The new microcode from Intel and AMD adds three new features - <AUTHOR> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/22/598 <comment><USER2> That link doesn't seem to show the continuation of the thread, but it continues to be rather interesting:

[https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/23/25](https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/23/25)

It looks like Ingo Molnar, Andi Kleen, and others are coming up with a pure- software alternative to IBRS, which could be much faster (rather similar in spirit to the retpoline trick)

<comment><USER3> TL,DR;

Leverage CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE. This is an OS only fix resulting in effectively zero overhead for chips other than Skylake.

[https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/23/25](https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/23/25)

      There's another possible method to avoid deep stacks on Skylake, without
      compiler support:

      - Use the existing mcount based function tracing live patching machinery
        (CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER=y) to install a _very_ fast and simple stack depth
        tracking tracer which would issue a retpoline when stack depth crosses
        boundaries of ~16 entries.

      The overhead of that would _still_ very likely be much cheaper than a hundreds
      (thousands) of cycle expensive MSR write at every kernel entry
      (syscall entry, IRQ entry, etc.).

Pretty damn cool if it works.

<comment><USER4> I couldn't find much about this 16 entries stack depth issue. Does anyone have more information?

<comment><USER5> It's explained in the thread. Basically, the RET instruction has its own tiny branch predictor, the return address stack (also known as RSB) which is only 16 or 32 entries deep. If your call stack is deeper than that, sooner or later the stack becomes empty.

In this case, old processors simply does not predict the jump and stalls. But Skylake instead uses the generic indirect branch predictor, since after all RET _is_ an indirect branch! Except the idea behind retpolines was to avoid the generic branch predictor, and now every single RET can use it! So, if you don't want to use IBRS you need to find a different way to protect the kernel from someone forcing undesired speculative execution after the RET.

<comment><USER4> RSB! Thank you, now I know what to focus on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > But wait, why did I say "mostly"? Well, not everyone has a retpoline > compiler yet... but OK, screw them; they need to update.

That got me interested, who has reptoline support, and from when?

GCC added support in 7.2 [0], which means a lot of people don't have access yet.

LLVM added it in D41723 [1], but I don't think that has landed in a release yet.

I can't find any talk around TCC, but that isn't exactly surprising.

Haven't heard anything about MSVC, and can't find anything, but that's not surprising as I don't think Windows is using reptoline in their mitigations, but I really have no idea.

[0] [https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear- Li...](https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux- Retpoline-KPTI)

[1] [https://reviews.llvm.org/D41723](https://reviews.llvm.org/D41723)

<comment><USER7> I'm not sure how close this is to the retpoline mitigation but ... [https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2018/01/15/spectre-m...](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2018/01/15/spectre- mitigations-in-msvc/)

 _Our tests show the performance impact of /Qspectre to be negligible. We have built all of Windows with /Qspectre enabled and did not notice any performance regressions of concern. Performance gains from speculative execution are lost where the mitigation is applied but the mitigation was needed in a relatively small number of instances across the large codebases that we recompiled._

<comment><USER6> Thanks! I think that and the inner-linked post tell us what we need to know.

From Terry's post:

> For context, on newer CPUs such as on Skylake and beyond, Intel has refined > the instructions used to disable branch speculation to be more specific to > indirect branches, reducing the overall performance penalty of the Spectre > mitigation.

And your link:

> /d2guardspecload, that is currently equivalent to /Qspectre.

It seems equivalent to reptoline, at least from a high level perspective.

So MSVC is probably protected, but only optionally. They're leaving it up to developers to use the /Qspectre flag, it isn't something automatically enabled when you use an /O(x) optimise flag.

Edit: I should add that /Qspectre is currently being added to a lot of Windows, but they're assessing where before doing so, because not everywhere should need it.

<comment><USER8> From what I understood from that link, /Qspectre is for variant 1, while retpoline is for variant 2, so it's not equivalent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Can somebody here explain why Intel and kernel devs are still debating about solutions in late January? I haven't followed this stuff closely, but I was under the impression that Intel and others had been informed about these vulnerabilities 6 months ago and everybody had fixes ready by early January.

<comment><USER4> Botched disclosure process.

More details at the end here: [http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2018-01-17-some-thoughts- on-...](http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2018-01-17-some-thoughts-on-spectre- and-meltdown.html)

<comment><USER10> Whether it was botched or not (from the position of this article) is based on whether you think it was important that FreeBSD have been notified ahead of time. Obviously the FreeBSD devs think they should have been notified. Since this basically affects _everyone_ that runs x86 code, and not _everyone_ could be notified ahead of time and still keep any form of secrecy, some groups will need to be notified and others not.

I think a case can be made that as operating systems go, FreeBSD is at a much lower threat level than Linux, MacOS/iOS, Windows (i.e. desktops that run unvetted code) and the VPS platforms that run host operating systems that need to worry about guests breaking isolation (Google, Amazon, others).

Given all that, while it wasn't done perfectly (it was leaked a few days early and some cloud providers had little warning, especially Joyent which also runs a different OS), I'm not sure I would call it botched entirely since it is also likely the largest exploit in history. Others disagree with some or all of this.

<comment><USER11> I read somewhere (didn't verify, wasn't _obviously_ substantiated) that the OpenBSD folks were beside themselves with anger, and that in turn others shot back that they had demonstrated a very poor track record with respecting embargoes in the past and had let slip "seven of the last five" major vulnerabilities they had been pre-warned of.

EDIT: For reference, consider some of the comments in this thread: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16110750&ref=hvper.com](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16110750&ref=hvper.com)

<comment><USER12> Seven of the last five? Sounds like they have some out-of-order execution issues of their own.

<comment><USER11> It's a common British idiom, to opine against eternal doomsayers. :)

<comment><USER13> First time seeing this usage, can you tell me what is this called exactly, in grammatical terms? Tried to Google and can't seem to reach anywhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> 4,000 cycles for a speculative execution barrier is just horrible. Since everyone needs a patched kernel, might as well take the time to recompile the kernel with retpoline compiler and remove all offending instructions in the first place.

<comment><USER15> Except, thanks to modern speculative execution, skylake and later also speculates through retpoline.

So you still need some solution there.

<comment><USER16> I'm pretty sure it's not that it speculates through retpoline, IIRC retpoline is coded with trickery to avoid that, but it only replaces indirect branches. It's that it speculates through normal `ret` instructions in functions, in a way that can be exploited.

<comment><USER17> It's that prior to Skylake, ret instruction prediction only ever used the "return stack buffer" (RSB), but since Skylake the indirect predictor is used as a backup. The RSB is a prediction mechanism specifically for call and ret pairs: each ret is predicted to return the instruction following the corresponding call.

This works great for the common pattern of matched pairs, but the stack used to track outstanding calls has a limited size (32 in Skylake), let's call it N. If you have N + M calls followed by N + M rets (or any other pattern where the call chain gets that deep), you will predict correctly the first N rets, but then the stack is exhausted and the last M rets won't be predicted by the RSB.

Prior to Skylake, those last M rets just wouldn't get predicted at all (probably instruction fetch would just fall through to the instructions following the ret), but in Skylake the indirect branch-predictor, which is usually used to predict jmp or call instructions to variable locations, is used as a fallback instead.

So the concern is that people could train the indirect predictor prior to a kernel call, and if the 32-deep RSB was ever exhausted, the indirect predictor could kick in causing a Spectre-like vulnerability.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> On ARM (A64, A32, T32) we get CSDB barrier, but it's a hint instruction instead of going via MSR registers.

From whitepaper CSDB is 1101_0101_0000_0011_0010_0010_100_11111

Here some snippets from ARM manuals:

HINT instruction:

1101 0101 0000 0011 0010 0010 100 11111 CRm = 0010 op2 = 100

Some encodings described here are not allocated in this revision of the architecture, and behave as NOPs. (This is important)

Hints 18 to 23 variant Applies when CRm == 0010 && op2 != 00x. HINT #<imm>

Hint is encoded in CRm:op2 pair, existing similar:

0010:000 ESB // Error Synchronization Barrier 0010:001 PSB CSYNC // Profiling Synchronization Barrier

Thus in assembler this is written:

hint #0x14

Which is a NOP if SOC does not understand this hint. It's being used here: [http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.0/04191.html](http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.0/04191.html)

and also here: [https://github.com/ARM-software/speculation- barrier/blob/mas...](https://github.com/ARM-software/speculation- barrier/blob/master/speculation_barrier.h) (which is being upstreamed to compilers in cross-platform generic form IIRC)

ARM whitepaper states that conditional selection/conditional move is enough on most ARM implementations. If it's not the case then the new CSDB solves the problem. On older CPUs it's still a NOP.

X-Gene disables branch prediction: [http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.2/06482.html](http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.2/06482.html)

ThunderX2 branch prediction hardening: [https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10151975/](https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10151975/)

<comment><USER5> CSDB is for Spectre variant 1. The post is about variant 2.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This might be fundamentally irrelevant to this thread, but it got me wondering and I would like some assistance/guidance:

Whenever I read the mailing list, or threads related to it, I don't understand 99% of the stuff. Do I need to know C _very well_? Do I need to be familiar with kernel? If so, how do I go about doing that? At the moment I'm reading "Code: The Hidden Language of Computer Hardware and Software".

<comment><USER20> Generally, you need to know the operating systems and hardware work together. And then depending on the details, you might need to know C _and_ assembly. In this case, you need to have good understanding on how modern processors do performance optimizations.

There probably isn't any good single resource for learning all this, but perhaps getting some good textbook on computer hardware architecture might be good next step after reading the "Code". Unfortunately I don't have any immediate suggestions on the current crop - I remember learning from William Stallings' books some 15-20 years back - not sure if they are the best choice nowadays.

<comment><USER21> The course "Computer Systems Architecture" at Queen's University uses "Computer Organization and Design: The Hardware/Software Interface" by Patterson and Hennessy. It's a 400-level course in the computer and electrical engineering department. I can recommend it. Most chapters in it have a "Real Stuff" section where they look at a real world CPU and compare it with the contents of the book to see how the theory actually ends up in practice.

<comment><USER22> I'd also recommend the text Structured Computer Organization by Tannenbaum[1].

[1] [https://www.pearson.com/us/higher- education/program/Tanenbau...](https://www.pearson.com/us/higher- education/program/Tanenbaum-Structured-Computer-Organization-6th- Edition/PGM200985.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Since all these CPUs are turning out to be so inherently insecure, maybe we should work harder to run only trusted/verified code.

<comment><USER24> There's a limit at which improving the car compensates for the degradation of the road. At some point, repaving is the only correct fix.

<comment><USER25> Is retpoline the equivalent of picking another road in this analogy?

<comment><USER26> More like picking special tires that can run on the shitty road. The roads are the hardware itself and their vendors (I would assume).

<comment><USER25> I can see that making sense. Still see the retpoline reducing the forks in the road, forcing the "proper route".

<comment><USER26> No you still misunderstand. The road in the analogy is the hardware itself. And the car is the OS. The OP's point was that we have to replace the hardware, because at some point you are hacking up your car to absurd degree just to be able to drive on the road of the hardware. It has nothing to do about forks in the road and the analogy to branching.

He could be arguing for anywhere from, we need to replace all our hardware now, to we need to start over with how we design chips.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> _The new microcode from Intel and AMD adds three new features._

 _The second (STIBP) protects a hyperthread sibling from following branch predictions which were learned on another sibling._

Is this about threads in the context of SMT?

I guess what I'm asking is "hyperthread" a thing outside of Intel marketing speak that warrants mentioning AMD?

<comment><USER28> Hyperthreading is Intel's implementation of SMT. However, since Intel was the only one doing SMT on x86 until very recently, hyperthreading has become the de facto generic name for it.

<comment><USER27> Ah that makes sense. My last exposure to this space was IBM Power stuff and we were calling them sibling threads or side threads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> > You _might_ want this when running unrelated processes in userspace, for > example.

When are you not? Why have security and process isolation if all processes are considered related?

<comment><USER30> You might perhaps have a setup where trusted users are running trusted code, can guarantee* a lack of malicious intent, and primarily want the user-and- process-segregation system to prevent a single failure of a single process from affecting anyone else.

You might conceivably have this in a corporate environment (I do).

For the vast majority of systems that _do_ run untrusted code, including web browsers, this mitigation is probably appropriate.

Perhaps the word "might" here could be upgraded to "probably"?

*for some arbitrary value of "guarantee"

<comment><USER29> So you run everything as root, or your setup would work just as well if you did?

<comment><USER31> How is that comparable? Running everything as root is a) asking for accidents; b) a different class of problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> So, the interesting thing here, to me, is this bit:

>So now we _mostly_ don't need IBRS. We build with retpoline, use IBPB on context switches/vmexit (which is in the first part of this patch series before IBRS is added), and we're safe. We even refactored the patch series to put retpoline first.

Unless I'm reading this wrong, it looks like retpoline is not enough, and you still need the microcode updates from Intel or AMD that offer IBPB.

If this is the case, why has Google been saying that retpoline is all we need?

<comment><USER33> From what I can see, the retpoline works on pre Skylake processors. I am guessing that Google might not be using Skylake+ processors and so their comments are not wrong for their equipment.

<comment><USER32> No, it's pretty specifically not about the Skylake issue - The retpoline not working on Skylake is fixed by IBRS, and is due to ret calls falling back to indirect prediction in deep stacks.

vmexits and context switches are a very different thing than the deep stack ret calls.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I have always felt it, but presumed it was "cross talk" in the optical nerves being interpreted as "movement" in the outer ear.

<comment><USER35> I think you might've commented on the wrong post somehow there.

<comment><USER36> What's very odd is that it's a copy of the first sentence of this comment: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16218608](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16218608)

<comment><USER37> Accidental copy/paste through an interface for the visually impaired?

 _> about: Visually Handicapped but can handle computer online work_

<comment><USER36> Huh, that's a good point. Apologies if my comment came off as accusatory.

<comment><USER37> I think your comment was fine. I would have had the same kind of thought -- possible bot trying to age an account with content lifted from other legit posts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I swore that Intel had recalled the microcode updates because of issues (I've not had any of note)?

[https://www.computerworld.com/article/3250297/microsoft- wind...](https://www.computerworld.com/article/3250297/microsoft-windows/let- the-biosuefi-firmware-recall-begin.html)

</comment><comment><USER39> My 2 unasked for pennies - the kernel is already too bloated with support. These are hacks and should not be mainlined. Let them fix their hardware and give arduous instructions to patch...they deserve it. Don't further pollute the kernel. Imagine if a tiny hardware vendor tried the same...ubiquity is not an excuse.

<comment><USER40> _"Let them fix their hardware"_

That could (and, I guess, would) mean a much, much, larger performance hit than a combined microcode/kernel fix would give. I doubt people would be happy about that.

Given that we don't want to give up all speculated instruction execution, it will be difficult to find the spot where we get safety at minimal performance impact.

<comment><USER41> Right, but why should OS devs and vendors scramble to save Intel's share price? The right outcome here is for the devs to _do nothing_ and the world switch to another CPU vendor on the next hardware refresh cycle.

<comment><USER42> Which CPU vendor would you switch to? Although Meltdown is (mostly) an Intel bug, all the main CPU vendors, including AMD and ARM, are affected by Spectre, which is what this particular discussion is about.

<comment><USER41> Agreed, but it almost doesn't matter: what matters is sending the signal that shenanigans will be punished by the market.

If devs do anything it should be learning to write software that doesn't depend on speculative execution for performance

<comment><USER43> > _Agreed, but it almost doesn't matter: what matters is sending the signal > that shenanigans will be punished by the market._

No, what it matters is understanding the issue. And the issue has no "shenanigans". All vendors suffer from Spectre (and some non-Intel models from Meltdown too), but more importantly, none of these was done "on purpose" which is the definition of a shenanigan.

> _If devs do anything it should be learning to write software that doesn't > depend on speculative execution for performance_

Whatever.

<comment><USER41> _none of these was done "on purpose" which is the definition of a shenanigan._

The "shenanigans" are that it has become acceptable practice to cut corners on security to improve benchmarks.

Maybe speculative execution is just a thing that shouldn't be done? People computed perfectly well before it. Itanium isn't impacted by Meltdown so Intel is capable of it.

<comment><USER43> > _The "shenanigans" are that it has become acceptable practice to cut corners > on security to improve benchmarks._

Nobody "cut corners". Those were unexpected bugs that took more than a decade for someone to even discover, not some deliberate decision to sacrifice security for performance.

> _Maybe speculative execution is just a thing that shouldn't be done?_

No, it should 100% be done.

> _People computed perfectly well before it._

Perfectly slowly too.

> _Itanium isn't impacted by Meltdown so Intel is capable of it._

Itanium tanked.

<comment><USER41> _Nobody "cut corners"._

What do you call accessing memory before checking permissions then? AMD do the check!

 _Perfectly slowly too._

A simple predictor that assumes backwards branches will be taken (loops) and forward branches (most likely exceptions) will not is really all you need, if you insist.

<comment><USER44> You appear to be confusing Meltdown and Spectre. This is about Spectre Variant 2. You're describing Meltdown. Also, the fault is _queued_ and not discarded. If the branch ends up being taken, you'll get a fault for accessing a forbidden part of memory. If not, the CPU "undoes" the speculatively executed part as if it never happened. The Meltdown issue is that it doesn't undo the cache effects, which nobody thought to be a big deal, and which are very hard to undo.

Also, you severely underestimate the speedups gained by a better branch predictor. There's a nice writeup at [https://danluu.com/branch- prediction/](https://danluu.com/branch-prediction/) if you're interested.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> That is one of the most mobile unfriendly sites I have ever seen

</comment><comment><USER46> "since the peanut gallery is paying lots of attention it's probably worth explaining it a little more for their benefit."

what a ridiculous sentiment to defend a patch from Intel thats effectively disabled by default for one of the most egregious bugs in microcode since F00F.

"The new microcode from Intel and AMD adds three new features." No ones talking about AMD, David, not Linus and certainly not hackernews or other outlets. Spectre patching will happen regardless of this fiasco but This NOT SPECTRE. this is a taylor made shit sandwich thats been warned about by researchers and lurking on Intels plate for more than a decade. intel chose speed over security, and intel lost. Now they're trying to find a way --any way-- to avoid having to eat an 8 generation recall or worse.

its been said on HN before, but this is now more of an 'if not when' of intels loss of dominance in cloud. customers no longer care about the fastest chip in the west if its going to get neutered to half speed due to wreckless design that allows for a complete security disaster. Theyll buy twice as many AMD, at half the price of intel, and make up the difference in sheer volume.

<comment><USER47> David Woodhouse works for AWS, not Intel. So maybe take it down a notch?

<comment><USER45> While the op may have mistaken the author, the point is valid on numerous levels, including attempting to slander AMD because Intel has bad designs

<comment><USER47> Umm, no. This is about Spectre variant 2, which AMD is 100% exposed to.

"GPZ Variant 2 (Branch Target Injection or Spectre) is applicable to AMD processors."

[https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/speculative- execution](https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/speculative-execution)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


What are good projects to showcase my technical ability in a portfolio? - <AUTHOR>

I'm currently employed doing some VERY light JavaScript and a lot of SQL work. My current job is moving away from the technical side of things and becoming more Project Manager/requirements gatherer. While this is the correct move for the company, and I'm really excited in the abstract for the change, I'm not interested in this - I like the technical parts of my job.
I plan on asking management in eight or ten months to move me over to the more technical side of things, after we've transitioned smoothly. However, I think they would turn me down in my current situation - I don't think they think my technical chops are up to snuff. I want to build a portfolio of projects that demonstrate extreme proficiency, something that would make me look like a real quality gem for a web company.
What should I build? What personal projects do you want to see out of someone to demonstrate technical proficiency, even if not necessarily stylish or creative?
The kind of thing I've done in the past are funny websites for my friends and I with admin functionality, a couple dozen Project Eulers in Python and Go, and a browser-based multiplayer tetris game, server written in Go. That's my current level. It's all hobby work. <comment><USER2> Personally, I think that the ability to show-case things that you've done (even if they're slightly exaggerated in advertisement type terms) is pretty important. So, building a portfolio page now with the projects you've done would help. Take that and compare it to the type of work your company does. Are there any holes that you haven't demonstrated your ability in? Fill one. Add it to your portfolio, repeat.

As always, pick projects that you love over projects you think you should do. A project that you did and put the bare minimum into because you felt you HAD to is almost a NEGATIVE thing on your portfolio.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Im taking a Rails course soon and am also interested in building something impressive to show potential employers.</comment>


How to Speed up Lion Boot Times - <AUTHOR> http://www.psyion.net/Tutorials.aspx?tutorial=43362

<comment><USER2> Garbage article.

> Repair/Fix Permissions

Terrible advice. There is a very small number of problems which Fix Permissions is the appropriate solution, and "slow boot times" is not one of them. In some rare cases it can actually hurt (generally only when you have a badly configured installer package that modifies files used by other packages though).

> Clear Caches

If anything, that will increase boot time as the caches need to be regenerated. Caches are called caches for a reason.

> Select a startup disk

This one confuses me. How did you end up with no startup disk? I imagine that if your real OS is the first drive in the system than this will have zero effect. If your first drive is a slow drive that doesn't contain an OS, I can imagine that this might do something, as the system will have to ping each drive to find an OS, but that's just speculation. I still don't know how someone would lose their startup disk though, and I doubt this will affect anyone reading this article.

> Free Some Disk Space

Reasonable advice in general, but I don't see how it's related to boot times.

> Lose the GM seed

Useless advice. IIRC the GM seed was build 11A511, which is the same build that was released to consumers. In other words, the GM seed is identical to the App Store version. Installing the app store version on top of the GM seed is a waste of time.

> Do a Fresh install

Reasonable suggestion in the face of a number of issues, but I don't see why this would affect boot time unless you had a number of daemons installed system-wide and set to launch at startup (and in that case you probably have a reason to have those installed).

<comment><AUTHOR> Well for me the results speak for themselves, I have also had some good feedback on these tips which I obtained from what people were saying on forums around the internet. Clearing the cache may increase boot time for the next boot but if it had some dodgy stuff in it the first time round chances are the same stuff might be gone the next time. As for the build numbers on the GM Seed and on the App Store release, again the results speak for themselves, I fix lots of Macs for lots of people and I am just posting about my experiences and what I have feel to be true ground what I have read around the internet. Really sorry my website offended you...

<comment><USER2> You're taking dubious tips collected from forums across the internet, and posting them as if they were authoritatively good. They're not.</comment></comment></comment>


Google's Supposed Chromebook Pixel (And Its Touch Display) Stars In Leaked Video - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/06/googles-supposed-chromebook-pixel-and-its-touch-display-stars-in-leaked-video/ <comment><USER2> This video seems fake (despite its high production value) for a variety of reasons.

1\. Google's ads are usually made by Creative Lab and this is not at all their style. Or the style of any other Google ad. It bears more resemblance to an Apple ad than a Google one.

2\. A laptop "completely designed by Google" might be something that its fans want, but I doubt Google would ever say something like this in an ad and risk antagonizing its hardware partners.

3\. Speaking of hardware partners -- who made this? Even when Google makes Nexus devices the manufacturer's logo is quite prominently displayed. Again, I doubt Google wishes to finance a non-partnered piece of hardware.

4\. Also, yes, touchscreens are on laptops are stupid. This is a stupid idea.

My bet is that this is the final project of some kind or a demo video from some upstart ad company that wants to show what it can do.

<comment><USER3> You had me nodding until

>4\. Also, yes, touchscreens are on laptops are stupid. This is a stupid idea.

Sure, touchscreens aren't going to be your main form of input in a laptop, but I wouldn't say they are stupid. Once you start playing with a touchscreen laptop, you'll begin to use the touchscreen occasionally, and in these moments it's really nice.

For example, when I'm browsing the web in my bed, it's awkward to use the touchpad to scroll, so I'll just reach out and scroll like I would on a tablet.

<comment><USER4> Seems like that problem would be better solved by a superior touchpad.

<comment><USER5> If by better touchpad, you mean better placement for the touchpad, then yes I agree. And in this scenario, the best placement is on the screen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> That is some pretty excellent marketing.

Also, I love the 'logo' of this Chromebook -- just a line with four colors, instead of .. well, an actual logo. I like the trend of there being no meta- information stickers on devices I buy.

<comment><USER7> Though there's an internal inconsistency having a four colour logo while showing pixels as having three colours.

<comment><USER8> That's where this one comes in?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It looks like Google is the first company to have listened to Linus - 2560x1700 resolution laptop! They might want to use that resolution for tablets, too, as it would make them a little better for using them vertically. Although 2560x1800 would probably be even better.

I also hope it's another ARM Chromebook, as I don't want it to be very expensive and with poor battery life. In fact their goal for Chromebooks should be 10h battery life, not 6h.

<comment><USER10> Google is the second company. 13 inch Macbook Pro with 2560 x 1600 resolution was released last October.

<comment><USER11> Same time Linus made the comment.

<https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/ByVPmsSeSEG>

<comment><USER10> Yup. Apple announced Retina 13 inch on Oct 23 so even before Linus made that comment. And Retina 15 inch Macbook Pro (2880x1800) last June.

It wouldn't matter to Linus anyway if he doesn't care about apple gear.

Edit : As comments below me point out Linus uses a Mac in his work flow.

<comment><USER12> Linus actually uses a MacBook Air: [http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/19/an- interview-with-millenium...](http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/19/an-interview- with-millenium-technology-prize-finalist-linus-torvalds/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I really have zero desire to touch my laptop screen. Maybe it's years of conditioning to not smudge my screen or it could be that lifting my hands off the keyboard to pinch and swipe at my screen would be more irritating then using a mouse.

With that being said. I'm all for high density screens in laptops!

<comment><USER14> You know, I thought the same thing but it's surprising how often I touch my Surface when I'm using it as a laptop. I don't think about it, it sort of just happens sometimes...like to tap a button or go back in IE by swiping backwards, or even just scrolling in a webpage I sometimes use the arrow keys and sometimes use my thumb. It's odd.

Equally surprising was how I would have to restrain myself from touching my non-touchscreen desktop monitor sometimes that I've had for much longer (i.e. years). Happens a lot as I'm sitting down and want to launch a few initial apps.

I think if you ever get a touch screen laptop you'll be as surprised as I was to see how much you do end up using the touch screen, even if it is "unintentional".

<comment><USER15> Isn't that just because their touchpads are so tiny? If you sit at a larger laptop with good touchpad, do you still feel that need?

<comment><USER14> Unsure since I don't have a larger laptop. Though I'll say that I don't find the Surface's trackpad lacking for what I would use it for - and yet I don't always use it. It's mostly unconscious like one of the other people said.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> When I "leak" a video it is always a professionally produced marketing advert.

Seems like every "leak" these days is anything but. Call me cynical or paranoid if you want...

<comment><USER9> You're not paranoid, but all companies release "leaks" like this these days, without an "official" announcement, months earlier.

<comment><USER17> It makes sense why they would do it. It let's them get response from the community and use that feedback to address concerns and hype the positives for the official announcement. It is just like the open betas that video games have been doing recently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I am very, very skeptical of the authenticity of this video. Anybody skilled in 3D rendering could have created this video, it's happened before: <http://anatomyofahoax.tumblr.com/>

<comment><USER6> Apart from being skilled in 3D rendering -- the creator of this video seems to have enlisted a superb voice actor; audio + video fit together well. This is the work of a highly paid advertising agency, working for and paid by Google. The 'anatomyofahoax' centers around an old phone picture... this video had a lot more stuff. To conclude: it's the real deal.

<comment><USER19> If your standards are low. It's perfectly reasonable that this video could be done by a couple guys over the weekend. To conclude: it's impossible to tell.

<comment><USER20> All commercials can potentially be faked, and sometimes leaked commercials are real. This is an intractable argument.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Will be interesting to see what price this comes in at. If they can get this significantly below $1000 it could be an absolute killer.

<comment><USER22> It's anything even remotely close to $1000 I wouldn't go near it if it's running Chrome OS. I'm not paying a grand for a fancy browser case.

Edit: to expand on my comment a little. I thought the premise of Chrome OS was that except for specialized cases almost a "typical" user things could be moved to the cloud, eliminating the need for high powered machines and complex OSes that can fulfill various use cases, consequently the price drops dramatically. If Chrome OS is still limited to essentially web/cloud driven functionality what is the justification for the high price point?

<comment><USER23> Sure, the default OS on this laptop may be limited, but that doesn't change the fact that the hardware is still that of a $1000+ laptop. Especially with that hi-res screen. And I'm sure if you really wanted to, you could install Ubuntu on it.

<comment><USER24> These devices are only sensible if the UI of the OS knows how to scale; otherwise everything is tiny. From a brief Google search, Ubuntu does not know how to scale ([http://askubuntu.com/questions/231646/is- ubuntu-12-10-optimi...](http://askubuntu.com/questions/231646/is- ubuntu-12-10-optimized-for-retina-displays)) so I don't think you would want to run Ubuntu on this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I still use a 1280x800 18" laptop, I really need a new one. Now the thing is: This Chromebook will probably run... Chrome, and I can't work just with Chrome.

I wish Google had developed a Linux Distro instead of ChromeOS, would be much more useful.

<comment><USER26> Hopefully it'll be like the other Google-branded devices, and it'll allow you to install what you want on it easily.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Couple thoughts:

* there was an earlier thread on touch screens in laptops, the surface thread, and I stated I have the Lenovo tablet laptop with touchscreen and it is horrible and I don't like it.

I work with lots of visual docs, from visio, PDF acad plans, acad itself and revit. Not once have I wanted to interact with any of these documents via touch.

We have a few plan-grid users in the office and that works kinda ok - but not on a laptop.

* I bought a chromebook for my mom, and I lamented here on HN about how it lacked features and the UX was very clunky.

This thing is going to likely wind up in the iPad price range, and I am suspicious it's experience will be some weird limbo between a full OS laptop and a fully purpose built tablet.

I want this to succeed, but I feel that the chromebook, with almost zero functionality without access to the Internet is shortsighted in the depth and sophistication (savvy) users need from their devices.

While "we" (my wife and I) have an iPad, "I" do not have one; I find the iPad too one dimensional for the majority of what I need to do. Using robust and nimble applications for work, light gaming and heavy web content consumption.

I typically have multiple browser containers open with upto 20 tabs in each.

For light browsing, I use my phone - as I am now to type this.

This video showed a person clicking a CGI jellyfish to change its color. Ok, zero utility and the spark of coolness lasted about a nanosecond.

The only thing semi-inspirational said in the video was also very scary: 4 million of these pixels create a new world.

This statement leads me to believe this is a hardware wrapper to G+, is a google encased physical portal into their total information awareness about your individual, and the pixels overall communal, online use.

This makes it sound liberating - but this is actually a digital prison.

Finally, it's a me too ad in response to Apple trying to tout "completely designed by google".

Don't get me wrong, I love lots of things about google, most things actually - but what I will never trust about google or any other company is that they are working in my interest.

So, people will find this useful, and interesting - but this ad showed me very little to convince me that my computing experience is about to evolve into anything other than a benefit for googles information indexing leviathan, let alone become something completely better.

<comment><USER28> You're right in that Google isn't working in _your_ best interest, they're working towards the interest of all of their users. While touch isn't ideal for your use cases, it may be for some. Touch is a pretty bad modality for content creation, but it's very good for casual use/content consumption. You seem to be heavily putting down this laptop because it's touch enabled. It's simply another feature, at the end of the day this is still a laptop. It's not a negative to have it be there - it barely increases the cost of materials/construction.

Was it a pretty boring/generic ad? Sure. Does it present anything that we haven't seen before? No, not really. But at the end of the day, it's cool to see Google pursuing new hardware ventures. The nexus line is absolutely fantastic, I would love to see that level of quality in a laptop, even if the laptop is only a netbook.

<comment><USER29> 'You're right in that Google isn't working in your best interest, they're working towards the interest of all of their users.'

..where of course "their users" are actually their advertisers and not mom and pop.

<comment><USER30> This oversimplification isn't useful and is getting old. If mom and pop don't use the new products Google comes up with, the advertisers will spend less money and/or eventually leave. The incentives are not so nearly misaligned as you suggest.

<comment><USER29> Nope - everything comes back to advertisers (well, actually, money). If Google could make more money by not offering services do you think they would? Of course they would.

<comment><USER31> I have friends who have not taken jobs at google. I'm pretty sure their issue is allocating scarce engineers, not servers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Apple has introduced a MacBook Pro with a similar resolution to this Chromebook Pixel. It has a Core i5 with 8GB of RAM. However, as AnandTech would point out, such a resolution is certainly a strain on the processor ([http://www.anandtech.com/show/6409/13inch-retina-macbook- pro...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/6409/13inch-retina-macbook-pro- review/5)). Google's Chromebooks have been picking up the low-end. If this laptop is real, it will almost certainly need to match a Retina MacBook Pro in specs. It seems unreasonable to believe that this could be an ARM powered machine (as I'm sure some hope) since the resolution proves burdensome even to a Core i5.

I think that's a compelling reason to believe this to be a fake. The amount of hardware needed to run such a resolution is substantial and I don't think people would want to pay that kind of money for a Chromebook right now. Personally, I would have to be assured that I could run a fuller operating system on it if I were going to spend that kind of money.

However, even if it is real, it seems like it would be much closer to a Retina MacBook Pro than any current Chromebook. It seems unreasonable to think that Google would be able to put out such a device with such a display that is like the current Chromebooks in hardware or price. I know that a lot of us would love someone to unseat Intel, but we've seen how demanding Retina resolutions are and how even processors many times more powerful can struggle to meet the task.

<comment><USER33> The retina iPad manages to pull off a resolution close to that with only an ARM CPU. If applications deal with half the vertical and horizontal resolution in logical pixels and leave the X2 image and font rendering to a highly optimized engine using a good GPU it sounds do-able.

Then again I agree it would bump up costs considerably, which negates one of the main reasons for buying a chromebook at the moment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I WANT ONE! (Or two if supplies last).

Seriously though it is about time we saw some more change in the laptop market. I love macbooks as much as the next guy but they aren't perfect.

Higher vertical resolutions rock.

<comment><USER35> Even if it only runs Chrome OS?

<comment><USER36> I'd be interested in it, developer mode gives access to vim and ssh, which is all I need to do my job (embedded kernel development). ChromeOS is quite decent on its own, and since it's ChromeOS it would have flash and their PDF reader on it. The only real complaint there is that their PDF reader doesn't support indexes and I usually have PDFs that are 2-5k pages so scrolling is a pain.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Several comments refer to the limited functionality of Chrome OS. This issue has apparently already been "fixed" with ChrUbuntu[1]. Ars published an article[2] on this two months ago.

1\. <http://chromeos-cr48.blogspot.com/> 2\. [http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/12/how-to-install- ubuntu...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/12/how-to-install-ubuntu-on- acers-199-c7-chromebook/)

</comment><comment><USER38> I know people from Google read HN.

All I want is a Retina screen in an ARM Chromebook. Thats it. It doesn't have to look nice, it doesn't have to have good speakers (or any speakers, really), it doesn't need USB 3, or a touch screen, or more than 4 hours of battery life (although more is always better), and it doesn't need any real storage space because I won't be storing large files on it.

The Samsung Exynos5 Chromebook is lacking exactly one thing: a Retina screen. Otherwise, I would have bought it by now.

</comment><comment><USER19> The body design cloning the mbp makes it look dated already.

</comment><comment><USER39> Can someone make an educated guess on min price on something like this? I guess it could basically be a Nexus 10 but with a keyboard and a different OS, putting it in the $500 range.

I just bought the $249 Chromebook and I love it but now I am having some buyer's remorse. However if this thing is likely to cost $500 I wouldn't feel so bad about my purchase since I just want it for a second computer to take to class.

<comment><USER18> This is most likely fake and if it is not fake it will be at least as expensive as a Nexus 10 ($400.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Look, an MBP Retina.

</comment><comment><USER41> Google is now making Macbook Pro retina laptops?

</comment><comment><USER42> "Completely designed by Google". hmm. more like "Case and keyboard almost entirely designed by Apple, to the extent of appearing to be a 2009 MBP unless you look very carefully". I hope it's a fake so that doesn't bug me.

</comment><comment><USER20> The problem with the chromebooks is definitely not the hardware, it's that you can't skype or play a dvd. If they sold one of these with just android I would buy it in a heartbeat. Perfect linux box.

<comment><USER9> Hangouts and WebRTC should be good alternatives for that. But you also _can_ use Skype in the browser last I checked (for video-calls):

<https://imo.im>

<comment><USER43> Using imo for skype is far from "ideal" -- you give your skype password to a third party, and I don't think you can call landlines with it. You might say "just use google voice", but you're out of luck if you're not in the US.

I've toyed with giving my parents a chromebook, but the lack of skype is always the sticking point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> As ads go, fake or not, this one didn't captivate me. What's so special about this laptop? The only thing going for it is that it's "designed entirely by Google," which isn't an advantage to some.

</comment><comment><USER45> Funny, it looks like the Nexus logo here:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=d2dhMKSKGBg#t=70s)

</comment><comment><USER46> Is Google planning on adding Android to the Chromebook at some point? It seems like Android would allow for much richer apps.

<comment><USER47> It increasingly feels as though Chrome OS functionality is a subset of Android functionality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> 43 seconds in shows a Thunderbolt port (aka, Apple proprietary). Clearly a fake.

<comment><USER49> You mean Mini DisplayPort? Many vendors use it nowadays.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> I really like the laptop's design.. clean and functional.

</comment><comment><USER51> Hmm is this really leaked?

</comment><comment><USER52> Wish it was Android OS.</comment>


Show HN: Simple board for Redmine tasks (React\Redux) - <AUTHOR> http://mighty-forest-75591.herokuapp.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Everything keeps on client-side, i mean token and url in the localStorage. Server needs only for send requests (all this things about CORS).

Works with React and Redux. If there will be any interets, i will continue work.

#TODO 1\. Detail information about task in modal window. 2\. Control issues from the board.</comment>


Regex crossword - <AUTHOR> http://regexcrossword.com/howtoplay

<comment><USER2> Looks fun, but is it really too hard to implement user login/registration? I'm not giving you my Facebook.</comment>


Why startups like Stripe win - <AUTHOR> About a week ago this came up on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22936818
PC, the bo55 co-founder of Stripe was the first to comment. Outlining this was feature only for advanced fraud protection.
As a Stripe user myself, I have to admit, I was sceptical. Also - more network payload. Arghhh. Lighthouse death.
Then today, I login to Stripe and get this message:  https://stripe.com/au/blog/advanced-fraud-detection-updates
Stripe. Thank you. You are my hero. THIS people is HOW YOU RUN A STARTUP. <comment><USER2> These are just some additional icing on the cake from stripe but Stripe won primiarily because they were the first to make it really really really easy to setup payments on a website (Did I say easy already?). This reminds of a book I just read called "The 22 immutable laws of marketing". One of the laws says that you should be the first in a category and Stripe was the first in making it really easy for anyone to setup payments on their website. Before stripe, it was a huge pain in the butt. So services like Paypal existed and they still do but Stripe was the "first" to make it easy.

On a side note, that book is awesome. I highly recommend for any business owners.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Code Geek, I will definitely check it out.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Links: \- [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22936818](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22936818) \- [https://stripe.com/au/blog/advanced-fraud-detection- updates](https://stripe.com/au/blog/advanced-fraud-detection-updates)</comment>


The Asian domain-name extortion scam - <AUTHOR> http://www.marco.org/1176211147

<comment><USER2> You'll get these for every domain you register, and they can be safely ignored.

Getting your .com.cn domain wasn't a priority yesterday, so why would you waste even a second considering it today? You registered the .com, and the .net/.org if they were available because that's good practice. Maybe a few popular misspellings too if they're available.

But there are 500 other TLDs out there that you didn't register. For good reason. Because they're worthless.

Some random email out of the blue doesn't change that fact.

<comment><USER3> Agreed.

I was actually shocked to see people falling for this. I deleted mine straight away knowing it was spam. Maybe I'm just a cynic :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> At Scribd we get about one of these per day now. Almost everyone has fallen for it once. As scam emails go, it is very clever, and routinely fools tech- savvy people who would never go for a 419 scam. Good of Marco to point it out.

</comment><comment><USER5> I got this a few years back. I replied and got the email telling me to register for it. I just ignored their reply and guess what. The company registered my domain with the .cn. After reading this post, I checked the .cn domain again and it expired last Dec.

Base on my experience these guys might just register and hold your .cn domain for a few years.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I get one of these for every _single_ website or app I launch. It's a benchmark: if I get one, I've made it decently popular enough for it to get around to them. There's always a bright side. :)

</comment><comment><USER6> I got one of these pretty recently. Like all cold calls that feel out of the blue, I googled up an extract of it and tossed in the trash after realizing that it was a (fairly well-worded) scam.

<comment><USER7> Ditto.

They were actually pretty persistent too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Is this a scam or do you actually get the domain names? If you get what they are selling you, then it's just unsolicited advertising, which is not really a scam.

<comment><USER9> The fact that they are claiming that a fictitious someone else is trying to buy the names in order to convince you to act quickly is what makes it a scam.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> My co-founder got one of these emails about 12 months ago. Even the opening email sounds pretty scammy, and quick googling shows they send out loads of these, so I shot it down. It must be worth their time if they're still doing it years later.

</comment><comment><USER11> These scams are very, very common, and have been around for years. On a regular basis, I get letters from a company called "Domain Registry of America" (or something like that) who kindly offer to register .biz variations (and whatnot) for my domain names.

<comment><USER12> I have had 100+ paper letters from Domain Registry of America (or similar) trying to snipe domain renewals over the years. Waste of paper.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> These scams are partly enabled by the fact that the domain system has so many suffixes. It was predictable. One solution is to remove the suffixes. Yes there'd be pain migrating/collapsing to that but there is clearly pain now when we don't.

<comment><USER14> We are moving towards the opposite. You will begin to see a lot more domain extensions as ICANN allows anyone with deep enough pockets to launch their own top-level domain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I get these on behalf of my clients all the time. Don't know of anyone who's fallen for it - if clients get it, they tend to ask me first before dealing with it.

It's the internet. It's always a scam. (TM)

</comment><comment><USER15> I get two such mails every month; it is a brilliantly executed scam though. I almost fell for it the first time I saw it.

</comment><comment><USER16> Yup, I got the same email from that same company for 2 different sites.

Glad to confirm that its a scam for sure. I figured it was an easy one to pull - play it off like there's trademark infringement and then sell the 12 'hijacked' domains at once.

</comment><comment><USER17> We keep getting this I think every other 2-3 months, I'm not quite sure why such a smart guy fell for the first one :) We keep ignoring those guys.

</comment><comment><USER18> All the time. Also renewal scams. Appraisal Scams.

</comment><comment><USER19> Got this too last week, I simply ignored it. However I have to admit I considered answering it for a while.

</comment><comment><USER20> I've been getting these for at least a year. I wrote back the first time too. I bet it's really effective.

</comment><comment><USER14> Has nobody followed up to see which registrars are to blame? Could be a simple fix if reported to ICANN.

<comment><USER21> ICANN don't maintain the .cn TLD. If China's attitude to copyright, trademark and other IP infringement is anything to go by, I don't think CNNIC is going to do much.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> If it was a courtesy email it would of been written in Engrish.

<comment><USER23> would _have_ been written in English</comment></comment>


Core Memory – a tutoral - <AUTHOR> http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~hilpert/e/coremem/index.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Thought I would share this, its a really solid article on how Core memory works.</comment>


Afternoon with Arduino - <AUTHOR> https://www.charlieharrington.com/afternoon-with-arduino <comment><USER2> Terrific article!! Looking forward to the alarm clock sequel ;) It would be also really really cool a post with Arduino + TensorFlow lite.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great idea. I should look around to see if there's any good articles / tutorials with Arduino and TFLite. Additionally, I really do think that a computer vision app for recognizing electronics components (especially resistors) would be super useful for tinkerers of all ages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is a _great_ beginner Arduino tutorial and explainer. 10/10, would recommend.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I'm definitely an Arduino padawan, so it was important for me to write down what I learned, messed up, and still want to figure out. It just feels good to be combining code with physical hardware, even if its just a tiny little LED. I'm also reading CODE by Charles Petzold at the same time and each chapter is blowing my mind (while requiring several re-reads). Oh, and I'm watching Halt and Catch Fire. So, I'm firing on a lot of hardware cylinders right now.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How did you deal with the fact that you were growing old - <AUTHOR> Dear middle aged hackernewsers, how did you deal with the fact that you were growing old and leaving your twenties behind, I am asking this cause lately I've been terrified and having panic attacks at the thought that in a few years time(6 years to be exact) I will leave my twenties behind and literally start becoming old, this is even more scary as I remember becoming 20 years old like it happened just last year.
To deal with this issue I have resulted to scorning new music's and movies, for music's and movies which were released 4 to 10 years ago, I am even surprised by the sheer number of movies and music that were made during these period.
Also this month will make it exactly a year that I lost my dad, which further makes the thought of me getting old frightening to me as I'm also kinda scared that getting old will mean I will lose a lot more people close and dear to me. <comment><USER2> (I'm 32)

The first thing I came to terms with is that 30 isn't "old". I'm looking at 40 up ahead, and that isn't "old" either.

My parents both turned 60 recently, and even though they're greying slightly, I honestly don't consider them to be "old". My dad plays drums in a band, they get booked to play at all kinds of parties locally. He built a practice room in their house, complete with separate mixing booth and recording facilities. When they go play, they lug all the gear themselves and set up a stage and everything.

My mom does realistic movie character doll heads for Barbie-size dolls, sews clothes for them and builds complete dioramas.

My uncle, who's in his mid-60s and just retired earlier this year sails kayaks and has built both a beautiful wooden kayak as a birthday present for my aunt, and he's making another for himself. He's also still active in the regional dog training club, for over 30 years now.

You get older, but you only get _old_ if you give up and stop doing things you like, if you get overly conservative and start just complaining about everything, instead of going out and _doing_ things.

Dude, you're 24! Life is just starting! Get out there and enjoy it! :-)

</comment><comment> a0-prw 51 here ;))

I'm having a lot more fun than when I was 21 ;) Stay healthy, be careful with your relationships and stop worrying.. There's only one way out and it's the same for everyone

</comment><comment><USER3> You're 24 and you think like this? If you don't sort out your thinking, you are headed for a miserable existence. Read the stoics, help people, visit a senior centre, get out of your head. You are a pup so your flawed thinking is forgivable and even expected. That youth is wasted on the young used to seem trite to me but when I read stuff like this I nod at that saying in sad agreement.

Edit: I will add that I'm 46, at what is statistically the nadir of contentment. I think about my aging every day and have to reconcile it with gratitude...this is how all things are reconciled.

</comment><comment><USER4> Growing old at 24? Thanks for the (grand)Father's day laugh.

I'm 63 and "old" has always seemed to be at least 10 years than I am at the time. I know people my age may say they're feeling old but inside we (at least the men) still have a middle school mentality.

<comment><USER5> I'm only 46 (so a bit younger) but I totally agree.

Yesterday night I was looking at my hairs going more and more gray and thought « How can that be ? I still feel like I was a student some years ago ! »

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> 31 here.

Growing old for me was mostly about accomplishment, "am I doing everything I want/need to do while I'm still young?"

I mostly am succeeding, have a nice stable career and am a father of one. I admit that this success was mostly dumb luck and I didn't have any master plan or list of goals.

You're where I was when I was your age, you might benefit from introspection to see what you want to get done before you hit age milestones, and go and do it!

As for the "everything new is dumb bit," yeah that happens to most people. I encourage you to force yourself to listen to new music and experience current culture. It's very easy to become ossified over time, and you should grow older with an open mind about all things.

By the way, I've found that making memories and experiencing new things with friends and loved ones is the best way to not only slow the passage of time, but also pacify the thoughts of "oh god I'm getting old." Having a pool of memories to attach to your age helps your thoughts go from "I am afraid of getting older" to "I can't wait to see what else I get to do."

<comment><USER7> > 31 here.

> Growing old for me was [...]

You're not old yet.

<comment><USER6> Eyeroll.

Original poster is 20 going on 30 and clearly worried about that milestone, like I was, like many 20-somethings in the industry that are taught that young=desirable. Let's not kid ourselves, there's a de facto shelf life for developers in SV and elsewhere due to current culture, and I think it's a hard thing to come to terms with. I probably could have chosen better language (and might be perpetuating the problem due to that language) but drive by comments that are like "haha you're not old" maybe be "technically right" but don't really help anyone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you really are having panic attacks about turning 30 (in 6 years??!!), I would suggest finding a therapist and getting a prescription for Xanax.

Like the other poster says, 60 is not even 'old' if one's attitude is correct. 45 or so, the biology slows down and you really start to feel it, but I've stopped ruminating (mostly) over all the missed opportunities and risks I did not take while younger (aka 40), and now have a laundry list of things to do.

Getting older is also nice in that I can more clearly see how Western civilization is completely full of shit and so I thus get to do what I damn well please (within the constraints of my ethical system, which is not pathological like a lot of the 60,70 year old asshole politicians out there <all of them>)

The sooner you realize exactly how much the West is truly a bunch of nonsense, the freer a person you will be. be in the world, but not of it. Then you'll stop being scared of death.

</comment><comment><USER9> Turning 36 in a month and I agree that sometimes it's hard to cope with the fact that I'm no longer in my 20's. I don't think it's the fact that i'm aging as I certainly enjoy the wisdom, the money, the confidence that age has brought me, it's the increased responsibility that seems to come with age. People feel the need to constantly ask me (especially family members) questions like "when are you getting married" "when are you having kids". I think that's what bugs me about getting old. Feeling the need to settle down when I don't want to. The thing that I'm working on remembering is that I need to live life on my own terms and fuck what everyone else is thinking I should be doing. Same advice I would give to you. Enjoy your life no matter what age you are and live it at your own pace.

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm 10 years older than you.

When I was 26 I was dealing with the same questions you're facing now. For me, it turned into an obsessive compulsive behavior - I had very frequent panic attacks and was constantly worried about my health (even though I was 100% healthy).

It was a very dark time for me, and the only thing that helped me was antidepressants. No therapy, self help books or meditation.

I also discovered that some people have negative opinions about antidepressants based very limited interaction with it. I tried at least 4-5 different meds until I found that one that works good for me, with minimal side effects.

Take your mental health seriously, it is as important as your physical health. Panic attacks are not something that should be ignored. Consult a therapist or a psychiatrist.

The questions that bother you have no real answer. We're all going to die, and loose people that are dear to us. The only thing you can control is how you live with it.

</comment><comment><USER11> The issue of death fear was historically(almost allways) solved by religion. Many people in the last century chose to be de facto atheist, which of course has its advantages but like the former also disadvantages. There is no solution to this phenomenon otside of religion.

<comment><USER2> Religion is absolutely not the only solution.

It's enough to just realize and come to terms with the fact that life eventually ends, and make sure to have fun while it lasts. Especially when the alternative is religion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Everyone is getting older, not just you. That's just the course of life. There are beautiful things in life and at the same time scary, unpleasant or even heart-breaking. It's just the balance we need to understand and respect. There's not something we can do about it. We need to appreciate the life to it's fullest with all its flaws and joys. Don't judge yourself or keep a grudge on things you cannot change. It will wear you out and you won't reach any resolution. Of course, it might sound easier said than done. Though you'd be doing yourself a favor spending more time with people you love and cherishing every day you have with them instead of throwing yourself into this void. Accept things that you cannot change and use that saved energy to spread good and enjoying life in general. I myself have similar moments and it sometimes seems unbearable but I really try to step back a little and observe my thoughts as much as I can. 99% of the time I'm just being too emotional and life, in general, is not as bad as it seems. Many people have it worse so appreciate what you have and live a life that fills you and your loved ones with joy. Don't worry about the number on your passport.

<comment><USER2> And remember to enjoy things while you're doing them, instead of always being in a rush to the next thing.

</comment></comment><comment> the-peter I started my own company as a 'lifestyle business' not a Unicorn-moonshot. This means I make a consistent healthy profit which I get to bring home, I make my own hours so I can take a day to see my kid's play or go rock climbing with my friends. But this business will never attract VC funding or grow to a billion dollars.

I also took up rock-climbing at the age of 46, loved it and now spend as much time as I can trad-climbing up in the mountains. This keeps me healthy strong and sane.

At 24 you seem like a kid to me. The difference between our ages is larger than your age. If you're feeling an existential crisis now what the hell are you going to do when you're 50?

Relax. You're not knocking on death's-door. It's a marathon not a sprint. You have no idea what great things and big challenges are ahead of you.

Make a bucket-list and start living. I recently found my old bucket-list from my 20s and am happily surprised at how many things I've done from the list: scuba-diving, having a family, starting my own company, making a million etc.

</comment><comment><USER13> 35 here.

If not for the physical aspect of it (better take care of your body now, because it doesn't get easier), my experience of growing old is pretty awesome.

You get cool perks like seniority and respect just because you don't look like a kid anymore. Even though you think it's mostly the same "you" than in your 20s, people, mostly rightly, assume you're wiser and more trustworthy.

That translated, at least to me, into getting more money and less shit for roughly the same amount of work, less need to prove my worth and all in all a chiller life. Money is a lot less an issue than it was before, meaning I don't stress about that much anymore (definitely not the case for everyone, but I would gamble it is for most of the HN crowd). A lot of things that were sources of stress are now under control or in the DGAF category (money, women, career, ...) and I can focus on more interesting parts (family, the meaning of life, everything).

10/10, would grow older again.

</comment><comment><USER14> Wow, this post gives me perspective.

I'm 53 this year, and I welcome the next few years ahead as I look forward to retirement. (I hope it's as good as I think it will be.) I don't recall ever feeling anxiety about an upcoming birthday. I guess I'd credit that to:

\- A long-game mindset, mostly. Max out your retirement plan, save in tax- advantaged ways. You'll love to project your balances thinking forward. (You won't dread the years ahead.)

\- Come to grips with your mortality. There are a lot of ways to do this, mine mostly has to do with religion. Find some way that works for you. Don't be afraid of death, learn to accept it.

\- Find a good partner to age with. Go for a 'keeper' marriage and put in the proper maintenance.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER15> It's life. I can't put it a better way. You can either accept what life has given you or you can fight it. And fighting it is fufile anyway. Embrace that you are getting older and do your best to be the best person you can be every day.

</comment><comment><USER16> Many of the downsides about 'being old' can be staved off with proper diet, fitness, (don't smoke, don't do drugs) moderate alcohol, and some common sense like don't destroy your knees with running. If you are fortunate by the time you are old you will have wisdom and grandchildren.

</comment><comment><USER17> I have only one rule for that: never think that you are old. Accept everything (physical changes) as it is & never compare yourself with the "old" you.

Well, maybe that's not exactly one (rule)...

</comment><comment><USER18> 51 here. My mind hasn't changed. I think more before I speak. I listen more. My body hurts a bit sometimes and takes longer to heal, but basically everything is just better.

</comment><comment><USER19> There is no need to "deal" with it. You're the same person you were yesterday, just a little wiser and a little slower.

Take care of your health and enjoy life.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think if you have a kid later on you'd worry less about growing old and more about making sure your kid grows old.</comment>