what these scripts do anyway). So these kind of scripts pray on those likely not to know enough to fix the issues they cause.

But regardless, just don't start posting about how Windows Update never works correctly because you manually set HOST file and ACL privileges that are specifically designed to stop Windows from working in a normal way. You play silly games you win silly prizes.

<comment><USER6> I suggested:

> ls Debloat-Windows-10/scripts/*.ps1 | % { . $_ } # YMMV

Notice YMMV comment :)

So now you made the entire thing about it ... :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> ive noticed my checklist has been slowly shrinking as microsoft sees fit to takeover alot of the typical first-run duties from the user

some months ago i realized i no longer have to go grab my gpu drivers from a website or 'fresh install essentials' backup usb

my current windows box is about a week old, and it occurred to me the other day that i didn't even have to go in and do little things like enabling the viewing of hidden files, or displaying file extensions 100% of the time etc - alot of these settings are attached to your microsoft account, if you choose to use one.

haven't tried to debloat it yet, as someone else mentioned the script you used last time might not work this time, but a decent way to make it somewhat tolerable is using classic shell to make the start menu far, far more appealing

i recently fully switched over from using ninite to using chocolatey. so far i have yet to find an application i need or want that choco doesn't have

also - and i really must beg forgiveness here - that new windows terminal... it ain't half bad... but mintty/wsltty are still the goto's for interacting with WSL

my choco install -g essentials:

firefox

speedfan

steam

vscodium / atom

ffmpeg / vlc

autohotkey

etcher

simplenote

irfanview

winamp / foobar / picard

</comment><comment><USER9> Stare at it and wonder how this spying device became okay. If it's my system, find a new hard drive and instructions on how to install linux for this hardware. remove hard drive.

If it's someone else's system, explain to them that perhaps every single keystroke is saved and sent to microsoft, along with other data. Explain that data could be used by advertisers to influence your decisions, but also by attorneys, gov agencies and more. Suggest they try linux. Walk them through the setup process and point out so many default settings that are privacy averse. Again suggest linux. Research how to make the hardware dual-boot. Explain that others windows systems may have already been setup to include these privacy stealing defaults and other data stealing parts of the Microsoft ecosystem could also be hoovering up data. Suggest putting a sticker on the keyboard and screen and box warning other people who may use it, that all information sent or received from said device is being recorded and shared by multiple different groups of people and can later be used against you by any number of various agencies.

Show them linux running, demand that they use it unless they need the windows partition for gaming. If laptop, find schematic to cut the microphone hardware.

</comment><comment><USER10> I boot up Ubuntu from USB... /s

</comment><comment><USER11> The first thing I do is update the BIOS, download the newest drivers and a copy of Firefox, and create install media. I would then perform a clean install. I liked doing this to make sure I was clear of any junkware (as a don't trust uninstallers) and to make sure my installation media worked.

After reinstalling I would create a new, regular, user account for normal use.

</comment><comment><USER12> When I bought my Windows 10 MSI gaming laptop, it ran horribly and stopped booting up after a week.

For some reason I just exchanged it for the same model. This time I reinstalled the windows image that came with the computer with no add-ons or extra software.

I've had this laptop for 2 years and game on it regularly.

So my advice is: make sure you have a clean version from the start.

</comment><comment><USER13> I usually install Linux, and then disable all of the privacy violating stuff that I can in Windows, like Cortana and Telemetry, and uninstall as much bloat as I can. I then install Firefox, Tor browser, and WSL.

Once that's done, I can move on to whatever I need for regular usage of the machine, like Git, compilers, Steam, etc.

</comment><comment><USER14> Step 1: Disable sticky keys (especially if it is for gaming)

Step 2: install [https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop](https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop) via a powershell script I wrote which will then spend the next while installing all I need for my development environment

and then it is mostly steam, browsers and drivers that are left to do

</comment><comment><USER15> Enable as many options as I can with PowerShell. (so I don't have to do any more point-n-click than I absolutely need to)

Set up WSL. (by running an Ansible playbook I wrote)

Install chocolatey.

Get my standard set of packages from the chocolatey mirrors.

Install Synology Drive client, sign in and let things sync.

(I recently switched off of most public cloud services onto my own on-prem cloud setup)

</comment><comment><USER16> Run this script: [https://gist.github.com/gregjotau/2e4678fa3742756d67f525a81e...](https://gist.github.com/gregjotau/2e4678fa3742756d67f525a81ed59ece)

</comment><comment><USER17> \- clean up the taskbar by removing the default icon shortcuts and the giant search bar

\- disable all desktop notifications

\- install Chrome

\- install Git Bash

</comment><comment><USER18> Install Chocolatey, Simplewall.

Also search GitHub scripts to disable unnecessary components.

<comment><USER19> I still wonder how Chocolately works in comparison to "classic" software installations - I take it you're satisfied?

<comment><USER18> Yep, always go there if possible. Occasionally nee versions might be slightly late.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> 1: Windows Firewall Control

2: Chrome/Firefox

3: Git/Webstorm

4: Putty

5: Spotify

</comment><comment><USER21> I will very firstly remove the pre-installed apps that comes with the Windows 10. These apps are not only useless bur also eat up hard drive space and as a result the system start working slow.

Check it out - [http://www.pcerror-fix.com/trick-to-uninstall-or-remove- pre-...](http://www.pcerror-fix.com/trick-to-uninstall-or-remove-pre- installed-windows-10-apps)</comment>


How to Edit Your Own Writing - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/07/smarter-living/how-to-edit-your-own-writing.html <comment><USER2> Submitted 14 hours ago here where it is still on the front page: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814342](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814342) .</comment>


Tired of neighbor's barking dog? Try sending this - <AUTHOR> http://stfuletter.com/

<comment><USER2> Hmm, no security for the payment form?

<comment><AUTHOR> Security is implemented. It's encrypted to the payment processor.</comment></comment>


Philips Hue blocks 3rd party lights - <AUTHOR> https://home-assistant.io/blog/2015/12/12/philips-hue-blocks-3rd-party-bulbs/ <comment><USER3> I'll never understand why companies make such customer hostile decisions. I can't see any upside to this and I can't imagine what the discussion looked like when implementing this decision. My (admittedly cynical) guess is that it was one part "We're fielding a lot of support questions on products that aren't ours and our malfunctioning" and two parts "Our customers will be more motivated to buy Philips Hue products since they're already invested in the existing system".

The first argument is out the door because now they'll just get a lot of support questions around many more products that don't work. The second _might_ happen for existing customers, but I'm now going to avoid this product as a future customer because _compatibility is a feature_ , and for me, and I'd think _anyone_ who is looking to purchase a tool that manages lighting/small electrics around the home, compatibility is easily the #1 or #2 feature. If there were a choice between a lightswitch that worked with a wide array of lightbulbs, and one that worked with only one company's bulbs, guess which one I'm buying?

<comment><USER4> Boss: We introduced Hue back in 2012 w/ a plan to lose money the first 3 years developing the hub, subsidizing partners, and getting our product out in the market. Tell me we're seeing a positive ROI now.

Hue PM: Hue is profitable, but only marginally so. Our strategy of making up the initial investment on $60 per bulb hardware is being undermined by cheap 3rd party lighting fixtures. Plus we're incurring costs responding to all of these non-hue connectivity and reliability issues.

Boss: We control a large enough market share now and most of the market is already heavily invested in our ecosystem. Cut off hub connectivity for these 3rd party products. People should not be using non-Hue approved hardware with our software. We're a for-profit company, not a government or a charity.

Hue PM: That won't go over well with the early adopters and the tech community.

Boss: I've already run the cost/benefit analysis. The tech community might be mad for a little while, but we've got our sights set on industrial and commercial contracts now that we've proved Hue's viability in the consumer market. Do it.

<comment><USER5> That doesn't seem like a fair view of the analysis.

If the real value was in the hub, and these other lights were getting a free ride on it, then the opportunity would be to charge more for the hub.

What is far more likely to be the case is that the support costs around problems caused by random third party components messing with the Zigbee network were exceeding the value of providing that support, particularly when you factor in that the customers they really wanted to grow wouldn't be using anything other than Hue's.

So, while blocking out 3rd party devices decreases the perceived value of the hub, the drop in perceived value is far exceeded by the drop in support costs. Easy win.

It's still hostile, but to a distinct use case, rather than their entire customer base.

<comment><USER6> It's a total dick move on Philips's part to "update" incompatibility into existing products that people _already own_ and have spend money and effort to integrate. These people bought product with the expectation of compatibility, now they're out their investment because of Philips's selfish business decision.

Even they have elevated support costs, Philips's made their bed by offering compatibility in the first place _for many years_. If they want to remove it, they really should introduce a new model ("Introducing Hue 2.0: Now with less bulb compatibility!") and leave the existing customers unaffected.

<comment><USER7> > It's a total dick move on Philips's part to "update" incompatibility into > existing products that people already own

Last year, Shimano (the bikes-and-fishing people) released a firmware update for their electronic shifting system which prevents 2012 (10-speed) parts from working with 2014 (11-speed) gear mechanisms. Literally, if you upgraded your bike from 10 speeds to 11, it worked when the hardware was released, but not after you installed the (irreversible) firmware update. This is with everything coming from a single brand!

You can read a little about that here: [http://fitwerx.com/converting-shimano- ultegra-6770-di2-to-11...](http://fitwerx.com/converting-shimano- ultegra-6770-di2-to-11-speed/)

<comment><USER8> A firmware update for a BICYCLE? I obviously haven't ridden in a while.

<comment><USER9> Wireless shifting. It's supposed to save us from the tyranny of the shift cable.

<comment><USER6> And when your batteries inevitably die out on the trail and you're stuck in some random gear, you'll bless the day you bought into this ~ _innovation_ ~.

<comment><USER10> I'd be surprised if they didn't recharge it by pedaling. ;)

<comment><USER11> > I'd be surprised if they didn't recharge it by pedaling. ;)

I'd be surprised if they did. A dynamo adds a noticeable load on the bike, and the people buying this are already optimising for small improvements. Adding a dynamo to power it would probably be a net negative for performance.

<comment><USER12> They should generate power from the motion of the shift levers.

<comment><USER11> > They should generate power from the motion of the shift levers.

How much power would that really generate? You can't make them too stiff, since part of the reason people like electronic shifting is that it's easy to do when your hands are numb from cold.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've been a hue user for the past year.

1) Their lights/bridge are by far the most reliable IoT product I've used. A 9/10 where other products (Wink, GE, Lutron) are at best 3/10.

2) While 3rd party bulbs were sort of supported, it wasn't advertised. I've never seen it described as a interoperable Zigbee Light Link device.

3) My attempts at getting a GE bulb working were inconsistent, and even when it did work the brightness range and responsiveness were worse than the hue bulbs. I had constant disconnections where I had to re-add the bulb as well. I imagine many people blamed philips when in fact the problem was with the cheap 15.00 bulb. This is probably the reason for discontinuing unofficial support.

I don't like the fact that there's not a thriving range of interoperable, cheap, and high quality zigbee light link devices out there. I'm happy the Philips is focused on delivering a product that actually works, however. All of my other home automation purchases have ended with many wasted hours and eventual returns.

<comment><USER14> If people blamed Phillips for this, then there is quite easy solution. Allow people to activate the 3rd party access, but do it Android way. Hide the option from plain sight, force users to read quick warning message about 3rd party bulbs can affect or damage system. This way only people that did their homework will be able to reactivate it.

<comment><USER15> As relevant today as when it was written: [https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20030728-00/?p=...](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20030728-00/?p=43043)

People will blindly follow a tutorial online that tells them how to activate this option, and continue to contact Philips for support. I've worked on products that have these unsupported/advanced modes, and customer queries on them are constant and time-consuming, even to simply dismiss (and, of course, those customers then go on to leave bad reviews, et cetera).

<comment><USER16> The Chromebook method (to disable write protect) requires you to open the device and remove a specific screw, it's beyond just blindly following instructions.

<comment><USER17> Is this screw method used so you lose guarantee if you change the software?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This problem isn't unique to Philips Hue, and I'm not sure Philips is necessarily a bad actor here. They are, after all, just acting in their best interest (and contrary to common belief, companies _are_ self-interested; the customer's interests are important only so much as they serve the company's interests - for better or for worse).

Perhaps the problem is more related to the ZigBee standard, or more specifically, what ZigBee _doesn 't_ cover. As I understand it, the fact that Hue products conform to the ZigBee standard only applies to the protocol between the hub and lights; it says nothing about communication between control interfaces and the hub.

With that in mind, I feel that anyone who expected to use the Hue hub for controlling anything other than Hue lights had incorrect expectations. I certainly don't remember seeing Philips advertising any kind of third-party interoperability with the product.

Of course, it would be awesome for consumers if Philips did make that guarantee of interoperability, but from a business standpoint, once you start going down that road, you effectively have to support everyone else's products (whether or not they conform to the spec), and any failing of another product then reflects poorly on Philips' brand - even if they aren't the ones at fault.

So maybe if we put more pressure on these companies to adopt a common home automation control standard (not Apple's, not Google's, but something vendor- neutral), then we might start to see home automation interoperability in a consumer-friendly way.

<comment><USER19> > and contrary to common belief, companies are self-interested; the customer's > interests are important only so much as they serve the company's interests - > for better or for worse

The idea used to be that companies served the consumer interest, and then billed some money in exchange.

When was it that companies become some self sustaining beings, with their own interest to be served? (Yeah, surely when they discovered they could take their clients as hostage. The question was rhetorical.)

<comment><USER20> I don't know if that idea was ever true. Maybe it worked back in the times when customers and sellers knew each other personally, but that must have been way before we first invented cities. The idea is certainly being taught to kids though, and it's also used to argue that the market can solve everything in a nice way.

<comment><USER19> Companies (or similar things) are probably doing this since they exist. But people used to expect them to behave and even reasonably recently (like the end of the XX century) people (normal people, even on government) used to display outrage when companies made defective products to push their bottom- line.

Nowadays that seems to be the expected behavior. But in a second thought, that looks like one of those cyclic features in society, that get worse only until people react, then get better until people get complacent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Having had the pleasure of developing ZigBee stuff (NDA, so cannot name specifics), I can understand Philips' position of blocking 3rd party stuff.

Zigbee is nasty enough to develop for even if you HAVE all the relevant docs and everything, without adding stuff developed by others into the mix. The only thing why this crap ended upon users is because it's less power hungry than WiFi will be and has a bigger range than Bluetooth.

</comment><comment><USER22> Are there grounds for a lawsuit when a manufacturer pushes out an update to a product that intentionally degrades its feature set like this? This is no longer the same product that these users bought, it's effectively damaged by the update.

<comment><USER23> No, technically the third-party manufacturers were in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a federal offense with penalties up to five years in prison. From Philips' perspective, refusing to cooperate with those criminally infringing their IP is a feature, not a bug.

<comment><USER24> This is wrong on a couple levels.

1\. The protocol is open. It's not Philips' IP.

2\. Even if the protocol were closed, and Philips put some DRM on it to lock out 3rd parties from reverse engineering the protocol to make compatible bulbs, the third parties _still_ wouldn't be in violation of the DMCA, even if they had to include small copy/pasted bits of the Philips code that are necessary for interoperability. This was the holding in the Lexmark case back in 2004.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v....](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v._Static_Control_Components,_Inc.#The_appellate_ruling)

<comment><USER25> Lexmark is only good law in the sixth circuit ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I was literally about to make a purchase but now I'll be considering other options. Good timing on your part hue.

Do these idiot companies not learn anything from backlashes against Keurig and others?

<comment><USER20> Didn't Keurig just get valued at $shitton BN? If anything, this case teaches us that being customer-hostile and abusive pays off. Which is sort of obvious if you think about how the market works, but people still act surprised.

<comment><USER27> They did, but they were worth double the shittons a year ago. That's why they got bought.

[http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coffee-machine- maker-...](http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/coffee-machine-maker-keurig- sold-14b-35621055)

<comment><USER20> Oh. Good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This is odd, but not catastrophic. If I understand right, Zigbee is open, so what's to stop the bulbs working with a third-party controller hub? Say, a Raspberry Pi with a Zigbee interface?

Wonder if this is still relevant? [http://www.everyhue.com/vanilla/discussion/141/getting- hue-t...](http://www.everyhue.com/vanilla/discussion/141/getting-hue-to-join- my-coordinator-and-related-zigbee-questions)

That thread suggests it's possible to have Hue bulbs join third-party ZigBee networks.

<comment><USER29> Yes, you can do this. And for the most part you can control your lights from your own software. I was looking at the protocol using a HackRF One to see how easy or hard it would be to build a replacement hub controller. I don't know if there are any patent issues however, that would be something that you couldn't really code around.

<comment><USER30> It's an open standard, which Philips hypocritically helped write, so there shouldn't be any patent issues other than the normal ones. You can even get it online from [http://www.zigbee.org/zigbee-for- developers/applicationstand...](http://www.zigbee.org/zigbee-for- developers/applicationstandards/zigbee-light-link/) . It's clickwrapped, but rather extant.

<comment><USER29> The same Phillips that sent out C&D letters to people who wrote software i2c implementations [1]. Their reputation precedes them.

[1[ [http://www.piclist.com/techref/postbot.asp?by=thread&id=I2C+...](http://www.piclist.com/techref/postbot.asp?by=thread&id=I2C+COPYRIGHTS%3F%3F%3F&w=body&author=Tim+Hamel&tgt=top)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I've ranted about this and the IoT and how we've came to it.

IoT is awesome, and super, as long as you don't buy products that require to beg for your data from some website API.

What makes more sense? Local device ->Internet ->Someone else's server(cloud) ->API ->Your cell/computer

-or-

Local Device ->Local controller

I extensively use Node-Red and Apache NiFi both. Node-Red is built on Node.js and is a graphical flowchart programming in the browser. It makes chaining together complex interactions easy and also makes many things no-code at all.

I use Node-Red for my home automation. It's open source, it works, and just makes sense.

Now, what should you use for the light bulbs? Unfortunately not Phillips Hue. This however opens up the market for others to come in and snipe business away. And that's a good thing. And whatever takes away the power of "other peoples' servers" cloud-crap, the better. It's just used as a way to control and extract more money.

<comment><USER32> Hue's hub works both ways, locally Smartphone -> Hub over WiFi (via a shared LAN connection, the Hub isn't it's own WAP), or remotely Smartphone -> Hue.com -> Hub over the internet. The remote mode has profoundly more lag, but also means you can turn on your lights from anywhere. The connection from Hub to the bulbs is always Zigbee. Unless/until Zigbee is built into smartphones this seems like a nearly ideal set up.

<comment><USER31> Zigbee isn't hard to implement within a Node-Red network. You can use an Arduino-Zigbee bridge to talk on that network, and then control the lights however you wish. In that case, it opens up using all the lights you choose from the cheaper_than_phillips category.

I also use Node-red on a Raspberry Pi. It's slim and as small as a base station. I also have Bluetooth, wifi, and nRF24L01+ boards on it, talking all those protocols. No reason for Zigbee, but it would be doable for $15 (I assume the price).

I've found the "from anywhere", at least for Node-Red is to use a static IP. If you dont have that, a dynamic one will work. If that doesn't work, a ToR hidden service works well.

My control over my hardware is always advantageous over control by a 3rd party entity.

<comment><USER33> If you are building your own Zigbee bridge you could use Phillips and Cheaper than Phillips lights all together. The change here is that Phillips has declared that the Hue bridge is not intended to be a generic Zigbee bridge and is focused on Hue (and friends) lights.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> When I read this statement[1] from Philips, that third party that is assigned will continue to work and only commissioning is blocked, then the reason for that seems to be as simple as the Master Key for commissioning got released[2].

So, Philips just started to issue a new Master key that now has to be implemented in all those third party devices. But Philips will issue that Master key probably only under very strict NDA with selling your first child and such things.

[1] [http://www.developers.meethue.com/documentation/friends- hue-...](http://www.developers.meethue.com/documentation/friends-hue-update)

[2] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9249753](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9249753)

</comment><comment><USER35> Can you dump Hue and use Wink? Wink can supposedly control both GE and Phillips bulbs.[1] GE uses Wink as their main control system, and GE is big enough to argue with Phillips.

[1] [http://www.wink.com/help/products/philips-hue-lighting- start...](http://www.wink.com/help/products/philips-hue-lighting-starter- kit/#faq)

<comment><USER36> From a casual look it seems that Wink just controls your existing Hue bridge, which exposes a REST API to do all the control actions.

I don't use the Hue app myself, I call the API from my automation system. Works well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This is the Philips controller software (app) that is refusing to talk to or control 3rd party light bulbs.

I don't really see this as being a problem. It's not the nicest thing, perhaps, but neither is 3rd party companies building bulbs (presumably by ripping off the design and protocol of Philip's bulbs), and then relying on Philips to build the software so they can actually be used. In other words, Philips is refusing to build software, for free, to control their competitors' and/or counterfeit products.

Do the Philips bulbs (still?) work without the Philips Hue software/app? If so, non-issue: you just have to use 3rd party software to control everything. If not, well, that's why you shouldn't buy into closed, walled-garden products.

<comment><USER38> I wouldn't describe 3rd parties as "ripping off the design and protocol" when bulb <-> hub communication is done using the ZigBee Light Link protocol. Philips didn't develop that.

Standard here: [http://www.zigbee.org/?wpdmdl=2132](http://www.zigbee.org/?wpdmdl=2132) [pdf warning]

And no, lights from other manufacturers (I have several from GE) no longer work via the Hue app or any of the 3rd party alternatives. I made the mistake of accepting Hue's "update your bridge" prompt already, not realizing it would break them. Until I saw this headline I assumed it was a matter of unpair/repair to get the working again, but it looks like no luck. They're no longer in my list of paired bulbs, and (I'll try when I get home) it doesn't sound like they can be paired anymore.

For an example of the now-useless bulbs I have: [http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-Link-60W-Equivalent-Soft- White...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-Link-60W-Equivalent-Soft- White-2700K-A19-Connected-Home-LED-Light-Bulb-PSB19-SW27/205404345)

GE isn't even selling these saying "get our cheaper bulbs and use them with Hue," they're marketed as being compatible with the Wink hub. But since it all works over the same open standard, you can use them on whichever base you like.

This is like Apple saying "Laptops from other brands are no longer supported on Airport wireless networks so that we can ensure devices are fully compatible." It's a _huge_ dick move on Philips's part.

<comment><USER20> > This is like Apple saying "Laptops from other brands are no longer supported > on Airport wireless networks so that we can ensure devices are fully > compatible."

Didn't Apple do that with Bluetooth once? I recall reading that at least one iteration of iPhones could not send files via Bluetooth to non-Apple devices.

<comment><USER39> iPhones can't even send files to other iPhones or Mac or anything over Bluetooth. In fact iPhone doesn't even HAVE files.

It's 2015 and still the only way to share files from your iPhone is to plug it in.

<comment><USER40> An example file that you can share from iPhone to iPhone or iPhone to Mac is a photo.

<comment><USER41> A pdf? Or today, a dicom. I didn't know I could do that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> We are building some related home control products and have forgone radio level integrations instead favoring integrating with anyone over http, providing an open api, and shortly after launch an sdk. Radio integrations in theory are fine but in practice it's a matter of picking sides, allowing third party devices to dictate your access to the Internet and interop, for a few features, offline (local http should be an option with any hub, nest etc but isnt) and lower latency operation as probably the biggest features. Not controlling your own products' access to the Internet is a scary proposition not to mention range/interference issues with 2.4ghz if you don't have aa critical mass. Building IoTs right now is as much an alignment excercise as a technical one and while it's a bummer that they have chosen to remove/prevent compatibility, consumers aren't really choosing subscription models for devices and cloud backed services hence the economics of customer acquisition, support, margins etc aren't realities that can be wished away.

<comment><USER30> This is a device using an open standard though. Philips could conceivably do the same thing over http by checking MAC addresses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I'm not convinced this was a hostile decision by Philips. It would be reasonable for the company to want to advance their own technology which would often entail a changing interface. If the third-party products are implementing an older interface, how is that the fault of Philips? The moral thing to do would be to standardise and publicise the interface...perhaps this is the situation already...?

</comment><comment><USER44> Creating a new compatible hub now sounds like an ideal Kickstarter project, no?

Also, I can't help but wonder if UL issues may have influenced the decision too...just look at the current hoverboard fire issues with cheap Chinese manufacturing and I can at least speculate that they might be.

<comment><USER39> Or just wait for Google to release Weave and Brillo. Those are both open platforms for communicating with IoT devices. Which is the exact opposite strategy as Apple's, who is SO CLOSED DOWN you actually need to buy a physical chip from Apple and incorporate it into your hardware for your hardware to be controlled by Siri.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Surely with the Pi Zero selling at $5 there has got to be way to do this without Philip's locked in, expensive system?

<comment><USER46> Even more relevant is the ESP8266 at $2. The Pi Zero doesn't have WiFi, and has _way_ more computing power than you would need to run a few RGB LEDs.

<comment><USER47> The Pi Zero might be able to do some additional interesting things through with that computing power, including transmitting information over those LEDs at imperceptible modulation frequencies and such. Perhaps it could even be a Ethernet-over-Power to Li-Fi bridge, with some additional circuitry. No Wi-Fi sucks though. And putting Wi-Fi into a Pi Zero requires a micro-USB to USB dongle and then another USB Wi-Fi dongle, thus the Pi Zero as big as a Pi after that cable and dongle mess. If it had on-board Wi-Fi it would be ten times more useful.

<comment><USER48> I've seen some cool mods where someone took a USB hub or a wifi dongle out of its case and soldered the pins directly to the USB pins on the Pi itself. That gets around a lot of the mess.

<comment><USER47> I'd gladly pay another $2-3 extra for someone to do that for me with some automated manufacturing process, and sell me "Pi Zero with Wi-Fi" boards. Soldering mini-USB can be a bear, let alone doing it 10+ times to get a room full of mini-robots or drones or something else to do interesting things. The true value in a cheap computer is really that I can buy a huge number of them at a reasonable price. But a huge number of mini-PCs is terrible if you have to mod each board. If I only needed one, I'd be okay paying $100 for it.

Even better if it's a "Pi Zero with USB Hub and Wi-Fi" for, say, $15, so that I can actually add something else useful besides Wi-Fi, such as a camera or sensor or something else. Sure, there are GPIO pins, but there are a lot of super-useful things out there that come in USB.

I use an Arduino Yun for a lot of basic tasks such as having a sensor report values over Wi-Fi, or putting a couple servos on Wi-Fi with as little work as possible, but the price is steep at $60+ and not much computing power.

<comment><USER48> I take your point; soldering individual boards scales badly (although the pitch for the USB+power contact points only looks a little worse than for the GPIO pins: [http://hackaday.com/2015/11/28/first-raspberry-pi-zero- hack-...](http://hackaday.com/2015/11/28/first-raspberry-pi-zero-hack-piggy- back-wifi/) ).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Philips statement about the block:

[http://www.developers.meethue.com/documentation/friends- hue-...](http://www.developers.meethue.com/documentation/friends-hue-update)

</comment><comment><USER50> I have been consistently disappointed by Philips Hue ever since I purchased the $200 starter kit a year and a half ago. Numerous iOS app updates have rendered the system useless (lack of basic QA), slow to adopt HomeKit and price gouging for it (they want users to buy an entirely new Hub for $60).

<comment><USER51> Only because Apple requires HomeKit accessories to be MFi-certified, which requires a DRM chip. Can't add a chip via firmware update..

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Here is the amazon product page for the hue starter pack with the reviews listed -- most recent first. Even if you haven't purchased this yet you can let everyone know these new reviews rolling in about the product are helpful:

[http://www.amazon.com/ss/customer- reviews/B00A4EUUO8/ref=cm_...](http://www.amazon.com/ss/customer- reviews/B00A4EUUO8/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewopt_srt?ie=UTF8&sortBy=recent&pageNumber=1)

</comment><comment><USER53> Defective by design.

<comment><USER54> DRM is defective by design.

I first saw the Hue lightbulbs on SyFy with the 12 Monkeys show. It syncs up lighting to your show. I knew I didn't need that and it would be trouble later on. Now I know the devices lock out third party bulbs.

<comment><USER55> Let's start redefining DRM as what it truly is:

      Digital *Restrictions* Management

<comment><USER20> No need to redefine anything. DRM works as advertised (lame pun intended) - <USER2> manages rights to a product or service. The thing is, the default assumption that "I bought it = I own it" is often no longer the case. Most people just didn't notice. DRM makes it painfully obvious that you don't have the rights you thought you had.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> So what would you recommend we use instead?

<comment><USER57> I would strongly recommend that any home automation device you buy has a direct method that it can be interfaced with and programmed in a local way. If a device is only programmable by a web API, rule it out.

You may also wish to consider looking for devices which are based on a switch, rather than a bulb. Controllable bulbs do not play nice with the state of physical light switches, and in the case of multi-bulb fixtures, bulb solutions may be excessively expensive. Meanwhile, a smart switch plays nice with physical users and can control as many bulbs as you want.

<comment><USER37> I never understood the desire to control lights _without_ using a wall switch. I say this having had X10 and later Insteon installations in 3 different houses over the past 10 years.

Even today, I have the ability to control nearly all the lights on the main floor of my house with an app on my phone. I actually use this feature _maybe_ once or twice a year, being generous. Even if my phone is on me and already unlocked (due to being in my house), I have to pull it out, swipe the screen, launch an app, wait for it to load, then find the lights I want and click to turn on. Or I can press the switch on the wall next to me.

Or, even better, a timer/motion sensor has already turned on the light for me and I don't even have to think about it. This is what real home _automation_ is all about.

<comment><USER58> It's not so much a desire as a work-around for the fact that smart bulbs need a trickle of power 24-7 so they can respond to external messages from timers/sensors/etc. The wall switch _has_ to stay on, so you need to kludge up some other way to control it.

These kludges are slowly getting better: maybe you can get a menu bar app so you can control your lights from the computer, maybe your phone/tablet light app can stick some buttons in an Android widget or in the iOS notifications pulldown, there are even people trying to make switches that you can stick over the normal switches and hit to trigger light changes without having to hire/be an electrician who can replace the switches.

<comment><USER39> Tappur does exactly that: [http://tappur.co](http://tappur.co)

It's a widget in your notifications bar and your lock screen with buttons for remote control. Also has a smartwatch app. I use it all the time and it's so much faster than the official Hue app.

<comment><USER58> I use the LIFX bulbs myself (such better greens and blues!); their iOS app has a notification widget. And a watch UI as well.

And I wrote a little app that lives in my Mac's menu bar and lets me pick from the scenes I set up in the official app, too, someday I should actually package it up properly. ([https://github.com/egypturnash/weatherlight](https://github.com/egypturnash/weatherlight))

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> What a horrible bait and switch.

Sadly I'm too lazy to go through the hassle of asking for my money back. :(

<comment><USER60> Consider writing a review if you bought it from a site like Amazon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> Worth quoting in this context is Doctorow's law:

        "Anytime someone puts a lock on something you own, against your wishes,
        and doesn't give you the key, they're not doing it for your benefit."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Nonfiction_and_o...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Nonfiction_and_other_writings)

</comment><comment><USER62> Am I only one who doesn't see a problem here? Sure it would be nice if company X allowed me to use cheaper Chinese knock-offs with their product, but to me, they are well within their rights to decide: "hey, we don't want competitors to benefit from our product(s)"

In essense Phillips put money into R&D and marketing and if you are to believe the linked article into making smart lightbulbs mainstream. That shit is not cheap so why would they give money for their competitors? This move forces others to build their own base system and what not, which is fair.

I am sure you can find open{source|hardware} alternative if you don't wish to support Phillips anymore.

<comment><USER63> You might be the only one. What if you bought a car, and after you bought it, the manufacturer of the car announced that they have remotely flashed the car's computer and now you can only drive to work, and if you want to drive anywhere else you have to buy 'tickets' for $5 per trip, or the car will refuse to run.

The point is that when you buy a thing, it is _yours_. When you own a thing, you are within your rights to do whatever you want with it, so long is it is legal. If makers of things can retroactively impose restrictions on the thing's use, then you have _no rights whatsoever_ and anything that you own is yours to use only so long as whoever manufactured it feels like your use is maximizing it's profits.

<comment><USER62> Your car metaphor is completely off. It's not like Philips updated your lights to only light up in specific location.

But cars are a good example, say your automatic shifter breaks. There are no real third party options, you've pretty much got to buy a new one from the manufacturer or by used one. You can still do all normal car things with it you just can't use third party pieces. Same with the lights, they still work, they shine light and do everything that they did before now you JUST can't use third party bulbs with the system.

If you want to go with other shitty analogies say you made a game, something like an MMO that has monthly fees. You sank a lot of money developing the game, the box price isn't high because you know you'll make your money from the monthly fees. You also use money from the monthly fees to improve the game, fix bugs, add content. Now your subscription model is a little strange, it works by players entering a code on your website. They buy it from your online store, get it in their email and use it to get play time. Now let's imagine that your security isn't absolute and some third party figures out how your keycode generator works and they start selling codes for half the price. Now your paying subscriber count is shrinking. What do you do? Do you A) fix the problem which results into many users losing money since they already bought several months worth of play time from this company? or B) leave the system as it is because openness or something like that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> I've been using neopixels to great success in combination with particle.io chips. They have cloud events and you can send whatever data to them. I'm sending a payload like `{ "color":"blue" }` and then all listening LEDs change. Plus they are individually addressable and are reusable for other projects. It's not the same level of brightness I'm guessing.

Adafruit has a 24 neopixel ring with a particle slot. It's like $45 for everything for one. No hub.

</comment><comment><USER65> In slightly related news, the open source project, Home Assistant, that this blog post references, is an excellent open source "hub" for controlling the smart things.

</comment><comment><USER66> I always wondered about smart bulbs... How much, per year, do they cost to run idle? Since they appear to use wireless to operate, so there must be at least the draw for that.

<comment><USER67> the hue bulbs use zigbee, so way less than, say, wifi, but it looks like about .4W/bulb/day 2.8W for the starter kit (base has to be on as well)

[http://greenmonk.net/2014/02/20/internet-things-connected- ph...](http://greenmonk.net/2014/02/20/internet-things-connected-philips-hue- bulbs-review/)

<comment><USER68> Watts already express energy over time, so the /day is redundant. The article you linked to gives a good comparison:

> [three bulbs + bridge] is the equivalent of leaving a 60W bulb on for a > little over an hour and seven minutes per day

<comment><USER67> Yeah, but it's billed in kilowatt hours, because you buy power. Power is energy supplied over a time.

But, you're right, i should have used better units, and the x/y/z is right but confusing. your quote from the article is the right way to explain it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> I didn't even know there were 3rd party lights compatible with the Hue ecosystem. Can someone point me to some brands and models?

</comment><comment><USER70> I have three neighbors, all of whom are non-technical, that use Hue lights in their home. I asked them if they used any other "smart bulbs" with their Hue bridge. The universal reply, averaged out to a representative quote:

"I didn't even think that was a thing, I only use Hue bulbs with the Hue bridge."

</comment><comment><USER71> They're going for vendor lock-in. Someone peered over Apple's garden wall and liked what they saw.

</comment><comment><USER72> Damn. I just bought my first Hues a week ago - a little spendy but worth every penny to have a super easy install into my living room lamps and be able to be controlling my lights from a ruby script in 5 minutes. Hopefully, someone will release a crack sometime soon.

<comment><USER60> Consider returning it and writing a bad review if you bought it from a platform like Amazon.

Maybe they aren't doing anything illegal, but you can still rate them if the product is different from what you expected.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> Why have they done this? Is it because the 3rd party bulbs were cheaper?

<comment><USER4> Official Reason: "The lamp that cannot be added may be a lamp from another brand. Philips does not test and cannot guarantee the behavior of all bulbs from other brands connected to the Philips Hue system. To guarantee the quality of consumer experience only Philips Hue and Friends of Hue lamps can be added using the the Philips Hue [Hub]." [1]

Real Reason: We invested money into our hub and building out our partnerships w/ Zigbee and "Friends of Hue" partners. We need to make up that money on hardware ($60 per bulb [2]) that 3rd parties could manufacture and sell for a fraction of the price. Why would we let 3rd party hardware companies leech off our investment?

[1] [https://home-assistant.io/images/blog/2015-12-philips- hue-3r...](https://home-assistant.io/images/blog/2015-12-philips-hue-3rd- party/mirror.png)

[2] [https://www.store.meethue.com/us](https://www.store.meethue.com/us)

<comment><USER74> Do you have evidence of the "Real Reason" scenario as opposed to the Occam's Razor scenario that (a) Philips really can't guarantee the protocol works with any lights they don't explicitly test against and (b) the reason some manufacturers can slide in at a fraction of the price is that they're cutting necessary corners in either hardware or protocol compliance? ;)

<comment><USER4> I think most users would see open connectivity protocols as a feature, and being unable to connect whatever lighting fixture they wanted to the Hue hub as a deterioration of their "consumer experience".

Connect some dodgy 3rd party lamp that is non-compliant, or worse, infects your system w/ malware and breaks your products? That's a bad consumer experience you've brought upon yourself, knowing full-well the risks. If anything, it'll make you an ever more loyal Philips Hue customer once you shell out another $200 for another starter pack and never touch the untested 3rd party stuff again.

I'd be very surprised if this was anything other than the classic case of - build a very nice garden, then wall it off, or else go broke.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> What are good Hue alternatives I should check out?

</comment><comment><USER76> Keurig is that you?</comment>


Microsoft Changes Tack, Making Office Suite Free on Mobile - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/technology/microsoft-to-give-away-mobile-version-of-office-software.html?src=twr&_r=0 <comment><USER2> One of the things that is missing from the comments here that say "Office Substitute X does 99% of what users need" is that in most companies, there is already a way of doing a task.

In many complex tasks, Excel is a front end to a complex business process. That business process is kicked off by some VBA code that talks to some COM object that talks to the back-end infrastructure. For example, in Finance, there are scenarios where that COM object kicks off a job on a Linux HPC cluster to compute, for example, the risk of a position that a trader is interested in. While "Office Substitute X" could potentially do the same thing, the trader has absolutely zero interest in using anything other than Excel, and he/she is the rainmaker.

So there is very little cannibalization of the existing desktop Office business for Enterprise customers. What this seems to be doing is taking people's familiarity with Office at work, and making it cheaper/easier for them to continue to experience Office in their personal lives.

<comment><USER3> VBA is joyless. I started my career as VBA dev. It was the shitiest job I've ever had and worst job I can imagine to do. Bloated unreliable with disgusting API (like try catching for contains method on collection).

<comment><USER4> I had a job in university that involved picking up 20-foot-long sections of freshly sawn lumber (some of which weighed well over a hundred pounds) off of a moving set of chains and placing them in bins. That's it, for a 10 hour shift.

VBA sucks, but come on, there are worse jobs out there.

<comment><USER5> My first job (at 14) was a dishwasher. Not as bad as yours by the sound of it, but it was filthy and disgusting and I got paid $3.35 per hour.

Having that job put all my programming jobs in perspective. To preserve that I have a picture of a dude in a coal mine by my phone at work. Any time I'm asked to submit a pointless form, I think of that guy. I don't do this to shame myself but rather to put my work problems into perspective which helps me.

<comment><USER6> Yeah i worked in a perfume factory for a summer when I was 19. I often think back to that when I feel stressed at work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The majority of the power of Office is only available on the desktop: COM, automation and integration.

This isn't a total give away, this is a loss leader which is just selling an editing front end for the files, not anything like the power of the full product.

However, I really think that Office on the desktop is a turd but it does make automation pretty easy but slightly awkward and painful. Perhaps this is bitterness from converting VSTO and Word interop to late binding all morning but I'm not a fan.

This is "meh" even to someone as embedded into the ecosystem like myself.

<comment><USER8> It's a loss leader intended to retain users. Most of us have used Office regularly at some point, but many of us have drifted away as other non-Windows platforms became viable (Linux, OS X, iOS, Android) and adherence to the new ecosystem overcame adherence to the Office platform. We'd _like_ to have Office available, if only for basic compatibility re: viewing & simple editing, but at $10/mo or $X00/flat we're satisfied with hacked-up translation to other ecosystem-standard suites (OpenOffice, Pages/Numbers/etc). Microsoft starts seeing the departure numbers growing rather high, and if they're smart (!) they will - and are - release[ing] something which persuades users to maintain a stake in the Office suite: free (albeit stunted) apps costing users nothing more than a shrug & download.

I'd rather give up on Office entirely, but its relative ubiquity plus free apps mean I'll let the camel stick its nose back under my tent.

<comment><USER9> I wouldn't exactly call Office a "loss leader" when it's MS's highest revenue division (circa 2012: [http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money- updated-20...](http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money- updated-2012/)).

<comment><USER8> The thread is about the _free_ MS Office apps being released today. I'm not paying for the $10/mo versions, but heck yeah I'll download the "loss leader" free versions, however crippled they may be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> >third of Microsoft's revenue during its last fiscal year — about $26 billion of $87 billion in total.

Wow, I know it was high, I never realized it was that high, I'm guessing that includes Exchange and administration app costs.

<comment><USER11> considering office is installed on something like 1 BILLION machines.. it's not that surprising. The software is rather expensive per machine.

Source: [http://news.microsoft.com/bythenumbers/ms_numbers.pdf](http://news.microsoft.com/bythenumbers/ms_numbers.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Google Docs have always been free, three weeks ago Apple's iWork suite went free, and now Office for mobile is free. Competition is a wonderful thing - hopefully it starts to bring down the price of Microsoft's cash cow, Office.

<comment><USER13> I'm just worried that we're going to start paying for those suites with our confidental document data instead of money... with no alternative choice.

<comment><USER14> That's how people pay for Google Docs and all of Google's products and they seem to be perfectly OK with it. As long as the perceived price is $0 they're happy and don't really care what the real price is for things. Ignorance truly is bliss.

<comment><USER9> A lot of people/companies/governments are not okay with it, and do not use it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Huh, interesting. What I like most about this is that Microsoft has been putting out a major piece of news (Microsoft Band, Independence Day, now this, etc.) every few days. I feel as if we're now beginning to really see product- level changes as a consequence of Satya being CEO. I'm very excited by these developments.

<comment><USER16> Product cycles are much much longer. So, no.

<comment><USER17> Ex MSFT employee here. Product cycles may or may not be longer, but red tape was the biggest issue when Ballmer was running the ship. There have always been many awesome teams working on cool stuff at MSFT, they were just never allowed to launch anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "We'd like to dramatically increase the number of people trying Office,"

Smart, considering its the better product and you still have the option to download an actual program.

</comment><comment><USER19> With such low market share, they had to do something. Giving it away is not the answer. They're thinking that a loss leader will increase sales on their regular Office licenses, but that remains to be seen. All I see is further validation to the market that mobile apps should be free.

This is bad news for independent developers and established software houses alike.

</comment><comment><USER20> I still prefer LibreOffice [http://www.libreoffice.org/](http://www.libreoffice.org/)

<comment> k-mcgrady LibreOffice runs on mobile devices?

<comment><USER21> There is an Android port. It is... Interesting. [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andropenof...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andropenoffice)

<comment> k-mcgrady ...wow. Looks like they just tried to copy the UI from desktop _exactly_. I guess it's pretty hard to get the manpower to develop mobile apps as well as the desktop version of such a large OS project.

<comment><USER22> As far as I recall, that's the same Chrome does on Windows 8 with the Metro mode. It looks identical to the desktop version, down to tiny toolbar buttons you can't reliably hit with a finger, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Great, I'll be busy prepping an Android VM appliance for this that I can install on every machine I touch. Probably a good idea to isolate Office code from the real OS anyway. Hope I can get printing to work.

<comment><USER24> I wonder why you're being downvoted for a hackish idea on a site called 'Hacker News' _eyes rolling_. I think the idea is interesting - not sure how to make file sharing work though, can you mount SSH drives from the local network on Android? Or do you want to just use Dropbox for that?

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Before Microsoft used to be this tightly integrated system. You had Office only on Windows, all mobile apps come on Windows Phone first. Satya has changed the company quite a lot . Each division works as an independent unit, they compete. Another example of this was the dropbox integration into office. Clearly one of the reasons to use Skydrive was the easy integration into Office. With the new integration, Skydrive will have to compete on features instead of getting fed because of its integration with office. Waiting for the day when IE becomes cross-platform.

<comment><USER26> > You had Office only on Windows

Mac versions of Office have been available for decades. In fact, the first version of Office was actually released for the Macintosh and not for Windows

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I can't find it in the app store. Is it not actually out yet?

<comment><USER28> You can sign up (nominate yourself?) for the Office for Android Tablet Preview here: [http://www.instant.ly/s/w7taW/nav](http://www.instant.ly/s/w7taW/nav)

(Found by clicking through several links of the article and removing the SessionID in their link.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> A lot of big announcements at once from MS. Free Office, new Band, and did you see they're opening the Azure ML for free testing?

[http://blogs.technet.com/b/dataplatforminsider/archive/2014/...](http://blogs.technet.com/b/dataplatforminsider/archive/2014/11/05/microsoft- announces-major-update-to-azure-sql-database-adds-free-tier-to-azure-machine- learning.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER30> It's funny that Microsoft is advertising the Surface as a sort of iPad++, while at the same time making full Office free for the iPad, but not for the Surface. (I know, Surface Pro is a full Windows PC and the iPad isn't, and Windows Office has more features than iPad Office... Just saying the marketing is kinda inconsistent with the sales approach.)

<comment><USER31> Pretty much every ad aired this year for the Surface Pro 3 compares it directly to a MacBook Air, not to an iPad. (Literally--the MacBook is on camera alongside the Surface Pro in many of these ads.)

To the extent that you perceive the Surface advertised as iPad++, you're probably thinking more of the original Surface ads one to two years ago (which focused on the regular Surface, which did in fact ship with a free copy of Office).

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> This will have different impact in different economies of the world. And eventually the bigger demographies will give MS a chance to make some space.

Let us see what sticky features MS brings. So that in the longer run a user gets caught in smooth integration of Mobile and Notebook version of Office.

But there are fewer hopes now. Too late.

</comment><comment><USER33> I think this is a huge and fundamental change for Microsoft...

Satya Nadella (Microsoft's CEO) understands that you don't choose your endusers platform. If you don't go with them, you'll loose them on the long run.

</comment><comment><USER34> at first I thought, cool, but then realized that I'd miss google docs too much if I went back to Office. Aside from Excel which I don't use (prefer Pandas), I'd miss the collaborative document sharing and interoperability between laptop (Mac) and desktop (Linux.) Maybe Office does the document sharing/collaborative editing thing now. It's been a long time since I've used a MSFT product. although I will buy the Band, that looks awesome and the price point makes it irresistible to early adopters.

<comment><USER35> Office and Office.com / OneDrive have had collaborative document editing for a while. Not sure about the mobile apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Does anyone know if how good is the integration with the underlying OS?

MS Office on desktop won't work on mobile devices without re-thinking the interface and UX.

<comment><USER37> Office for iPad is very well designed, now they need to upgrade it on Windows Phone

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Smart move by Nadella and Co. I'm a sure they will see an increase in office 365 subscriptions in the near future to make up the ROI.

</comment><comment><USER39> Does this have any implications for the forthcoming update to Office for Mac?

</comment><comment><USER40> Is this a sign of what happens when a cloud guy becomes CEO?

</comment><comment><USER41> Current generation of kids are using Google Docs in school right now. Can Office survive another generation?

</comment><comment><USER42> if MS charge a high price, biggest winner is apple.

</comment><comment><USER43> _" Come in to my parlour"_ said the spider[1] to the fly[2].

[1] NSA partner

[2] You

<comment><USER44> If you think your data is safe on either device, with or without Office, then you are deluded.

<comment><USER45> Oh I think it's pretty safe on a non-wired/wireless enabled computer in a room with thick concrete walls filled with lead.

;)

<comment><USER43> Alright then. Lets give up. Lets offer up our private lives to the prying eyes and ears of the NSA.

<comment><USER44> If you own a cell phone, you already have.

<comment><USER43> You shouldn't parade your ignorance.

<comment><USER44> It's clearly being upstaged by yours.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why Stanford Is Not the Answer - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@eaedbook/why-stanford-is-not-the-answer-88696acbba04 <comment><USER2> Two guys who got into Stanford and now have an article getting noticed because they graduated from Stanford explain why being a graduate of Stanford isn't really all that cool and that everyone else's kids should probably not go to Stanford.

Nothing against Stanford, its just kind of an ironic piece.

Also, I can't access the full manifesto at the time of posting this comment...

<comment><USER3> They address that within the manifesto:

 _A Caveat: We did graduate from college, and we did benefit from having friends, taking cool classes, and acquiring ideas through osmosis. It is easy for us to suggest skipping college without actually having done so. Again, the takeaway from this section is not that you should or should not skip college; rather, don't make that choice on autopilot._

It's a fantastic read.</comment></comment>


BURN EVERYTHING TRUST NO ONE KILL YOURSELF - <AUTHOR> https://kristinhayter.com/2017/01/04/burn-everything/ <comment><AUTHOR> "my MFA thesis for Brown University was titled BURN EVERYTHING TRUST NO ONE KILL YOURSELF, abridged for the sake of propriety to BURN EVERYTHING."

...

"BURN EVERYTHING has many moving parts. its basis is a document 10,000 pages in length."

...

"the 10,000 pages were assembled using a markov chain in Shannon's nomenclature in orders three and four. 10,000 pages is equal to 100 lbs in standard paper, which is equivalent to my body weight."</comment>