Science and gun violence: why is the research so weak? - <AUTHOR> http://boingboing.net/2013/02/26/firearms-science-and-the-mis.html <comment><USER2> Perhaps a better title would have been "Science _versus_ gun violence research: why would we expect meaningful answers?"

Given someone with critical thinking skills who is well versed in scientific methods, they would quickly move to asking why _violence_ is a problem. Why are there so many violent crimes in the U.S. compared to Canada? With a huge number of guns in Canada, why aren't their gun violence stats similar to the U.S.? But very few people seem interested in that line of questioning. Instead, we get pro-gun vs. anti-gun arguments. And of course the media and the public feed into this as well. It's just so easy to think something as symbolic as guns must be the problem and/or solution. But this is a much deeper problem, and one that is in desperate need of more attention.

<comment><USER3> A concept that gun culture consistently fails to grasp is that a) technology is an enabler and b) humans, even the homicidal, are lazy. It's true guns don't kill people; but it's also true guns as an independent factor increase the probability of people killing people. The size of this effect is very much in need of empirical analysis. However the nra has behaved in bad faith on this issue.

Also Canada has less than half the per capita rate of firearm ownership compared to US.

<comment><USER4> so you need empirical evidence but are comfortable asserting what the outcome will be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Another thing we don't have is reliable, long-term data on where the guns that are actually used in crimes come from. One of the ways we legislate gun use is through registration programs and systems that limit who can buy a gun legally. But if we don't know whether guns used in crimes are purchased legally, illegally, or purchased legally and then sold or given illegally to a third party, we have no idea how to craft those laws or even if they make any difference at all._

I consider this a huge problem. How can you have a well-regulated militia if you don't know who is in it?

How do we know any of our gun laws have any effect at all?

<comment><USER6> Because Republicans and the Gun Lobby have systematically shut down any attempt to collect and study any data about guns.

 _Over the past two decades, the NRA has not only been able to stop gun control laws, but even debate on the subject. The Centers for Disease Control funds research into the causes of death in the United States, including firearms — or at least it used to. In 1996, after various studies funded by the agency found that guns can be dangerous, the gun lobby mobilized to punish the agency. First, Republicans tried to eliminate entirely the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, the bureau responsible for the research. When that failed, Rep. Jay Dickey, a Republican from Arkansas, successfully pushed through an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC's budget (the amount it had spent on gun research in the previous year) and outlawed research on gun control with a provision that reads: "None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."_

<http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/the_nras_war_on_gun_science/>

<comment><USER7> The CDC isn't allowed to conduct research into gun violence because they didn't even try to hide the fact that they were horribly biased. Here's a quote from Mark Rosenberg, former director of the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control and the guy who led a personal crusade against guns under the guise of 'research':

"We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. Now it is dirty, deadly, and banned."

He had no interest in conducting unbiased research, he wanted to treat gun ownership like a disease, and did everything in his power to try and 'eradicate' it.

<comment><USER6> >The CDC isn't allowed to conduct research into gun violence because they didn't even try to hide the fact that they were horribly biased.

So just because the numbers didn't reach the conclusion that you agree with, they are automatically biased?

>Here's a quote from Mark Rosenberg, former director of the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control and the guy who led a personal crusade against guns under the guise of 'research':

An out of context quote - and an ad hominem attack?

As far as I can tell, your strategy at this point is to try and muddy the water.

Meanwhile, here are some useful numbers to contemplate.

[http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths- fa...](http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Creating a system that allows scientists to gather that data might be > objectionable to some people who own guns.

Sampling is the answer.

If the federal government is keeping really close tabs on 100% of non-criminal gun-related happenings, that's Orwellian supersurveillance.

If a randomly selected 1% of gun sales or local police blotter entries or whatever are selected for a scientific study, that's a lot less invasive of gun owners' privacy while still giving scientists enough data to work with.

<comment><USER3> Not really. Gun ownership has externalities, just like car ownership. The government keeps "close tabs" on 100% of automobile related transactions, including licensing and insurance requirements. It's not Orwellian to force a consumer to fully realize the total cost to society of her consumption.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Because the data doesn't really back up the either side in USA.

USA is really violent for a western civilization

The only correlation is identified that poorer regions have more violence, regardless of guns.

Guns doesn't really play a big role at all, according to the statistics.

Of course one thing the statistics cannot account for that guns are available in any state.

</comment><comment><USER10> Because partisans are not interested in solid science. They are interested in getting their way.

<comment><USER11> Exactly. No one on the pro-gun control side looks too closely at the statistics because they don't like what they see. Namely that the odds of someone who isn't suicidal and who isn't involved in criminal activity dying from a gunshot wound are about the same as the odds of being hit by a wayward meteor.

<comment><USER12> Come on now. The odds of being hit by a meteor (actually meteorite) are effectively nil [0]. Are you claiming that the 88 people shot in mass shooting last year [1] were all suicidal or criminals?

And really, while mass shootings get all the news attention, they are only a tiny part of the problem. The real tragedy is the way easy access to handguns has transformed communities like the South Side of Chicago, where kids are gunned down every week. This American Life recently did a remarkable report [3] on the conditions in and around one Chicago high school where in the past year _29_ current and former students were shot. That reporting could have just as easily been done in Oakland, or Detroit.

This is not about ideology. People are dying every day, innocent people going about their lives, and our current strategy of doing nothing, of burying our heads in the sand, is accomplishing...nothing.

[0] [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/12/in...](http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/12/insurance- from-the-skies/#.UTPRKl5QCTM)

[1] [http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass- shootin...](http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass-shootings- happened-2012-84-dead)

[3] [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/487/h...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/487/harper-high-school-part-one)

<comment><USER11> _The real tragedy is the way easy access to handguns has transformed communities like the South Side of Chicago, where kids are gunned down every week._

Do you have any idea how many laws are already being broken when that happens? How are more laws going to help?

More to the point, how is registering my guns (in preparation for future confiscation, it's safe to say, because that's what's happened elsewhere) going to protect those kids?

<comment><USER12> The problem is, as I said, _easy_ access to handguns. While Chicago has stringent gun laws, one need only step over into Indiana where gun shows or private "collectors" can sell unlimited numbers of guns to just about anybody. Effectively, there is no gun control in this country right now. Every step of this transaction is legal, until the guns are brought onto the street.

<comment><USER11> But oddly enough, I don't hear of the same thing happening in Indiana, at least not to the extent I hear about violence in Chicago.

Must not be the guns. Must be something else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I am extremely pro-science. However, I am angry about attempts to scientifically study gun ownership because I know the only reason is to try and violate my rights by restricting or banning ownership. It's just as offensive to me as a scientific study to decide if we should restrict or ban free speech. Unless you honestly think they undertake these studies to expand our firearm rights or strictly for scientific curiosity?

<comment><USER14> I don't think "pro-science" means what you think it means.

<comment><USER4> He's anti-scientism. Providing a scientific veneer of legitimacy to political claims. Are you claiming this doesn't happen all the time?

<comment><USER14> Nope.

Being against scientific studies because what they uncover may lead to measures you dislike is not anti-scientism. It's anti-science. Science, done correctly, inconveniently disregards your values and preferences, so it's perfectly rational to oppose its use in certain situations, but doing so is absolutely anti-science.

<comment><USER4> unless choice of hypothesis is a hell of a lot more impartial and rigorous and null-results and replications actually get reported on NO science is not value free.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> _If you were studying gun use, and you wanted to know how often guns were used in self-defense, how would you categorize Charles Wellford's experience?_

Preemptive gun use. Bam, done. Any other categorisations required?

<comment><USER16> Preempting what, exactly? Seems to me like objectively, in the given situation the only effect of the gun being present vs. not being present was to increase the likelihood of a tragic accident.

<comment><USER15> You are probably referring to the way the word is used in a computer programming context. I was talking about this:

"A preemptive war is a war that is commenced in an attempt to repel or defeat a perceived offensive or invasion, or to gain a strategic advantage in an impending (allegedly unavoidable) war before that threat materializes."

<comment><USER16> And I was talking about the fact that in the example the gun was brought in preparation to an imagined but unspecific and actually not existing threat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> >For instance, because of those differences in the definition of "defensive gun use" some researchers will tell you that Americans use a gun to defend themselves something like 1.5 million times every year. Others say it happens maybe 200,000 times annually.

That kind of variability does not create an environment where it is easy to craft evidence-based policy

fuck you, yes it clearly does, it just isn't the answer you want. Author has clearly written the bottom line first in this article. 20k deaths occur annually from gun violence discounting suicides. The lowest estimate for defensive uses of guns (which came from a study which only counted actual police reports) was the aforementioned 200k. This is an order of magnitude difference. Criminals in our country are going to have guns for a long time and no law is going to change that.

<comment><USER17> Presumably the 200K "defensive uses of guns" includes uses that didn't result in a death.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's largely because the United States has as part of its constitution that citizens be armed. Even if guns are determined to be harmful, they're unlikely to go away. Meanwhile, there are hundreds of promising categories of research, including sociological and criminal areas, in which, if effective means of improvement are found, changes may actually be implemented. The more strident of a utilitarian (the school of thought that favors less violence versus following the Constitution) a researcher is, the more the researcher will pursue the avenue that will do the most good and avoid a principled death on the hill of gun ownership and proliferation.</comment>


Beta App – Extend Your World with Augmented Reality - <AUTHOR> Hey there,
Create and extend your own digital world with our brand new Augmented Reality app. We'd like to invite you to test with us and become part of the Mapstar Community from day one.
This opportunity is ideal for Android users in Canada, Ireland, Austria, Switzerland, Thailand and Vietnam to provide feedback and exchange your ideas with us. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.MapstarAG.Mapstar
If your interested but we are not available in your country right now, drop us a few lines at firstname.lastname@example.com and we will inform you as soon as new test seats are available.
If you have any questions let us know.
Have fun! The Mapstar Team <comment><AUTHOR> Here you´ll find the link again [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.MapstarAG....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.MapstarAG.Mapstar)</comment>


Twitter API: Call for OAuth beta participants - <AUTHOR> http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-api-announce/browse_thread/thread/42486bd3d7d136d0 <comment><USER2> Hell yeah! I've been waiting for this. Tipjoy does payments over twitter, and the password issue is pretty huge. <http://tipjoy.com/twitter>

</comment><comment><USER3> Our users (<http://twalala.com>) have been asking for a better login mechanism since we launched. It'll be really nice to finally be able to deliver something better. Looking forward to it!

</comment><comment><USER4> It's great to see that the OAuth beta received so many beta applicants so quickly that Twitter had to stop accepting participants for the beta. That's really encouraging to see the Twitter development community excited about something that requires them to implement more code, in order to makes more secure for their users.

I can't wait to see the first few Twitter apps/mashups using OAuth. :)

</comment><comment><USER5> <http://readmytweets.com> uses an unfamiliar login procedure to avoid asking people for their twitter passwords.

This will be much better.

<comment><USER2> I noted you posted to the twitter dev mailing list with that. I don't understand it at all. This is mainly because the site is really difficult to parse.

Can you explain it in 50 characters? Now make that explanation really big on your front page, under the site name, which should be bigger. Organize all the content below that, and make login/account creation on a separate page.

<comment><USER5> Assuming you are referring to the purpose of the site, not the login procedure...

Have you seen it recently? I've made another attempt to explain it on the front page.

If it is still difficult to parse, could you be specific about what doesn't make sense?

<comment><USER6> I get the concept but my problems with the app are

1) what's the point?

As in, really... What's the point? Success for Twitter users is to get people to recognize their brand/personality and not so much piecemeal tweets. Just reading individual tweets of random strangers is boring. And if I wanted to read topical messages I would just use summize.

2) why is this engaging?

As Twitter increase towards more to conversational styles amongst its users, an out of context message is jarring. To the point where I have not much interest in perusing __your __site. In fact, if the person is interesting at all I would much rather just follow them. But a Twitter user recommendation engine this is not.

3) how do I know this is working?

The instructions to find the missing word makes it awkward. How do I know the missing word is because of the app in play or because the original Twitter user wasn't dyslexic? It's also too much of a chore to parse and reparse a 140 character sentence to see if it's broken. Brains don't work that way--we automatically self-correct sentence subconsciously.

<comment><USER5> If someone encounters a tweet you wrote that he/she likes, he/she might check out your twitter page and possibly follow you.

And even if you don't get many new followers, it is still a way to get people to read your tweets.

Unlike a recommendation engine, this one allows you to get lots of people to read your tweets if you are willing to put in the effort reading other people's tweets.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


BurlapCraft – Using Minecraft to Improve AI in Robotics - <AUTHOR> http://h2r.cs.brown.edu/announcing-burlapcraft/ <comment><USER2> Seems to show database error for me. Here's a link to google cache[1].

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://h2r.cs.brown.edu/announcing- burlapcraft/)

<comment><AUTHOR> It looks like the link is working now

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Error establishing a database connection..

<comment><AUTHOR> The website went down for a bit but it is back up now.</comment></comment>


Razor Startup Harry's Raises $75M, Pushing It Over $200M - <AUTHOR> http://recode.net/2014/12/03/razor-startup-harrys-raises-75-million-pushing-it-over-200-million-say-what/ <comment><USER2> \--If you want to scratch your head, I won't stop you. At a time when capital is easy to come by for buzzy startups and valuations are frothy, some will view this news as another signal that the tech bubble is real.--

I find this angle in the article puzzling and something of an indicator of the gap between "startup media" and what real companies do. Both venture firms re- committed additional capital to the venture on the basis that the Harry's model is working well and that tighter control over production, R&D, and supply chain will benefit the business over rivals stuck in white label/OEM.

To me this is the opposite of a "tech bubble" and more an indication of what's supposed to happen to tech startups- they grow out of the startup phase and develop into expansion stage / established companies. This is the goal!! If your goal is to forever remain a startup you're doing it wrong- particularly in manufacturing, where economies of scale rule. If you want indicators of a tech bubble, observe the myriad of seed stage software startups with anemic growth going nowhere. Let's not throw manufacturing companies under the bus for doing what manufacturing companies are supposed to do as they mature. Full disclosure: I have a beard. :-)

<comment><USER3> It's a company that makes and sells razors.

It's no more a "tech company" than, say, Gillette.

<comment><USER2> Have you ever manufactured anything? A shitload of technology, engineering, and creative financing at huge risk is required. I'm not going to debate the semantics of what defines a tech company but I'd say their business model disrupting large incumbents and their rapid growth qualifies them enough for airtime here.

<comment><USER4> Is McDonalds considered a tech company [1]? Toy manufacturers? Supermarkets [2]? Financial services companies?

Pretty much all companies are "tech companies" to some degree...

I'd personally tend toward a narrower definition of "tech company", which would be one in which a new and innovative idea forms the core of the business.

Unfortunately many well known "tech" startups (Uber, AirBNB) wouldn't fit that definition. They are enabled by the widespread adoption of the Internet (in the same way the telephone enabled chat lines), but I don't think I'd consider them tech companies any more than a normal taxi company or hotel...

[1] Can be argued! [http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/mcdonalds-a-tech- company/584132](http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/mcdonalds-a-tech-company/584132)

[2] [http://blogs.marketwatch.com/behindthestorefront/2013/05/01/...](http://blogs.marketwatch.com/behindthestorefront/2013/05/01/wal- mart-wants-you-to-think-of-it-as-a-technology-company/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Dollar Shave Club, by way of comparison, has a white-label relationship with a brand you've never heard of. (Dorco, originally a South Korean brand. Their US office is here: [http://www.dorcousa.com](http://www.dorcousa.com) I would assume they're also behind a lot of house brands at e.g. Walgreens or what have you. )

<comment><USER6> If it says "Made in Korea" it's probably Dorco. If it says "Made in Israel" it's probably ASR, aka Personna, owned by Energizer Holdings. The "German factory" in this article is Feintechnik.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> So they bought a huge factory with the vast majority of a previous round raised ($100M of $122M), which is interesting. This reminds me of real-estate- backed investments. If you need to buy, say, a farm to test a pharmaceutical or machinery or drones or whatever, then that farm will hold its value, regardless of the fate of the startup. And I guess that means investors believe that money is coming back to them, regardless? So their only real exposure is the "liquid" part (the $22 million in the example)? If someone knows more about this, I'd be interested in hearing how it works on these sorts of deals.

</comment><comment><USER8> I've been a Harry's customer since, I believe, the first day they went on sale. I like the product, but I desperately wish they offered a two blade razor. I find four-bladed razors to be very irritating to my skin.

My daily-use razor is the Merkur double-edged safety razor, which works very well for me - far better than any cartridge razor ever did. It's main drawback, of course, is that you can't take the blades on an airplane. So I use a cartridge razor for travel and for quick shaves at home.

I was drawn to the Harry's razor because it looked to be a solid handle (rather than the cheap plastic ones from Gillette) and the blades were a reasonable price. It lived up to my expectations. A notch above Gillette in quality and a better price. I just wish they hadn't felt the need to put four blades in it - two is more than sufficient.

My favorite non-safety razor of all time is the innovate, but unfortunately discontinued, Avid 4 Travel Razor: [http://www.moderngent.com/avid/avid_razor.php](http://www.moderngent.com/avid/avid_razor.php)

<comment><USER9> I wonder how many millions in lobbying it'd take to reverse the silly no- razor-blades policy. Something like "only 1 blade, mounted and 1 spare" allowed.

I'm also a bit puzzled how there are razor startups. Harry's blades are literally an order of magnitude more expensive than DE blades. And outside of proper shaves from a DE, I find even bulk disposables do well enough (whatever comes up on top of Amazon Prime).

<comment><USER10> You do realize that not many people share your views on DE blades and disposables? But for good, cheap 2-6 blade blades, I could direct you to Dorco.

<comment><USER9> Share my views how? As in, they dislike DE blades? I was under the impression most people just didn't know of them or figured they were difficult or something. It would surprise me to find out that people actually dislike a DE shave. Maybe I'm extrapolating too much from personal experience :\\.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Break MirageOS's TLS for 10 BTC - <AUTHOR> http://ownme.ipredator.se/

<comment><USER2> Most of the discussion is on the other submission: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9027743](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9027743)</comment>


How to speed up the Rust compiler in 2019 - <AUTHOR> https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2019/07/17/how-to-speed-up-the-rust-compiler-in-2019/ <comment><USER2> Nice to see such improvements.

Congratulations on the ongoing work.</comment>


(2007) to CLOS or not to CLOS? - <AUTHOR> https://lists.csail.mit.edu/pipermail/ll-discuss/2007-February/001186.html <comment><USER2> I stumbled on this literally in the same minute as I was about to start writing a program and wondering whether I ought to use CLOS. I don't think it answered my question, but it was interesting reading nonetheless.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, I'd argue that you should _grin_

I've had much the same experience that the Mr. Marshall describes with many aspects of Common Lisp: repeatedly, I'll discover that something which annoyed me (CLOS, packages, pathnames — whatever) is actually remarkably well-thought- out and pragmatically useful. It really is an amazing language.

<comment><USER2> Thanks! That is a solid endorsement.

I always find myself struggling with programming paradigms, having heard of so many and used so few. I love functional programming (to the extent that my ugly point-free-ish, heavily type-hinted Python is functional), but I also love how OO makes it easy for me to encapsulate logic and data. It seems too good to be true that I could have both, but here I am!</comment></comment></comment>


USA Today has an Amazing New Website - <AUTHOR> http://beta.usatoday.com/?

<comment><USER2> It's like an over-designed tumblr theme. My eyes don't know where to go, it feels claustrophobic when a story is open, the white headline is almost invisible against the main photo, navigation is all over the show, and I'm distracted by the secondary stories' photos so much so I don't read the headline and just keep scrolling.

It's beautiful, but functionally it really needs simplifying.

</comment><comment><USER3> How do they make the page animations transition across separate requests to the server?

<comment><USER4> The magic of AJAX and history API?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Slow like crazy but a forward step if they can address the site performance.

</comment><comment><USER6> I like the design.

A low bandwidth version would be useful though.

</comment><comment><USER7> Their article preloading is very quick.

</comment><comment><USER8> Shame about the newspaper.</comment>


Ask HN: Any data-breaches known involving DNA data? - <AUTHOR> I have a bet going on with a friend for some years, about if there will be a hack or data-breach that exposes DNA data in the next 10 years (from 2009). He comes to visit tomorrow, so I researched if there is a public known incident yet, but couldn't find anything.<p>So I am wondering, if HN does know of something that could fall under this category? <comment><USER2> I'm not aware of any. I put my genome up on the web because I can't see any reasonable risk of disclosure.</comment>


Show HN: Simple "Integration Tests" for Your APIs, Through the Web - <AUTHOR> http://stoplight.io/#hn <comment><AUTHOR> Hi all, I've been working on StopLight for the past month, and just put up this first version. If you have any questions do let me know! Thanks for checking it out.

<comment><USER2> Congrats on the launch. Always like seeing more API tools!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm pretty excited about this product. I find that if I'm not doing TDD, all I want is integration tests to make sure the high level stuff works. Add in the fact that there's a command line interface for local dev and it adds up to something that could be more powerful and easy to use than rspec.</comment>


Garden Radio lets you listen to 17,000 radio stations from the whole world - <AUTHOR> https://sfree.life/radio-garden-expand-your-music-taste-with-free/ <comment><USER2> I love this. Thank you.</comment>


Why the Time Is Ripe for Smartwatches - <AUTHOR> http://testdroid.com/news/why-the-time-is-ripe-for-smartwatches-and-why-appdevs-must-make-their-move

<comment><AUTHOR> Apple Watch will be actually also good for Android counterparts. This is probably the first gadget that will actually boost the whole ecosystem (all wearables) and create more commercial opportunities across different OS platforms.</comment>


How Excite Won a $3M Bet-The-Company Deal with $1M in the Bank - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/startup-war-story/how-excite-won-a-3m-bet-the-company-deal-with-1m-in-the-bank-c261b704d8e1#.q8b01gq5z <comment><USER2> And how'd they get $3m</comment>


Moral Mazes: Bureaucracy and Managerial Work (1983) - <AUTHOR> https://hbr.org/1983/09/moral-mazes-bureaucracy-and-managerial-work <comment><USER2> > "All right," said Susan. "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need... > fantasies to make life bearable."

> REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE > HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE.

> "Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little—"

> YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.

> "So we can believe the big ones?"

> YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING.

\-- Terry Pratchett, The Hogfather

\</comment><comment>-----

One of the defining characteristics of humans is our ability to create shared fantasies... or "lies" if you are cynical. One of the most important jobs as a manager is the creation of the shared fantasy of the workplace environment.

"Hard work creates results" is an obvious lie, or fantasy, to anyone who has any amount of programming experience. You can look to colleagues and see that some people can get things done in hours what another person may take weeks, or months (of good, hard work) to accomplish.

So what's the point of the fantasy? If the fantasy is no longer helpful, we humans have the ability to change the fantasy, change the story, change the workplace culture, to better suit the morale and psyche of the modern worker.

With luck and hard work, a shared fantasy can become a shared reality.

In the case of "Hard work creates results", the fantasy is real if the programmers have the support they need to move in the correct direction. Its not so much that hard work creates results, its that a GOOD MANAGER creates situations where hard work creates good results.

<comment><USER3> I think in most cases it is the proverbial tail wagging the dog. The established fantasy to use your terms is what leads to the behavior and productivity is the rationalization.

Giving up on "hard work" feels to managenent and their bosses like leaving money on the table. Even if they would consistently get five times better results and no downsides by having say game programmers work eight hour days and spend half of the day having LAN parties in the game so they became intimately familiar with its mechanics, performance, bugs, and flaws it would emotionally feel morally wrong "slacking" because it contradicts their values - in spite of the purpose of the values.

Inertia tends to keep things the status quo until "feedback" forces changes on it.

Confusingly the status quo itself may not be stable - rewriting the code base every three years in a new language regardless of how well it works is just as much a status quo as leaving it in untouched COBOL and only putting efforts into compatability layers when absolutely needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> (1983)

Reading this, I feel like there's some historical context that's implied but probably easily missed if you're unaware: In the U.S. this was the end of the era of managers working at one company for their entire career, of showing undying loyalty to the company which in turn would march them up the corporate ladder. Many companies had gotten large and complacent from this, and their competitiveness had eroded terribly, because (as the article points out) management was focused on appearances and the short term.

Thus this article seems to be right in step with the times of calling into question the benefits of strong, hierarchical management.

<comment><USER5> Do you have evidence for the idea that US companies had become uncompetitive in the early 80's? I think that the oil crisis and globalisation had very significant effects on the US economy (also the vietnam war) at around that time.

<comment><USER6> The trend for companies had been to scale up and diversify to avoid antitrust and avoid risk.

Big companies are always slower, and that hasn't changed. We're as dependent on big business today as ever, perhaps more so.

An upwardly mobility seeking suburban family would want their kids working at GE or IBM, versus today where finance and tech are the way.

The stagflation of the 70 and early 80s broke a lot of things in big companies, and magnified the impact of smaller competitors. Deregulation in finance, changes that defanged antitrust, and tax changes but the nail in the coffin for the old dinosaur companies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> There are some good excerpts from _Moral Mazes_ (book-length version) here: [https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/quotes-from-moral- ma...](https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/quotes-from-moral-mazes/)

<comment><USER8> Zvi has a lengthy Less Wrong sequence that builds on this.

[https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ham9i5wf4JCexXnkN/moloch- has...](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ham9i5wf4JCexXnkN/moloch-hasn-t-won)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> In recent years, working at a top tech company has become accepted by many as a path to success (if not success itself). Although Robert Jackall did his field research in the 80s in big industry, his work has a lot of great insights into what life is like in the FAANGs. Also, this was one of Aaron Swartz's "very favorite books."

</comment><comment><USER10> 1\. 1983 2\. I wish they were contracting it to other cultures — I wonder if there models that a different from American and what they look like.

<comment><USER2> > From the September 1983 Issue

Yeah, this should get a 1983 tag. This is a surprisingly old article to surface here.

<comment><USER11> Yup, and still as relevant today as the day it was published.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > "Managers rarely spoke to me of objective criteria for achieving success > because once certain crucial points in one's career are passed, success and > failure seem to have little to do with one's accomplishments. Rather, > success is socially defined and distributed."

I always thought that in IT, we have somewhat reliable metrics for measuring everyone's contributions. The above quote is as depressing as it is true...

</comment><comment><USER13> > "It's characterizing the reality of a situation with any description that is > necessary to make that situation more palatable to some group that matters. > It means that you have to come up with a culturally accepted verbalization > to explain why you are not doing what you are doing… [Or] you say that we > had to do what we did because it was inevitable; or because the guys at the > [regulatory] agencies were dumb; [you] say we won when we really lost; [you] > say we saved money when we squandered it; [you] say something's safe when > it's potentially or actually dangerous… Everyone knows that it's bullshit, > but it's accepted. This is the game."

Wow. This article wonderfully describes dysfunction in a (modern, chicken-shit IMO) corporation, operating much like a pyramid scheme.

Accepting responsibility is discouraged.

Rational plans to profitability are avoided in favor of "looking good" for at least as many years at the company as one needs in order to be hired by the next company, and upon leaving the lack of planning results in a disaster.

And on modern bureaucracy vs America's classical Protestant Ethic, now often ignored:

> The bureaucratic ethic contrasts sharply with the original Protestant Ethic. > The Protestant Ethic was the ideology of a self-confident and independent > propertied social class. It was an ideology that extolled the virtues of > accumulating wealth in a society organized around property and that accepted > the stewardship responsibilities entailed by property. It was an ideology > where a person's word was his bond and where the integrity of the handshake > was seen as crucial to the maintenance of good business relationships. > Perhaps most important, it was connected to a predictable economy of > salvation—that is, hard work will lead to success, which is a sign of one's > election by God—a notion also containing its own theodicy to explain the > misery of those who do not make it in this world.

> Bureaucracy, however, breaks apart substance from appearances, action from > responsibility, and language from meaning. Most important, it breaks apart > the older connection between the meaning of work and salvation. In the > bureaucratic world, one's success, one's sign of election, no longer depends > on one's own efforts and on an inscrutable God but on the capriciousness of > one's superiors and the market; and one achieves economic salvation to the > extent that one pleases and submits to one's employer and meets the > exigencies of an impersonal market.

And the punch-line:

> Men and women in bureaucracies turn to each other for moral cues for > behavior and come to fashion specific situational moralities for specific > significant people in their worlds.

> As it happens, the guidance they receive from each other is profoundly > ambiguous because what matters in the bureaucratic world is not what a > person is but how closely his many personae mesh with the organizational > ideal [....]

</comment><comment><USER14> > This ethic of ceaseless work and ceaseless renunciation of the fruits of > one's toil provided both the economic and the moral foundations for modern > capitalism.

Well, that turned into communism fast...

<comment><USER2> I'm sure the US was more concerned about communism in 1983 than it is today.

\----

There are some gems in this long-form rant. For example:

> Another important meaning of team play is putting in long hours at the > office. This requires a certain amount of sheer physical energy, even though > a great deal of this time is spent not in actual work but in social > rituals—like reading and discussing newspaper articles, taking coffee > breaks, or having informal conversations. These rituals, readily observable > in every corporation that I studied, forge the social bonds that make real > managerial work—that is, group work of various sorts—possible. One must > participate in the rituals to be considered effective in the work.

This very much appropriately states my experience of the modern workplace environment.

<comment><USER15> As a network guy this reminds me of how a lot of networking equipment (and also distributed system clusters) operate - you have this constant background overhead of chatting and gossiping and keeping in sync with your peer nodes, all so that when the actual work needs to be done you are on the same page. If you are not in that network, you can not get any of that work accomplished.</comment></comment></comment>


In praise of the mechanical keyboard - <AUTHOR> http://fusion.net/story/113869/in-praise-of-the-mechanical-keyboard/ <comment><USER4> > The best thing about typing on a mechanical keyboard, by far, is the sound. > The click-clack-click-clack is so familiar, and so soothing ...

Maybe it's soothing for the person hammering away on their mechanical keyboard, but for anyone unfortunate enough to share an office with said person it's excruciating. I really don't get why the whole noisy-keyboard-in- a-shared-office never gets any play when this is discussed. Am I just oversensitive to this?

<comment><USER5> > I really don't get why the whole noisy-keyboard-in-a-shared-office never > gets any play when this is discussed.

If it is a problem there is simple solution - private office, remote office or I fire the company. Simple. Effective. And why would anyone want to share office - I have no idea.

<comment><USER4> It's very good that you're in the sort of position where you can make a stand on that sort of thing - but I'm not quite there myself. In any case I do like a shared space ("office" was maybe incorrect in my original comment) but for people to be productive everyone needs to be just a little bit more considerate than if they had their own office.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > The best thing about typing on a mechanical keyboard, by far, is the sound.

The satisfaction for the sound is most likely a result of the tactile feedback. The 'clackiest' switches tend to also have the most pronounced tactile feedback. Pinning it to sounds is misrepresenting the advantages of mechanical keyboards and makes them sound like a novelty (which they are definitely not).

The satisfaction of mechanical keyboards comes from the feedback of knowing when the key has been pressed: enthusiasts claim (and I agree) that bottoming out keys is tiring for your fingers. The tactile response helps build muscle memory toward this goal.

One of the most sought after switches (Cherry MX Clear) are evidence of this: they are almost silent but have a strong tactile response.

> I'm not sure how my Das Keyboard 4 stacks up against the competition.

For a typist (or programmer) the switch is the most important feature of a keyboard. A Cherry MX Brown feels the same no matter which keyboard it is featured on - the only discerning feature on keyboards is their build and operational features (such as NKRO on gaming keyboards).

One final point: it might be a better idea to stick to a single type of switch everywhere. Mechanical keyboards are about building muscle memory - <USER2> different switches (which have different activation forces) probably works against you building it. I the long run your muscles will learn, but you will hit the plateau faster if you stick to one switch.

<comment> chao- Agreed on multiple points, but especially the muscle memory. Years ago I had a board with Cherry MX Reds, acquired in Japan when they were still almost unknown on any consumer models. Felt like a huge accomplishment in a keyboard geek pissing contest to say I had the board, but it wasn't useful in practice because I was so used to my MX Browns that shifting to Reds, even after a week of use, resulted in this huge increase of typos, an an overall discomforting feeling of uncertainty with the tool I was trying to use. I eventually gifted the board to a friend who had never owned a mechanical keyboard.

I still type on MX Browns to this day, but the next board I buy will definitely have MX Clears (or who knows, maybe I'll splurge on something Topre).

I've never been one for the sound, though. Distracting when I use one, and outright raises my blood pressure when it's someone else.

<comment><USER6> > I was so used to my MX Browns that shifting to Reds, even after a week of > use, resulted in this huge increase of typos

I also erroneously purchased a red keyboard. A coworker now uses it. The reason is likely that reds have __NO __tactile response, but medium sound.

<comment><USER7> Cherry Red switches are designed for gaming. Most of the time with games, you hold the key all the way down for a while instead of tapping on it and releasing it as soon as it actuates. So they're really not intended for typists.

(Because of this they actually make great modifier keys even for typists though, because modifier keys aren't meant to be tapped and released either, so they don't benefit from a tactile response.)

<comment><USER8> The reason that red switches are popular with (some) gamers is that they can be pulsed quickly right at the actuation point with very little rebound between presses.

The tactile switches, on the other hand, have to be allowed to return quite a bit more before they can activate a second time. Whether of silent design or not, they have to unclick before they can click again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Currently I always use an IBM Model M both at home and the office and I really, really love it.

I always had used Model M but stopped using them when I bought my first Mac because it came with a keyboard and I was lazy to order a PS2-USB converter, somewhat influenced by someone who told me they didn't really work well.

After some years with the Mac keyboard I felt like using again a mechanical keyboard, so I bought a Das Keyboard (Clicky - Blue Switch). I thought I would get the same feeling I had with the Model M, but it was totally different and I did not really like it (it felt a lot cheaper than the Model M, and the noise was similar to preparing pop corn).

Finally I decided to buy PS2-USB converters and was able to rescue the old IBM Model M keyboards I had (more than 20 years old), and I'm not looking back.

However, to use these beasts you need to have your own office (or home office) or else your colleges and loved ones will start complaining a lot.

<comment><USER10> Buy a Unicomp (pckeyboard.com) if you ever find yourself wanting of model M. I did about a month ago, after being sad at the cost of vintage model M keyboards that I had a small stock of many years ago. In short, the action is exactly the same as I remember, probably owing to using the same mechanism.

Further, I was able to buy a keyboard with dvorak layout (in hardware, not just the keycaps). You can also get them with caps and ctrl swapped and other such tomfoolery.

Only minor complaint is the extruded plastic casing for the keyboard is clearly not the best quality. You can see the way the plastic "flows." That said, I'm sure the thing is bulletproof given its weight. The mechanism itself is clearly of the highest quality, which is what counts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I invested in a Microsoft ergonomic natural 4000 keyboard. Probably the best thing I ever did, now i have significantly less wrist pain at the end of the day.

It did take a bit of getting used to though, but not that much, only a day or so.

Anyway, I used to have an old mechanical keyboard. Sure it made a nice click, but that's about it, I don't really get the whole "mechanical keyboards are the best" thing

<comment><USER12> I'm completely with you. I bought a Das Keyboard a couple of years ago that I ended up sending back after a week. It did absolutely nothing for me and had some quality issues anyway. I bought a Natural 4000 keyboard a couple of months ago and quickly became a convert. I've never had any wrist pain issues but it's still just a lot more comfortable than "normal" keyboards, which now feel awkward.

<comment><USER7> Luckily mechanical switches and ergonomic layouts aren't mutually exclusive. IMO you can get a lot more comfortable than the MS Natural by ditching the archaic row-staggering for a more finger-friendly vertical stagger.

<comment><USER13> No? Where are mech+ergo in the market? I only find BYOD in hacker sites and perhaps one from a company (don't remember the name), but is smallish and cost to much for me.

BTW, I have used Natural keyboards from the original model!, so the only thing that could me make change is ergo+mech, not just mech...

<comment><USER7> Quality isn't cheap; this is true across the board. There are a bunch of expensive ergo mech boards though:

* Kinesis Advantage, Maltron (the originals)

* Truly Ergonomic ([http://trulyergonomic.com/](http://trulyergonomic.com/))

* Infinity Ergodox ([https://www.massdrop.com/buy/infinity-ergodox?mode=guest_ope...](https://www.massdrop.com/buy/infinity-ergodox?mode=guest_open))

* Atreus ([http://atreus.technomancy.us](http://atreus.technomancy.us) disclaimer: I run this site)

* Ergodox EZ ([http://ergodox-ez.com/](http://ergodox-ez.com/))

* Keyboard.io ([http://keyboard.io](http://keyboard.io) still in preproduction)

* Axios ([http://axios.io](http://axios.io) still in preproduction)

<comment><USER13> Truly Ergonomic look like is the only ready to use, without extra hacking.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Have mechanical keyboards had any innovation since the release of Model M? I mean, if the technology had any potential, you would see it evolve over time, trying to get rid of unwanted properties (reduce weight, dimensions, loudness) while refining the good ones (keypress feel, durability, rollover).

The lack of innovation is a sign of manufacturers catering to the nostalgic&hipster audience who still can't get out of 1980s. Basically, every article about superior mechanical keyboards reads exactly like audiophile- targeted articles telling how vinyl sound is superior to CDs/digital.

<comment><USER15> Or maybe it's a result of people not thinking about keyboards much? Technology evolution is driven by profit from a solid userbase, and right now the userbase is fairly small, so there isn't much extra money for R&D.

<comment><USER16> While there may not be much evolution in switches, there is a lot of recent evolutions in keyBOARDs.

Some examples: two new versions of the ergodox announced more or less simultaneously:

ErgoDox Infinity [https://www.massdrop.com/buy/infinity- ergodox?mode=guest_ope...](https://www.massdrop.com/buy/infinity- ergodox?mode=guest_open)

ErgoDox EZ [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ergodox-ez-an- incredible-...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ergodox-ez-an-incredible- mechanical-keyboard)

Massdrop's Infinity [https://www.massdrop.com/article/the-story-behind- infinity-a...](https://www.massdrop.com/article/the-story-behind-infinity-a- community-designed-keyboard)

Keyboardio [http://www.keyboard.io/](http://www.keyboard.io/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Membrane keyboards are not all that bad.

I moved from macbooks to thinkpads for many reasons (including freedom - <USER3> want a machine that runs coreboot) but the keyboard was just a big unexpected surprise.

Now, I am a big fan of the pre-X220 "classic" 7 rows keyboards, found on every model before. It's simple, comfortable and standard. I remember how a Thinkpad 600 felt "good" about 15 years ago, and now I just get the same good feeling back. Maybe it's nostalgia, but it feels quite good.

For my desktop computer, I have a SK8845 (same thinkpad keyboard in usb form factor), with a trackpoint + a trackpad + 5 mouse buttons all in one device. Very handy, and no window keys to bother me. You can fetch a new one off ebay for like $30. The SK8855 are expansive - a new one will set you back by $200.

Before that thinkpad keyboard, still in a membrane, I enjoyed the Apple raised USB keyboard- not the contemporary aluminum chiclet keyboard, the plastic one. On amazon, it's the M9034LL [http://www.amazon.com/Apple-M9034LL-A-USB- Keyboard/dp/B0000A...](http://www.amazon.com/Apple-M9034LL-A-USB- Keyboard/dp/B0000ACOBG)

I guess for me the difference is not so much the hipster "click" noise but the size of the key. I don't want an empty space between my keys.

EDIT: fixed the model numbers

</comment><comment><USER18> I used to try an old IBM model M in the office but my colleagues would not accept the noise. Also I found it a bit loud myself. Currently I am using various IBM/Lenovo Standard Server Keyboards - I can recommend them.

<comment><USER19> Same here, my coworkers danced in joy when I finally moved it home. Currently using various Thinkpad keyboards at work, and the Cherry Stream XT on desktops (cheap and sturdy, love it).

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I use a HHKB Pro 2 in the office and would have a very hard time giving it up. It is a joy to type on, I can reach all of the keys very easily and the CTRL key is correctly placed; what more could I want?

Yes, I could get by with an 'ordinary' keyboard. I don't feel as though my typing speed or accuracy improves vastly. But, it's comfortable, beautiful, has a very premium feel, makes a satisfying 'thunk', and my hands are on it all day; I'd buy another in a heartbeat if this one disappeared.

</comment><comment><USER21> The author describes his experience with mechanical switches being more tough on fingers than the switches of mainstream. I have found the opposite; mechanical switches are both more light to type and easier on the fingers itself. And unlike the usual rubber dome keyboards, mechanical switches don't harden over the years just like that.

<comment><USER7> IIRC he says that it's rougher on the fingers when you're first learning because you constantly bottom out. The trick is to release immediately as it actuates, but this takes a while to adjust to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I use a mechanical keyboard in the office, and It's definitely louder than the membrane keyboard I use on my laptop. However, I don't bottom out my keys anymore, and the click of the keypresses is quieter than anyone else in my office who types more aggressively and bottoms out.

<comment><USER23> It totally depends on the switches used. That is mentioned in the article, but he is focussing too much on the sound to make that stick. Yes, MX-Blue are quite loud. The mentioned MX-Brown are louder than a normal keyboard as well, but even they are not really loud. Then come MX-Black, who have no click sound at all, and should not be loud at all.

There are some alternatives, the old MX-Crystal (?), or MX-Green and Red, and I'm only talking about Cherry. The author mentioned sour fingers, he probably should get a keyboard with switches that need less force (with the MX-Brown he should already have on, if I'm not mistaken).

Mechanical keyboards are no hipster-device for YOLO-sound (wow, that hurts to write, and it hurt to read). They are the better tool for a job, if you write much. It's a bit sad to see the article misrepresenting that, even though it is nice to see them appreciated.

Tip: If you want to try a mechanical keyboard without fluff and hype price, look into the basic cherry lines, G80-3000 especially. They have the same switches and cost the half.

<comment><USER24> I got a basic cherry board, and the USB connection in the back broke after about a month's use. I take it with me with my laptop - which could explain the additional wear and tear, but I've not been doing anything other than typing and removing the cable when moving the laptop - I can't say I'm impressed with the life. (YMMV, of course)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> There is a reason why Pianists still love and use mechanical, wooden keyboards designed 100 years ago.

<comment><USER26> Pre-WWI pianos from Vienna (the one I met was a Steinway) still have ivory on the keys instead of some white coating they have on the keys now. Those ivory keys are unlike any other piano I've touched. Amazingly contradictory feelings of how sturdy the keys feel without the cold-edges. Very soft, but hard at the same time. Amazing.

<comment><USER25> You probably mean Bösendorfer? This is a Viennese company, Steinway not. Their playability is incredible. The touch and sensibility of such instruments even from 1910 (restored) is unbelievable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> One would save much more time by switching to alternative keyboard layouts (dvorak, or something that was on HN mentioned as more code-friendly).

Typing for programmer is probably the least of a problem, we spend order of magnitude time thinking.

<comment><USER7> Much like switching to Dvorak, moving to a better key switch isn't about speed; it's about comfort and satisfaction.

<comment><USER27> Speed was the only reasonable argument in this article.

I don't get how you can get better 'accuracy' on a 0|1 button.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Problems with mechanical keyboards - unavailable in Europe, extremely expensive in Europe or always some twisted and perverted layout (qwertz, UK or other travesties).

<comment><USER28> well, not entirely.

Amazon.de has US keyboard layouts (I bought three different products from them with US keyboards) and all the "brick-and-mortar" stores in Sweden which stock mech keyboards have the native nordic layout.

they are very much available in the EU, your point about having the native layouts is true though- but that will be true for all keyboards in all counties- people always stock the native and almost never another countries.

<comment><USER5> Have you checked prices compared to overseas though. Even if you add VAT they are still more expensive. With the euro crashing it the price disparity is reduced though. But it was annoying 2-3 years ago.

<comment><USER28> depends where you look I guess, I think in east asia it's cheaper, but that might be because they're mostly produced there.

remember to not include USA because they do not compute sales tax on the list price, only after check-out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Please produce a _notebook_ with a _good keyboard_ , again.

ThinkPad T420 and X220, you will be missed :'(

</comment><comment><USER30> I hereby declare my love for the Cooler Master Storm Quick Fire XT with Cherry MX Brown switches. It's cheap and entry level but it is my first mechanical keyboard and the tactile feedback is incredible.</comment>


NetNewsWire 5.0: Open-Source RSS Reader for Mac - <AUTHOR> https://ranchero.com/netnewswire/ <comment><AUTHOR> NetNewsWire has been around in various forms since 2002. It's great to see it's back from the dead.

Source code is here: [https://github.com/brentsimmons/NetNewsWire](https://github.com/brentsimmons/NetNewsWire)

<comment><USER2> Historically, it's been an awesome app. I just launched this new version and it pulled up all of my old feeds and refreshed them very quickly (I have no idea the last version I had installed).

For those, like me, who remember the app fondly, but can't remember the whole history Wikipedia has a dry version: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetNewsWire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetNewsWire)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> So what does it offer that Feedbin itself doesn't provide?

I especially ask because I never found a compatible mobile app that was even as good as Feedbin's web UI. Being better than Feedbin on a desktop browser strikes me as difficult.

</comment><comment><USER4> Based on the praise others have been giving this, I can't help but feel I'm reviewing a completely different app.

To me, supporting only Feedbin is a showstopper and woefully insufficient considering its contemporaries all support half a dozen or more RSS aggregators out of the box. I'm not about to completely switch providers just to try out a different RSS reader.

I also find it strange any development effort at all went into "On My Mac" as an option. Local-only RSS is functionally useless to me since at any given time I'm reading either on two different Macs, an iPad, or an iPhone. No RSS reader is an island!

I get it, it's open source and free, and I suppose if you value that over a product's functionality and usefulness, then NetNewsWire's the RSS reader for you. But for me, this is simply not good enough.

<comment><USER5> What a sad, pathetic comment. Apparently you have no appreciation for the interesting, important history of this app and how its original author decided to bring it back to life. If NewNewsWire 5.0 doesn't work for you, don't use it and keep your snark to yourself.

<comment><AUTHOR> The complains give me a different appreciation of this: [https://inessential.com/2019/08/20/immunization](https://inessential.com/2019/08/20/immunization)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What's the HN term for "slashdotted"? Because that's probably what happened here, site is down.

<comment><USER7> it's HN's hug ( of death ).</comment></comment>


Why Elon Musk keeps raising the price of Tesla's Full Self-Driving option - tech-historian https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/20/21264345/elon-musk-tesla-full-self-driving-autopilot-price-increase <comment><AUTHOR> I used to think that Tesla was about eventually making cars that would be affordable to the most people. Now he plans to increase the price even after buying a car? No thanks. And I would never trust people to behave in a robotaxi if that ever becomes a thing.</comment>


Ask HN: Has technology ruined our life or improved it? - <AUTHOR> It's true that technological progress has helped humanity unlocking some mysteries and solving many problems, but on the other hand it contributed to the increasing rates of depression and other health problems (due to lack of physical movement). It is also associated with increasing surveillance and mass manipulation (AI and social media algos).<p>So it's important to know if technology is overall good or bad? And what to do to make its outcome better? <comment><USER2> What technologies?</comment>


Haproxy-1.9.0 - <AUTHOR> https://firstname.lastname@example.com/msg32143.html <comment><USER2> Nice! I have been looking forward to this day. 1.9 adds more control around caching and caching bigger objects which means I can dump a middle layer of caching servers.</comment>


HackerNews API: What if HN does not have API? Make API on the fly with APIfy - <AUTHOR> http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fca535156983f0001000002 <comment><USER2> Hah! tectonic and I applied to YC with almost exactly this in 2009?!

We went as far as building a browser-based IDE-like environment for generating these, and a language called parsley for expressing the scrapes. If you're interested in this, you could check out some of our related open source libraries:

Edit: I just open-sourced the scraping wiki site we created here: <https://github.com/fizx/parselets_com>

<http://selectorgadget.com>

<https://github.com/fizx/parsley>

<https://github.com/fizx/parsley-ruby>

<https://github.com/fizx/pyparsley>

<https://github.com/fizx/csvget>

        > cat hn.let
        {
          "headlines":[{
            "title": ".title a",
            "link": ".title a @href",
            "comments": "match(.subtext a:nth-child(3), '\\d+')",
            "user": ".subtext a:nth-child(2)",
            "score": "match(.subtext span, '\\d+')",
            "time": "match(.subtext, '\\d+\\s+\\w+\\s+ago')"
          }]
        }
        > csvget --directory-prefix=./data  -A "/x" -w 5 --parselet=hn.let http://news.ycombinator.com/
        > head data/headlines.csv
        comments,title,time,link,score,user
        4,Simpson's paradox: why mistrust seemingly simple statistics,2 hours ago,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox,41,waldrews
        67,America's unjust sex laws,2 hours ago,http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14165460,59,MikeCapone
        23,Buy somebody lunch,3 hours ago,http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2009/08/buy-somebody-lu.php,58,DanielBMarkham

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you mind if i use selector gadget in APIfy? I use firebug and firefinder to get selectors. But i can't expect everyone to have the same tools.

<comment><USER2> Everything mentioned is MIT-licensed, and like many OSS authors, we would love any ideas or code in there to be widely used in virtually any capacity.

Also, if you're in or near SF, I'd be happy to get coffee sometime.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for suggesting SelectorGadget. I ended up building an in-browser firebug+firefinder clone to make the app even more easier to use. Please check out Preview webpage for any API

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> HN does have an API: <http://www.hnsearch.com/api>

<comment><USER4> I wish HN had a API which could write - the hnsearch one was only read-only when I used it. I tried writing a tool for HN (<https://github.com/pbiggar/hackerite>) that needed to be able to upvote stories, and although hacks existed to make it work, it wasn't a very pleasant experience.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hacker News content is expired every 1 hour.

Hacker New Newest links are also available here: <http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fca651b8526fe0001000002>

Other APIs are never expired (Expire feature is still not pushed)

</comment><comment><USER5> My problem with HackerNews API (having done something like this -- the Hacker News Filter on Github) is that you get throttled after you hit a certain number of HTTP requests and your IP gets banned for a certain amount of time.

So as nice as this is, it simply won't work here for the many people who would like to use near live data on HN.

<comment><AUTHOR> The page contents are cached and page is fetched every 1 hour. In fact cache is expired only for HackerNews API from the backend. Expiry feature is still not pushed

<comment><USER5> Might be the best you can do but the problem still exists.

<comment><USER6> Proxy your traffic through tor, and you are set.

This is not saying you should do it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> We have had an HN API for a while now: <http://api.ihackernews.com/>

<comment><USER8> This API is extremely unreliable and has a great deal of functionality missing as well (commenting, voting). The original developer is also no longer maintaining it. I tried to build an Hacker News app using it some time ago and abandoned the idea very quickly.

Hacker News needs a real API.

<comment><USER7> I have been using it for a few years now. It does give a error quite often (1 out of 10 requests on average), but for what I'm using, it is pretty solid (as long as I retry when these errors occur).

The lack of functionality: it had it. The problem is that it not only required user/password, but it also was caught into HN's safety net, that prevents multiple accounts from the same IP to do a lot of stuff.

So it can work as library, but not as a server-side API. Therefore he removed it.

For another project of mine[1], I used Hacker News search API[2], which is really consistent, and really powerful, and is maintained by the the yc company that does ThriftDB[3]

[1]<http://hnwho.com/>

[2] <http://www.hnsearch.com/api>

[3] [http://venturebeatprofiles.com/news/view/y-combinator?articl...](http://venturebeatprofiles.com/news/view/y-combinator?article=398456)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Can you add support for CORS (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross- origin_resource_sharing>)?

Can you add support for taking existing JSON API (rather than scraping HTML)? This useful for APIs that are neither accessible with CORS nor JSONP, APIs that are provided by incompetent mental midgets who don't answer emails or participate to their Google Group ( _cough_ MBTA _cough_ ).

<comment><AUTHOR> If i understood correctly JSONP supports only GET but CORS supports all http methods. APIfy can only provide GET Requests (Index and Show) over a static html page

<comment><USER10> That's one of the advantages of CORS. The other advantage is it allows cross- domain XMLHttpRequest requests in the browser, which will have better error handling than JSONP.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Seems to be fried. (Popularity is a good sign.)

So, it's basically a web-scraper, but with a JSON API. The API input is limited to a single parameter, that indexes the record to be scraped. The API output is taken from that indexed record, consisting of a set of scraped elements within that record, and presented as JSON, with attributes named as user specified.

Although this is limited to a list of renamed records, it could be extended (if needed), and I really like the concept and UI implementation. Feedback: As someone who has never used css, I found it very tricky to even duplicate the tutorial: selectors are sensitive to leading and trailing spaces; the selectors given in the tute aren't what's needed (and see BTW below); and often "API call failed: Internal Server Error" indicating a problem with the selector, but not what it is, and ATM service is often "unavailable" :), it's slow switching back and forth between "edit" and "test" (why not include testing on the same page? like HN comment edits: textarea + rendered result); when an attribute is removed, it remains in the JSON (code eg <http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fcb26d7a06a160001000024>); it takes a long time (30s, 1min) to get a result. I hate to say it, but it's like my experience with ruby: it takes so much time and effort to get the tool to basically work, that I've used up all my enthusiasm/gumption and have none left for the project I had in mind. But much of this is because of current traffic spike, my ignorance of css, and minor polishing/bugs that can be fixed in vers 1.1 - as I said, I really like the idea and UI.

But a deeper question: why a service, instead of a library? It's cross- language, but has an extra dependency (the service), an extra network jump, processing from many users convening at one point. It's interesting to me, because the world seems to be moving towards services, and this would logically include _components that formerly would be libraries_. Will this happen? What are the pros and cons? Will Amazon etc provide free computation for users of open-source components, analogous to open-source libraries? Interesting.

BTW: minor typo/bug in active URLs in the tute (<http://apify.heroku.com/tutorial/create>): an extra "s" in "episodess":

      http://apify.heroku.com/api/big_bang_theory_episodess.json
      http://apify.heroku.com/api/big_bang_theory_episodess/5.json

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback. Will fix it in a future version.

Service is just an extension of this library:

<https://github.com/sathish316/scrapify>

The intent of service is to make mobile apps without a backend/db like Parse for read only APIs

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Looks interesting. I just tried to scrap a sample API but got an error with no further information on why it was broken:

[http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fca83088526fe000100011a/e...](http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fca83088526fe000100011a/edit)

<comment><USER12> After playing around with it some more, it's working. Question, are you going to introduce REGEX or any other rules or even some helper functions to further process the API? That would allow us to drill down even further. It is really great for bootstrapping and getting some live data quickly. Kudos!

<comment><AUTHOR> Regex is not yet pushed to the webapp. Regex support is available in the gem used by APIfy <https://github.com/sathish316/scrapify>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is it broken right now? It just says "API call failed: Internal Server Error" when I hit Test API.

There's also a good API which powers my favorite Android HN app over here: <http://hndroidapi.appspot.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> I just fixed it. Someone removed an attribute by mistake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This might be a stupid question and perhaps I didn't look hard enough on your website, but is this open source? I didn't see a GitHub link anywhere. I'm specifically curious as to how you routed Noko or whatever scraping library you're using to do its thing.

<comment><AUTHOR> The webapp is not open source. But the underlying library Scrapify is open source. It internally uses Nokogiri if that's what your question.

<https://github.com/sathish316/scrapify#readme>

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Does not work with twitter [1].

"API call failed: Internal Server Error"

[1] <http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fcb23c5a06a160001000014>

<comment><AUTHOR> If html content is loaded using ajax, you have to give the URL of the Ajax request html. See [http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fc2a234ae684d0001000008/e...](http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fc2a234ae684d0001000008/edit) for example.

It won't work for #! URLs. Twitter has a nice streaming API for search if that's what you're looking for.

<comment><USER15> * Ajax responses are often JSON content. How do I apply a CSS/XPath selector on it?

* I guess #! URLs could be transformed into _escaped_fragment_ URLs [1]

* I know twitter has an API. It was just an example. Maybe this example [2] would be more relevant (content could also be fetched with an _escaped_fragment_ URL).

[1] [https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax- crawling/docs/...](https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax- crawling/docs/specification)

[2] <http://apify.heroku.com/resources/4fcb2f7ba06a160001000044>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Did anyone ever make an API that could read a user's upvoted/saved articles from HN? It would require some kind of login credentials, as the data is not public.

<comment><USER17> Simply record the HTTP requests happening when you access that page. You probably have to pass the Cookie along through the header for the credentials to work.

But it's just HTTP, so it's basically already an API.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> If you're creating APIs, please add Attributes. To get quick help on css or xpath selectors for attributes press c or x in site.

</comment><comment><USER18> Does this work for sites that are behind logins? Didn't see anything related to authentication but may have missed it.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is no authentication mechanism right now. Only public sites are supported

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is this related to <http://www.apifydoc.com/>?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not related. APIfy is a web frontend for a small library i've written to scrap webpages

<https://github.com/sathish316/scrapify>.

The advantage of the app over the library is caching and automatic expiry

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> would be cool if all the APIs created via APIfy are automatically listed into Mashape.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Somebody created an API in APIfy to list all APIfy APIs. Recursive and awesome. I just need to fix and make it work.

<comment><USER20> cool - let me know when it's ready</comment></comment></comment>


Five ways to lie with charts - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/19/illusions/five-ways-to-lie-with-charts <comment><USER2> There's a well-regarded book on this matter that I still hope to read someday "How To Lie With Statistics": [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics)

Ah, just discovered the book can be read for free online: [https://archive.org/details/HowToLieWithStatistics](https://archive.org/details/HowToLieWithStatistics)</comment>