Bertrand Russell's 10 Commandments for Teachers - <AUTHOR> http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/05/bertrand-russells-10-commandments-for-teachers.html <comment><USER2> I have one additional commandment, which I try to follow, and which is either a corollary to or a summary of several of Russell's:

 _Always keep in mind that at least some of your students will be smarter than you. Give them what they need and don't treat them as a threat._

They may not yet be as knowledgeable as you (presumably not, at least in your area of expertise), and if you're particularly smart there may not be very many of them, but they'll show up someday and from time to time. This commandment manifests in various ways, from something as simple as a willingness to say "I don't know" on up to giving students an alternate, challenging path through an assignment when they're bored with the default.

IME, the best teachers all (possibly subconsciously) followed this rule, and it was violations of this rule that made the worst teachers so bad.

<comment><USER3> This is a needless restatement of things Russell said so much more elegantly. Your addition conveys no useful advice and yet manages to be both vague and vacuous, possibly you are a teacher.

<comment><USER4> I downvoted you. Here is why:

\- that last parenthetical 'possibly you are a teacher'. It is clear from his post he is a teacher. That comment is an attempt to lend credence to your assertions by making yourself seem insightful and semi-clairvoyant, by 'guessing' he is a teacher. We all understand he is a teacher. I hate it when people use sneaky fallacies like that.

\- You accuse someone of 'not giving useful advice' and 'managing to be vague and vacuous', when you yourself do not offer any useful advice and fail to explain _why_ the statements you are responding to would be 'vague and vacuous', making your own statement 'vague and vacuous'. When harshly criticizing someone, always make sure the criticism doesn't apply to your own argument or yourself. It prevents you from looking like a hypocrite.

\- It is completely unclear what you intend to achieve with your criticism. Do you honestly believe someone will respond like 'oh jeez, you're right, how could I be so silly?'. Your post is abrasive and will not achieve its goal. Did it even have a purpose other than 'throwing your thoughts out there'? If not: please stew on them a bit longer next time and explain _why_ you are telling us this.

\- In fact, the post you respond to makes a very practical point, much more practical than the more 'vague' general rules Russell provides. It is not a 'needless restatement': it is a much needed explication of what practical behavior these rules lead to. It provides an example of an application of Russell's principles, that makes those principles concrete.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Titling this Russel's "10 commandments for teachers" is very misleading. He included these under the title "A Liberal Decalogue" [ * ] in his autobiography and as far as I can tell there's nothing to suggest that he was addressing them to teachers in particular.

* <http://www.panarchy.org/russell/decalogue.1951.html>

<comment> why-el He did identify himself as a teacher, saying "The Ten Commandments that, as a teacher, I should wish to promulgate..". So he clearly wants to see those commandments followed by teachers.

<comment><USER6> I think the parent is right. Russell was presenting the ten commandments that he would teach, in constrast to those taught at sunday school.

There's also the legendary section of his C.V.:

Awards and honours

1950: Nobel prize for literature

193?: Pronounced morally unfit to teach at university by the supreme court of New York state

<comment><USER7> _"When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husband or your children"_

He is clearly speaking to what he perceives as being an adult female demographic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What a coincidence, just this morning I read an account of "How Bertrand Russell was prevented from teaching at the College of of the City of New York" [1]. The judge deemed him to be a dangerous influence on students because he would undermine their morals. Therefor he should not be allowed to teach there.

Reading his 10 commandmends affirms for me that he was the wiser man. He taught later at Harvard and received a Nobel Prize for Literature.

[1]: [http://www.skeptic.ca/Russell_&_CUNY.pdf](http://www.skeptic.ca/Russell_&_CUNY.pdf)

<comment><USER9> Firstly, reading the 10 Commandments, I didnt feel an instant connection to Teachers, rather a loose set of values for all. So I came back to Hackernews to read the comments, thanks to Michiel throwing the titbit of information about his rejection from New York, I went on to discover a fascinating individual, via wikipedia lead me down the rabbit hole of self-learning of a few other interesting folks who were closely or loosely linked to Bertrand. All this whilst sat on a boat, via 3G. (The world we live in is amazing!)

Take a moment to read his wiki entry and then ponder quietly to yourself, what sort of activities, Bertrand Russell would have championed today.

<comment><USER10> If you've got the time to spare, even a passing interest in philosophy, and haven't read it already, I can't recommend his History of Western Philosophy highly enough. It's delivered with a tone that really imparts a sense of Russell's enthusiasm both for the subject and for teaching; I've never found 900 pages easier to read or more informative :)

<comment><USER11> Russell's "History of Western Philosophy" is a wonderful book, but I am told by people more expert in the history of philosophy than I am that it's not terribly accurate. I don't think that's much reason not to read it, but treat knowledge acquired from it with caution.

(Allegedly Anthony Kenny's big single-volume history of philosophy is more accurate and also enjoyable to read. I have it on my shelves but haven't opened it yet, so can't confirm or deny that.)

<comment><USER10> Yeah, I was advised to bear in mind that it was very much coloured by Russell's take on things.

In some ways, I treat it like a wikipedia article -- a mostly-good overview, which can be used as a guide to look up more rigorous accounts of any particular topics that interest you, but is kinda biased. But it's better written than wikipedia, and I'm more interested in Russell's bias than a random netizen's ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> For those who who are curious, he's also a famous logician, mathematician and pacifist in addition to being a philosopher [1].

My first introduction to mathematical logic, set theory and axiomatics [2] was thru his work because he made everything so accessible as a writer and a thinker. What a remarkable mind.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell> [2] <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/>

<comment><USER13> I think he was also into eugenics and forced sterilization.

<comment><USER14> You appear to oppose those things¹ - I'd certainly be interested in your reasoning. Is/Should reproduction be a basic right of _all_ people that can not be withdrawn (despite many states in the world advocating death sentences).

Is there something wrong generally with wanting to improve the genetic make up of the world's human population - most of us practice a mild [innate] form of eugenics in our mate selection don't we?

Or is it specifics of what Russell advocates that are most clearly wrong in your view?

Probably this is going too far OT ...?

<comment><USER13> Eugenics is mass murder and and forced sterilization is the murder of the unborn. There's plenty of resources and goodwill to make up for unwanted groups by a certain few. You take your mate selection and keep it to yourself.

I haven't looked deeply into Russells reasonings and theories in this area, nor do I want to.

<comment><USER14> Eugenics can be practised without premature death of any person. So I'm afraid you need to do better on that argument.

Sterilisation, eg vasectomy, can be done without any loss of life; so ditto on that argument.

<comment><USER13> Well, let's hope useless eaters like yourself get vasectomies or just euthanize yourselves for the Sake of Humanity, in which you are having great trouble assimilating. That's why you're just a figment of the imagination and should remain that way.

<comment><USER14> > _useless eaters_ //

Not an insult I'm familiar with - can you explain.

<comment><USER13> For you.. nup.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> #6 Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do the opinions will suppress you.

Who is this guy, The Sphinx? If you do not learn to master your rage, your rage will become your master!

</comment><comment><USER16> Most of these apply to politicians too.

<comment><USER17> Most of these SHOULD apply to politicians too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is from the "Brain Pickings weekly" curated newsletter - <http://www.brainpickings.org/> (see the "hat tip" in that post). The topics featured in that newsletter would appeal to HNers I think and I recommend it.

</comment><comment><USER19> A good reminder that scientific thought and "authority" are often at odds. I try to keep this in mind when I hear statements that x% of scientists are purported to "believe" in anthropogenic global warming.

<comment><USER20> As opposed to looking at all the varieties of evidence which point to (almost certainly largely anthropogenic) global warming?

<comment><USER20> For example: <http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/early-bloom.html></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do you live in a city in the United States? - <AUTHOR> I'm working on an idea for a SaaS product that is geared towards cities in the United States. I'm trying to gain a better understanding of a specific landscape in cities across the United States. I don't want to share too many details on this post but if you live in a major city in the United States and would be willing to answer a couple questions I would greatly appreciate it.<p>My email is firstname.lastname@example.com <comment><USER2> Maybe hop in your car and take a tour?

<comment><AUTHOR> Unfortunately, I don't have the finances to do that or the available time. An investor contacted my University and is interested in acquiring my idea from me. I built out my MVP to serve a hyper-niche market and I'd like to familiarize myself with as much information as possible pertaining to other cities so I can form an understanding of the potential scalability of my idea. This meeting is in a week so I'm pressed for time and don't have the financial resources to go city-hopping.

<comment><USER2> Hmm... needs data stat, can't go reap data their self, asks for free data from locals... So you want to flip our info for a quick profit. Nice.

I have a really hard time believing you have something to offer given that you seem to be just starting a research phase you are unwilling to invest in beyond a post on HN.</comment></comment></comment>


Truth about Fukushima Daiichi - <AUTHOR> http://www.cringely.com/2011/09/truth-about-fukushima-daiichi/

<comment><USER2> cringely is not where I go for wisdom about nuclear saftey. and maybe a few other things as well.</comment>


Build a crawler to crawl million pages with only one machine in just 2 hours - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@tonywangcn/how-to-build-a-scaleable-crawler-to-crawl-million-pages-with-a-single-machine-in-just-2-hours-ab3e238d1c22 <comment><USER2> Not too long ago I built a small webcrawler using Node.js, figuring that crawlers spend most of their time waiting (e.g. downloading) and therefore Node.js would be well suited. At the time I found crawlers written in Python were fairly slow, which is not a surprise. It is backed by Redis and is pretty fast even on a single process. [https://github.com/brendonboshell/supercrawler](https://github.com/brendonboshell/supercrawler)

<comment><USER3> Can you beat the article's 800 concurrent connections & 12GB RAM used to scrape 100000 pages in 15 minutes, with just one process?

Not close to a real comparison without the same URLs, but still fun to compare.

<comment><USER2> I've just run a small test (crawling a server running locally) and it comes out at 243 pages per second with one process. This crawls a webpage, adds its links to the queue and saves the URL in a Redis set. This is running on a Macbook Pro.

<comment><USER4> So you eliminated the biggest cause of slow down in crawling, network latency, and are asserting yours is faster?

<comment><USER2> The selling point of Node.js is asynchronous I/O. I'm sure you mean bandwidth rather than network latency - in which case that is really not a limiting factor when running in a datacenter (40 Gbps in at Linode for example).

<comment><AUTHOR> Some library in python ,such as asyncio or gevent could do some work asynchronously and efficently. I will have a test later for these library. In the meanwhile , welcome to post more details about asynchronous of Node.js. Thanks for your comment again!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Did I read that right? "it's necessary to deploy docker clusters to maximize performance of your machine" to get the performance out of a single system?

<comment><USER6> I had the same initial thought too - but he said he's creating a crawler that is meant to be distributed - in which case it's fine to use Docker since it makes the deployment on multiple machines simpler.

However that ram usage though...ugh

<comment><USER7> Is there really much overhead of wrapping processes in docker containers vs orchestrating them via a process manager? Since containers are basically a set of mounts and namespaces, what memory overhead do containerized processes incur that non-containerized processes do not? I am under the impression that a container does not add very much memory overhead itself; it's the process(es) _inside_ the containers that add memory overhead. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

<comment><USER6> Didn't really mean Docker was the cause of the memory usage. I mean it might add a little overhead, but afaict the article's memory usage comes from the fact he's using a bunch of heavy python libraries making each process come to about 300mb and running 40 workers.

You could get the same performance within 600mb by using 2 processes each running 20 threads.

But I guess hardware is cheap.

<comment><USER7> 2 processes = 2 GIL

There is no avoiding the GIL within a single Python process (even with asyncio IIRC, though I've been using JS lately). Multiprocessing is usually the most efficient way to execute I/O intensive, independent parallel operations. Of course you can also run threads within each process.

I do wonder where the 300mb memory is coming from. Surely it can't all be python interpreter? It doesn't look like he's importing 300mb of modules, unless MongoClient really is that big. In that case he could create a separate worker process for persisting data, and only that worker process needs to load the MongoClient module.

One explanation for the memory overhead might be conntrack tables within the network namespace of the container. However I would expect that conntrack table to be on the host, where SNAT is performed. As an aside, the default Docker networking configuration is really not well suited to concurrent network requests, whether inbound or outbound. If you can avoid NAT (and therefore a conntrack table), that is preferable.

This stack could also benefit from tuning some kernel parameters, both within the containers and on the host. Great blog post with details: [https://blog.packagecloud.io/eng/2017/02/06/monitoring- tunin...](https://blog.packagecloud.io/eng/2017/02/06/monitoring-tuning-linux- networking-stack-sending-data/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your comment. Great article for networking. I'm not so familiar with NAT of linux, so could you post more details about it with python or docker, performance/advantage or something else?

Thanks again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> In the Clojure side of things, I recently used this [1] to scrape/parse ~4m pages in a few hours. It's very plug-and-play, but maintains a pretty decent amount of extensibility. Parsing using Tika turned out to be extremely useful.

While it's on topic.. anyone have any other recommendations for web crawlers? I'm particularly interested in finding unique identifiers (phone numbers, emails) and their contexts on gov-owned websites for a project.

[0] [https://github.com/junjiemars/itsy](https://github.com/junjiemars/itsy)

<comment><AUTHOR> Great crawler, Thanks for your share.

<comment><USER8> Agreed. It's probably save me over 100 hours of work in the past two months.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to use something like aiohttp? [https://pawelmhm.github.io/asyncio/python/aiohttp/2016/04/22...](https://pawelmhm.github.io/asyncio/python/aiohttp/2016/04/22/asyncio- aiohttp.html) With no docker, or anything like that.

I know the benchmarks cannot really be compared, since one involves a queue, and mongo, while the other does not. But, it seems like a prime use case for async.

<comment><USER6> Could also use multiprocessing, got about ~500req/s returning a 'hello world' response (which the article also does). The article does about 300req/s but that's because he saturates his pipe. The reality is the article might be faster than 1,000,000/hour.

        from multiprocessing import Pool
        from requests import get
        urls = 1000 * ['http://localhost/hello']
        def scrape(url):
            return get(url).text
        p = Pool(40)
        results = p.map(scrape, urls)

~2.2 seconds on a dual core 2.2ghz

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your comment. If you have the same test with cloud server or some public website , perhaps it will decrease some.

I've used multiprocessing/threads/geven/asyncio before. And I will have a full test with these libraries.

Thanks again!

<comment><USER6> As I said, the benchmark is flawed since it's dependent on the network pipe. It would be a good idea to run tests locally so you get a real maximum.

There are lots of factors involved which can completely skew benchmarks, for example, if you were scraping an average 10kb response instead of 'hello world' you would automatically be limited to 100req/s on a 10mbit pipe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> You might want to set a specific user-agent for your crawler

</comment><comment><USER11> Seems like this wouldn't really be useful to scrape js rendered content or any content of "real" value that had any kind of rate limiting or monitoring enabled. Spreading the ip space and making scraping look like genuine user input is a far greater challenge than spinning up a RMQ cluster.

<comment><AUTHOR> You are right. But with more codes or tools , it could do this too. It's just a quick demo for distributed crawler. If you moniter traffic of your target website with js rendered content, you will find json file and json api. And what you need next is just the same code in my article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Another worthwhile article if you are building a crawler. [http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/how-to-crawl-a-quarter- bil...](http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/how-to-crawl-a-quarter-billion- webpages-in-40-hours/)

<comment><AUTHOR> I've seen this article.Great article about distributed crawler. Mine just is a demo version of his.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Crawling described here is very inefficient. For efficient and high performance crawling I recommend libcurl and curlmulti.

</comment><comment><USER14> Question to the experts here:

\- What is the relevance of Docker here? I'm pretty sure that celery+rabbitmq are enough to do a distributed scraper...

<comment><USER15> I think the OP just drank the docker kool-aid :) It's also the future, obvs. [https://circleci.com/blog/its-the-future/](https://circleci.com/blog/its-the- future/)

> and learn how to use docker and celery

Seems the OP was learning Docker at the time? I think it just comes down to the tools you're comfortable with.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Who are the 100 people who most changed the world? - <AUTHOR> Norman Borlaug invented dwarf wheat and in so doing allowed the earth to support billions more people.
Mikhail Kalashnikov invented a weapon which changed the world map and the ability of the common man to fight governments (and vice versa).
In creating C and Unix, Dennis Ritchie created arguably the infrastructure for all modern computing.
<comment>---
Who would be on your list of the top (perhaps unsung) people who changed massive numbers of lives for centuries and WHY? </comment><comment><USER2> Unsung and infamous: Fritz Haber inventor of the nitrogen-fixation process (later industrialized by Carl Bosch, which is why it is known as the Haber- Bosch process.)

At a minimum, 3 billion people are alive today because the proteins in their bodies contain nitrogen that had been fixed by fertilizers created in factories using this process. Without artificial fertilizers produced with this process it would be impossible to support a human population of more than 4 billion people even if every bit of arable land were being farmed to maximum capacity.

The Haber-Bosch process broke through the hard limit of how much plant protein could be produced through agriculture and led directly to the population explosion started in the 19th century.

Paraphrasing Vaclav Smil's arguments:

Naturally-produced fertilizers can provide approximately 200 kg. of nitrogen per hectare annually; this allows for the production of between 200 and 250 kg. of plant proteins. This places a theoretical limit on the number of people that each hectare of land could sustain. Under ideal conditions this would amount to around 15 people per hectare; in practice, the historical limit has been about 5 people per hectare.

Note: he also invented chlorine gas for use during World War I

<comment><AUTHOR> Excellent reference. A friend mentioned him to me the other day and you're absolutely right, he was a game changer

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I would make an argument for Bill Gates. I know on HN people might snub this, but I honestly believe that for better or worse, the future was reshaped by his business tenacity.

I know that everyone involved in the entire PC movement equally played a big part, but Windows ended up being the huge unifying factor for Joe White- Collar-Worker. I think the surge in office computing in Windows was what eventually lead to the acceptance and idea of "normal people" owning computers in the home and consequently the drive towards intelligent consumer electronics in general.

Also a mention for Sir. Tim Berners-Lee, of course it was not a one man effort but he is largely attributed to the creation of the WWW which, let's face it, has already hugely reshaped society in many ways.

<comment><USER4> I'd argue that long after his business acumen is just a footnote, Bill Gates' charity work will stand him head and shoulders into the top people who've ever lived.

He'll be remembered as a business tycoon probably among the likes of JP Morgan or Carnegie, but that will fade with time. His charity work, on the other hand, might eventually work out to save _tens of millions_ of lives.

If the foundation prospers long enough to beat malaria and waterborne disease in the developing world, they'll re-shape the population of a continent. They may not only save more lives than anyone in history, but manage to save more lives than any dictator was able to end, which is a sadly astonishing achievement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> \- Nicola Tesla, no matter how much he is praised, it's always way too little.

[http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/10-inventions-of- nikola-...](http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/10-inventions-of-nikola-tesla- that.html)

\- Henry Ford: Giving the world mass production and giving his workers (comparatively) high wages for the time.

<comment><USER6> It's correct spelling is Nikola Tesla, but yes, he is the enabler of modern society and the way we live today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Constantine, the first Christian emperor. This was the first time Christianity was recognized by the state; much of A.D. history (but not necessarily most) revolves around the interplay between church and state, most namely the institutionalized Catholic church and protestants.

Similarly, it follows that Martin Luther (not King), one of the vocal leaders of the protestant reformation, was influential with his 95 theses.

Jesus Christ (and the story of the man) obviously has made one of the most global and lasting impacts on culture and humanity.

I'd agree that Pauline literature largely shapes the perception of Christ and Christianity, so Paul is an important figure.

The Beatles - Shifted culture significantly, not just in the US but around the world.

Certainly Dennis Ritchie.

Vannevar Bush, who first conceptualized hypertext via the Memex in the mid-20th century.

Tim Berners-Lee.

I lightly tread and say Mark Zuckerberg, but really I mean the brainpower behind Facebook. Regardless of staying power, to have a massive enough sum of people to start saying things like "1 in 13 people on earth", it certainly is one of the most far reaching and adopted efforts in history.

Albert Einstein - the theory of relativity shapes the way a lot of modern physics are approached.

Adolf Hitler.

<comment><USER8> Not to upset any fans, but how did The Beatles shift the culture? I have the impression that culture was shifting by itself and The Beatles only lucked into being at right place at the right time.

<comment><USER7> Fair comment. I suppose I mean that The Beatles were a large catalyst in shifting culture, in that they mark the beginning of rock and roll and TV- casted, stadium-oriented performance and stardom. More importantly, this was a new wave in massively widespread pop culture that perhaps would have been weaker or absent without them.

Let me be clear - I'm not saying they invented or caused the shift. (Which I suppose I said before.) I'm saying they were incredibly influential to pop culture, to a massive degree. (This isn't fanboy talk, so I won't be upset on this thread whatsoever.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> There's a book on this exact subject: [http://www.amazon.com/The-100-Ranking- Influential-Persons/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/The-100-Ranking-Influential- Persons/dp/0806513500)

Here is the list: [http://physics.hallym.ac.kr/~physics/course/a2u/evolution/im...](http://physics.hallym.ac.kr/~physics/course/a2u/evolution/img/toptenlistweb.pdf)

<comment><USER10> Very cool list. Though seeing all the religious figures at the top, makes me cry a little inside. But when I think about it, it makes sense.

It seems ancient history produced two types of people: great political and religious leaders.

Modern history mostly has: scientists, inventors, philosophers...

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Gutenberg - printing press made the sum of human knowledge exponentially easier to transmit and expand

(random article from Google: [http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,36527,0...](http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,36527,00.html))

<comment><USER12> I think the Chinese did this a few hundred years earlier.

<comment><USER13> Then both helped move human knowledge exponentially further.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wouldn't credit Kalashnikov quite so highly, the real key was the invention and wide post-WWII adoption of non-corrosive primers, which radically decreased the maintenance required after firing a gun. After that, it was the Soviet system that ensured zillions of reliable, low/no maintenance weapons would flood the world; Kalashnikov's was the later, but it was proceeded by the SKS (same round, fixed magazine fed by clips).

But using him to represent all the of the above works. I'd add John Moses Browning, history's greatest and most influential small arms designer, if for no other reason a design detail that's used in almost every semi-auto pistol today. And we are still using weapons he designed in the 1910s, e.g. the 1918 M2 heavy machine gun and the M1911 handgun, one of which I carry almost every time I walk out my door.

I'd add Jay Forrester, who's Project Whirlwind invented the physical computer as we know it; he left the field after that project, saying correctly all the really important and interesting stuff had been accomplished.

Alfred Nobel, inventor of the first stable high explosive (stabilized nitroglycerin known as dynamite).

Pick a selection from _Thirty Years That Shook Physics_ (quantum physics), and go back some, at least to Newton and Leibniz. And, oh, Euclid.

Claude Shannon is best known as the father of information theory, but before that he wrote one of the most consequential master's thesis ever, in which he applied Boolean logic to found both digital circuit and digital computer design.

Hewlett, Packard and Shockley unintentionally founded Silicon Valley.

John Ericsson, inventor of the monitor class of warships ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor_(warship)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor_\(warship\)) ) and how they influenced naval design following.

Tesla, for AC power, Edison's DC had strict transmission length limits.

Time for breakfast, that'll do for now.

<comment><USER14> In between Newton and the quantum mechanics, Dmitri Mendeleev for the periodic table, a complete discontinuity in chemistry.

Linus Pauling wouldn't make the top 100 because _someone_ would have done it around that time, it was that obvious, but he was the first to apply quantum theory to chemistry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> For starters:

Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed -- obviously. Similarly Marx. Socrates/Plato and Aristotle also had long-enduring influence on how people thought.

Highly effective conquerors -- Alexander and Genghis Khan come to mind first, because they punched WAY over the weight of the nations they started with.

Newton, Gauss, Darwin, Einstein -- massive and enduring influences on how science and mathematics are framed.

<comment><USER16> Surely Paul the Baptist was far more influential than Jesus - there were quite a few crazies wandering around in those times telling people to sell all of their things and follow them to paradise. It took quite a bit of admin and organisation to form a religion out of the stories and rumours that were left.

<comment><USER17> I think you mean Paul/Saul of Tarsus. There is no "Paul the Baptist." _John_ the Baptist died before Jesus did. Paul of Tarsus was certainly one of the most influential of the very early Christians, but by all accounts, Christianity has already taken off before he joined and already had an organized leadership.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Akhenaten, the world's first truly radical innovator, circa 1350 BC.

As the pharaoh of Egypt, he had the power to turn his completely original vision into reality. He abandoned old gods and turned to the only power that was visible and potent, the Sun. His religious theory based on a concept of energy originating from the Sun was more scientific than anything that would be invented for almost a thousand years afterwards.

His powerful influence created a completely new art style, a new kind of poetry, all driven by a sense of individualism that was completely foreign to the ancient cultures of his era.

There are many links between Akhenaten's radical monotheism and what formed as Judaism after his time -- some go so far as to suggest that he was the historical character who eventually became described as Moses in the Bible.

<comment><USER19> Indeed, and even if you haven't followed Egyptian history, you probably would be familiar with his wife Nefertiti (of the famous bust [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Nof...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Nofretete_Neues_Museum.jpg/409px- Nofretete_Neues_Museum.jpg) ) and his son Tutankhamun (who reversed much of Akhenaten's changes).

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Genghis Khan...his military and logistical exploits in a time before the steam engine just boggle the mind.

<comment><USER21> I don't think people realize just how much he shaped his future. He essentially brought Asia and the Arab world to its knees and they were more advanced scientifically than Europe at the time. Without him the world as we know it would have power shifted eastward.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Just imagine the world of technology that blossomed from these 2 inventions:

1\. John Bardeen, Walter Brattain and William Shockley for the _transistor_.

2\. Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce for the _integrated circuit_.

<comment><USER23> Do not forget Julius Edgar Lilienfeld who invented and patented the much more relevant field effect transistor more than 20 years earlier.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Lilienfeld](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Lilienfeld)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Fritz Haber (9 December 1868 – 29 January 1934) was a German chemist, who received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1918 for his development for synthesizing ammonia, important for fertilizers and explosives. The food production for half the world's current population depends on this method for producing fertilizer.

Also known as the father of chemical warfare so it's a mixed bag.

</comment><comment><USER25> If you're looking literally at the definition of "people who changed massive numbers of lives" then the relatively recent leaders such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao whould be at the top:

1\. Autocratic leaders individually affected more change than the comparable democratic leaders (Roosevelt, Churchill) because they had more radical actions and more direct power to change and/or take lives on a huge scale;

2\. Relatively modern events affect huge amounts of people compared to older events - WW2 killed more people than were alive at the peak of Roman Empire, and directly 'affected' far more than that (~2 billion?).

3\. Really recent political events are comparably tiny - events such as 'War on Terror' or Rwandan genocide are impactful, but order of magnitude smaller than the atrocities we did in 20th century.

Of course, we might rather want to glorify entirely different kind of people :)

</comment><comment><USER26> Skanderbeg 1405 – 17 January 1468

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanderbeg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanderbeg)

He has been credited with being one of the main reasons for delaying Ottoman expansion into Western Europe, giving the Italian principalities more time to better prepare for the Ottoman arrival.

On October 27, 2005, the United States Congress issued a resolution "honoring the 600th anniversary of the birth of Gjergj Kastrioti (Scanderbeg), statesman, diplomat, and military genius, for his role in saving Western Europe from Ottoman occupation."

Fully understanding the importance of the hero to the Albanians, Nazi Germany formed in February 1944, the 21st SS Division Skanderbeg, with 6,491 Kosovo Albanians.

</comment><comment><USER27> Thomas Midgley Jr. Invented leaded fuel and CFCs.

Norman Borlaug developed semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties credited with saving over a billion people from starvation.

Ignaz Semmelweis discovered that it's a good idea to wash your hands before carrying out surgery.

</comment><comment><USER28> Nameless inventor of wheel Jesus Christ Alexander Fleming who discovered penicillin

<comment><USER29> "Nameless inventor of wheel Jesus Christ" \- man, that guy had many talents

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Take with a grain of salt some of the more known names. History is written by the victors (i.e. Edison) so your list is probably rigged by construction, and sometimes what changed history is not the person or what he really did, but the story about him (i.e. Jesus). Also, calling the "world" the line of culture that comes from greece and rome to us is dangerous, who invented gunpowder or arabic numerals? Anyway, considering that with globalization that line of culture is the prevalent now in all the world, the victor that writes the history, probably is what you can know.

</comment><comment><USER31> I have a hard time choosing, mainly because each time I come up with an answer, I think "oh wait, that wouldn't be possible without invention x". For example - the microprocessor wouldn't be possible without electricity. As such, I think I'd pick Benjamin Franklin. He did much research into electricity, and even the precursors for what became the design of modern air conditioners. Without air conditioning, our world would likely be drastically different - I wouldn't be sitting in an enclosed building working on a computer, that's for sure.

<comment><USER32> well, the AC thing, your building would have big open windows and lots of fans. Not _too_ different...

<comment><USER31> True, it could be bearable. But, in the summer here it tends to get up to 100 degrees with high humidity, fans don't help too much. It would definitely change the way the buildings were built, at the least I'd think. Then there's the question of its effect on computing, which requires much cooling as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is a confusing question if we are considering the results of someone's life mainly because of procreation. If Hitler, for example, can be thought of as being at the beginning of a causal chain that made a big difference, wouldn't his mother be even more important? She can as much claim Hitler's actions as a result of her behavior as he can the behavior of his armies and subsequent generations and so forth. She has set in motion the Hitler chain but also a number of other small irrelevant chains that nevertheless help her overtake Hitler in impact.

<comment><USER32> So you're saying that the 100 people who most changed the world were the mothers of the 100 people who most changed the world?

<comment><USER33> or their mothers, right?

<comment><USER32> Actually, in your example, Hitler's mother can't really claim she is the person responsible for Hitler's actions, unless she was there with Hitler as his senior advisor or strategist or something. Well, unless she specifically raised him (bred him?) to be some great cruel dictator or warmonger, in that case... or should we blame WWII on the Vienna Academy of Art, for not accepting him?

<comment><USER33> Why? What does intent have to do with causation?

<comment><USER32> Because the question was 'Who are the 100 people who most changed the world?', as in 'who are the 100 people who _directly_ changed the world?'. I think this is understood in the question. Everyone named was directly involved in the change they made, as in _they_ made/changed/invented/came up with whatever it is they did. So what if they had a mother? Everybody else in the whole world had one too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> From the 20th Century, definitely Adolf Hitler: the fallout from the war he started has shaped modern world. The Cold War was certainly accelerated as a result of the land grab after Germany's surrender and the US development of the atomic bomb. I would argue that Israel gained its independence from Palestine in 1948 because of the Shoah. It may have happened later, but one cannot deny that the Zionists used it to their advantage. Once Israel existed tensions in the middle east increased, forcing us to take sides and make strong enemies in the Muslim world.

<comment><USER14> Our "strong enemies in the Muslim world" are upset at the 1942 Reconquista, which kicked the Moors out of what they still held of Spain. The end of your above history is highly revisionist and completely ignores, say, the Muslim division of the world into two parts (what they are is left as an exercise to the reader).

<comment><USER14> Oops, that would be the 1492, which was the end of 781 years of land war in Western Europe proper.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Isaac Newton - Introduced a world-view which arguably led to the industrial revolution and most modern science.

James Bradley (1693 - 1762)- "The inventor of Modern science", for his development of the modern scientific method. [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v400/n6739/full/400027a...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v400/n6739/full/400027a0.html)

</comment><comment><USER36> Gandhi for showing the world that non-violence and non-cooperation can be an effective form of political expression.

Abraham Lincoln for ending slavery in America.

<comment><USER34> What was the global impact of emancipation in the US? I ask not to be a dick: I'm legitimately interested in the answer.

<comment><USER37> I would say not a lot. All countries that harshly oppose slavery today did that way before the US.

The idea that slavery is not fine did also not originate in the US.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> How about that Chinese emperor who ordered their fleet of long range boats sunk, thus stopping Chinese expansion and trade dead in its tracks?

Hrm...maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_voyages#Aftermath](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_voyages#Aftermath)

</comment><comment><USER39> People who changed the world can be further classified into a few categories in my opinion. Includes inventors, revolutionists, philanthropists and even dictators.

Thomas Alva Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Bill Gates, Marie Curie, Aryabhata, Mother Teresa, Wright Brothers, Henry Ford, John Vincent Atanasoff,Gutenberg, Hitler to name a few

<comment> simba-hiiipower ...Nikola Tesla. to name one more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Fritz Haber

Rather unknown, but he invented a Method to synthesize ammonia, which is important for fertilizer. I think Wikipedia puts it quite well:

"The food production for half the world's current population depends on this method for producing fertilizer."

</comment><comment><USER40> You simply do not have modern history without Euler or Gauss. Suck it fops.

</comment><comment><USER41> Thomas Jefferson - Founded Republican Party, had a large influence on the US Constitution. Adolf Hitler - Leader of Nazi party, Started WWII, Big role in the Holocaust.

<comment><USER42> Jefferson founded the Democratic Party, known then as the Democratic- Republicans. The Republican Party was formed later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> J. Robert Oppenheimer - "father" of the atomic bomb

<comment><USER43> Dwight D. Eisenhower - most notably the leader of the Allied Expeditionary Forces during WWII. I shudder to think where we'd be if Hitler were allowed to continue...

<comment><USER32> So put in Soviet Union in place of Eisenhower. They're the ones who actually stopped Hitler.

<comment><USER43> Psshh. The Eastern front was a diversion for the real war on the other side. ;)

<comment><USER32> Hello there, fellow Hollywood director!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Charles Darwin, his was both a scientific and cultural revolution. All modern biology is taught with evolution as the overarching explanatory framework.

</comment><comment><USER45> James D. Watson, Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin.

</comment><comment><USER46> Elon Musk.

Electronic Banking turned Pay for Shit Online. Mainstreamed Electric Cars. Non-governmental Space Travel. Alternative Medium Distance Travel Concept.

</comment><comment><USER47> Stalin, Hitler, Julius Cesar, Genghis Khan.

<comment><USER48> Napoleon Bonaparte

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Nikolaus Otto and Rudolf Diesel who invented the four stroke internal combustion engine and the diesel engine.

</comment><comment><USER49> Copernicus and Columbus - both literally changed our perception of the universe and the world.

<comment><USER50> then again... [http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day)

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Alan Turing, Sigmund Freud, military innovator Jan Žižka z Trocnova a Kalicha.

<comment><USER52> Tommy Flowers should go right beside Alan Turing in my opinion.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Flowers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Flowers)

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> Satoshi Nakamoto.

But it's too early for the world to appreciate.

</comment><comment><USER54> Osama bin Laden, for 9/11 and its fallout.

</comment><comment><USER55> Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia

</comment><comment><USER32> Mao

</comment><comment><USER56> Steve Jobs.

<comment><USER57> I don't suspect he'll be that important on the length scale of human progress.</comment></comment>


Congress rejects Obama veto, Saudi September 11 bill becomes law - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-sept11-saudi-idUSKCN11Y2D1 <comment><USER3> An example of suing a diplomat/state without foreign policy considerations: an Indian diplomat was sued for underpaying her domestic help. In response, India promptly sued spouses of American diplomats for tax evasion, illegal imports and fraud.

Quoting from [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devyani_Khobragade_incident](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devyani_Khobragade_incident)

"Former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha called for the arrest of same-sex companions of US diplomats, citing the Supreme Court of India's recent upholding of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.[72][73] The Indian government asked US consular officers posted in India to return all identity cards.[7][6]

On December 17, 2013, Delhi Police removed security barricades on the road outside the US Embassy in New Delhi, citing need for improvement of traffic flow in that area.[74] India has demanded an unconditional apology from the US government[74] and asked the details of the salaries of all domestic help, gardeners and other staff employed by US consulates in India to check for inconsistency or frauds.[74] India moved to block perks such as alcohol and food imports at concessional rates, for embassy employees.[75] With new restrictions, U.S. Embassy Vehicles will not be immune to traffic violations, the restrictions also requires the embassy not to hold 'Commercial Activities' in its premises.[76] Indian income tax and immigration authorities are investigating allegations of work-permit, visa and income tax fraud at the American Embassy School.[77][78][79]"

<comment><USER4> TIL that India outlaws same sex relationships. Looks like they're in great company: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here- are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/)

<comment><USER5> > TIL that India outlaws same sex relationships.

It seems quite antiquated, but the US had similar laws as late as 2003.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_Stat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States#Lawrence_v._Texas_and_laws_regarding_same- sex_sexual_activity)

<comment><USER6> Adding to that with a simple quote: "When I was in the military they gave me a medal for killing two men and a discharge for loving one"

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have the same feeling about this law as I have about Donald Trump. Even though you know it's bad, there's a teensy-weensy part of you that likes the fact that it's sticking it to Saudi Arabia and the political class that's trying to defend Saudi Arabia even though it's pretty clear those shitbags are pretty much behind 911.

Also there's a part of me that thinks maybe it would be a good thing if there was more at stake when we blow up wedding parties with robotic death machines and the like.

Buying the president's defense is a lot like buying Hillary's defense of NAFTA. Maybe that plays well to policy wonks, but regular people aren't buying it and don't appreciate politicians trying to tell us white is black in the name of "American interests" or "national security."

<comment><USER6> Good that you mention the blowing up of wedding parties by US drones - <USER2> by the same law that allows Americans to sue the Saudi's, any victim can now sue the US for damages because of these (often quite uncontrolled) drone attacks.

And not only future drone attacks - also any victim of US armed forces since 2001, as the law goes back in time. So: you got hurt by an American in the past 15 years? Feel free to sue the US...

<comment><USER7> And why shouldn't families of innocent people killed by our robotic death machines be exempt from having a day in court? Oh yeah, because our government said we had good intentions when we blew up those children so it's all good. What really matter is that we didn't _mean_ to kill those people, right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Forgive my ignorance, but how does an individual of one country sue another country's government? In what court does this hold up, and how can the country being sued be held to any decision made by such a court?

<comment><USER9> This law allows Saudi Arabia to be sued in American (presumably federal) courts. Enforcement is up to the terms of the law, but presumably can be taken on any assets that the US courts can get their hands on - probably anything held in the US, or at US banks.

There's not a great general answer, because normally the answer to your question is "they can't." Setting aside the fact that in this case the Saudi Arabian rulers are obviously horrible people who more or less deserve to have horrible things happen to them, the problem with allowing this sort of thing is that, from the outside, it looks like the United States unilaterally seizing property of a sovereign state, which is something that international law usually frowns upon. For that reason, foreign governments are normally given immunity in American courts, because upholding the system of statehood and encouraging other countries to recognize American sovereignty by reciprocity is seen as more important than whatever sense of justice would be gained.

<comment><USER10> Well I would argue that Argentina does set a precedent: a government decided to default on some of its debts, but some of its creditors (the so-called 'vulture funds') attacked this decision in US court. The US court ruled in favor of the creditors and allowed the seizing of Argentina's assets in several banks.

A UN resolution vote to prevent those practices (and thus reaffirming the kind of sovereignty you describe) was voted by a huge majority but rejected by the US.

I am not sure where I stand on this issue, but USA was already rejecting the notion of sovereignty when it comes to debt defaults, I think it is logical to reject it too when it comes to terrorism.

<comment><USER11> Good points, though those cases hinged on the argument that Argentina had, in its bonds, expressly waived sovereign immunity and made New York the forum for any legal action. Even so, the 2nd Circuit ruled against attempts to seize Argentinian Central Bank assets, setting a reasonably high bar for future attempts at recovery.

Personally, I'm with you -- I think the Argentina cases had somewhat delicate international ramifications (traditionally, the assumption has been that international investors take their chances, and that the market would punish any country that defaulted), but even so, JASTA really does upend international law in a new and troubling way.

<comment><USER10> I am really against the notion that waiving sovereignty is something that elected leaders are allowed to do. It is too easy to design a deal that will benefit one leader but open the country for pillaging under its successor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I could live with the idea that this law subscribes to a more universalist view of politics and morale ; one in which individuals strive to share their values and their new ideas with their neighbours. Such a concept was always risky, but it also underlines the fundamental altruist nature of mankind.

However, when we look at the context of this decision, it is doubtful that such is the case. On the opposite, this decision seems to be the result of a particular strain of exceptionalism, where one nation should be able to judge others' deeds, while at the same time claiming immunity for its own misdemeanours.

This duality of standards, which would have us accept that foreign nations can be judged when no introspection is possible, is very dangerous, because it starves empathy and feeds nationalism ; it enables national outrage at actions which are merely reciprocal. This is the kind of group mentality that made the first world war happen.

</comment><comment><USER12> Is there any way this doesn't become a kangaroo court? My initial reaction is that no government will lend this legitimacy by appearing in court, and instead confiscate property in-kind while also pulling investments out of the US.

I'd be interested in any analysis published on this, if anyone has found some. I have not unfortunately.

<comment><USER13> Slate did a pretty decent overview of the implications:

 _" Under typical principles of fairness, JASTA is a just and necessary bill. Under basic norms of international law, however, it is a disaster. A primary justification for foreign sovereign immunity is comity: America doesn't judge foreign countries' internal decisions; in return, other countries don't judge America's. JASTA would jettison this principle for a different proposition: America doesn't judge foreign countries' internal decisions, unless they're really, really bad. Yes, the bill specifically targets terrorist aid and enablement, but Obama and the State Department are nervous that other countries could retaliate by passing even broader waivers of sovereign immunity, allowing lawsuits against American service members, diplomats, and government officials in their own courts. (And it may go without saying that some of these courts—like, say, Saudi Arabia's—do not comply with American standards of due process.)"_

[http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/04/19/_9_11_vict...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/04/19/_9_11_victim_bill_is_controversial_over_sovereign_immunity.html)

Meanwhile 28 of the 97 senators that voted for the veto override have now signed a letter warning of the unintended consequences of JASTA. The mind boggles.

[http://www.corker.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/d8eee900-5f...](http://www.corker.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/d8eee900-5ffc-4204-a4f1-8072c104d9c2/Bipartisan%20Senate%20JASTA%20Letter%20092816.pdf)

<comment><USER12> Yes, that's about the deepest analysis I've been able to find beyond "gosh this is bad" (that much is evident and is not analysis), and given how much I like Amicus it's no surprise this is from Slate.

I'm really looking for writing on concrete likely outcomes rather than conjecture, but that's hard to find. It seems the immediate result, given the law can only target domestic holdings, will be governments withdrawing as much as they can from US investments.

<comment><USER14> I imagine, under possible threat of interest being withheld or redemption not occurring, Saudi Arabia will try to dump as many Treasury bonds as it can and look to eliminate the petro dollar... sounds like thrashing the US dollar could happen and soon (before any lawsuits go through).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > The vote was a blow to Obama as well as to Saudi Arabia, one of the United > States' longest-standing allies in the Arab world, and some lawmakers who > supported the override already plan to revisit the issue.

US doesn't have "allies", only interests.

<comment><USER16> I would disagree, based on the language of the NATO treaty.

NATO article 5.

"Collective defence means that an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies."

[http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm](http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm)

<comment><USER17> That doesn't changes the fact that for the most part the US doesn't have an alliance, it has interests it want to protect or secure.

That said for the most part pretty much every other country is no different, the only big difference is that because the US is de facto the biggest baddest mofo around it doesn't need to take anything from anyone which means often it's alliances are more "one sided" that what would traditionally be considered an alliance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does anyone else think the only reason Obama did this is to help preserve US influence in how Saudi Arabia prosecutes the Yemen war/disaster (with US weapons and intelligence)?</comment>


New Startup JPEGmini Reduces Photos' Size, Not Their Quality - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/06/new-startup-jpegmini-reduces-photos-size-not-their-quality/

<comment><USER2> When this was discussed last week people were deeply unimpressed.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940505>

Tests done by HNers suggested that the service introduced significant artifacts. One comment was:

        Custom quantization tables and chroma
        subsampling, with a bit of hype.

( <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940759> )

Others thought it did a really good job, but you have to scroll down that discussion to the bottom to find people who agree with the site's claims.

I'm sceptical.

<comment><USER3> I can only second that. I also tried some sprites we use. The service reduced the size by about 15%, but introduced clearly visible artefacts, especially around text. Not very convincing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was unable to distinguish a difference between their "technology" and ImageMagick's "convert -quality 75" on their demo image.

Smells bad to me.

</comment><comment><USER5> pff read their harsh terms! They steal your rights completely on pictures you upload.</comment>


Snapchat Reactions - <AUTHOR> https://storyreact.com <comment><AUTHOR> Add a Story React link to your Snapchat Stories so your friends can swipe up and react.</comment>


Github, the future of book publishing? - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/karlseguin/the-little-mongodb-book/network <comment><USER2> Pull requests is an awesome way to fix errors and spelling mistakes, and the fork that is aiming to translate the book to brazilian portuguese is also very interesting.

What I really hope to see catch on though, is the format that this book is written in. There is definitely a shortage of technical resources that is longer and more in-depth than an online tutorial, yet shorter and more to-the- point than the full fledged 500-pager. I feel like reading this book gave me just enough info to make an adequately informed decision on whether or not MongoDB is what I'm looking for and worth looking into, or that it isn't the fit for whatever application I'm writing. Great work!

</comment><comment><USER3> <https://github.com/schacon/git-scribe>

Highly recommend you check this out. We're pretty interested in this idea and definitely want to see it take off.

<comment><USER4> Very nice.

The _Modern Perl Book_ I linked to elsewhere here also comes with publishing tools for producing PDF, LaTex, ePub & HTML and (I believe) was used for the finished printed book (<http://onyxneon.com/books/modern_perl/>).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It would definitely be handy for technical books but I can't see this being widely adopted because most technical books aren't free.

Fixing errors and sending a pull request via an interface we all already know would be much easier than tracking down author contact info. Having said that this might be more readable as a wiki.

<comment><USER6> I'm currently writing a "commercial" book (the redis book), and I'm every day more confident that the future of many tech books is self publishing. You get hardly rich writing a tech book for a traditional publisher, it is a lot of work for little money most of the time (you are not going to sell, usually, a large number of tech books, they are not "best sellers", and the percentage you earn is very low).

So after all, why not self publish? You have more control on what you write, you earn a lot more if you publish the book on the Kindle for every sold copy, you are free to provide the book for free on the web, and so forth.

From this point of view github is a viable way to handle the writing of a book. What is needed is a license that allows everybody to contribute, so that the electronic version is free for everybody, but only the "main" authors have the right to use the book for commercial purposes (Kindle, Printed, ...). Otherwise if the book is under a non free license it can be still interesting to use github in a public repository to get feedbacks, comments, and so forth.

We'll see what happens but my next book will be a self-published one for sure, written using a github public repo, if I'll ever write another one :)

<comment><USER7> _> I'm currently writing a "commercial" book (the redis book)_

Nice! When do you think that's going to be out? (Horrible question to ask an author I know.) And if it's not self published, who is publishing it?

<comment><USER6> Not sure, but I think it will be out this summer (sorry, unable to be more specific). It is published with O'Reilly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is cool but I'm not sure if it's really publishing nor is it something new.

I help manage a large publishers proprietary platform for online textbooks. We use svn to hold all of our books. We then serve them to their site in an online reading app.

If we were to remove the front end and point users to our svn repo I doubt one could call that publishing. Sure we would be providing informtion, but until we add the wrapper that makes it useful, it is not published. Could you call an unbound book published?

Providing that platform for reading creates more value for the user. It also makes it easier for the author to pass their value through their publisher to the reader.

</comment><comment><USER9> writing != publishing.

Where does the publishing come into play?

<comment><AUTHOR> Publishing is about "making information available to the general public". I think two translations to different languages and one conversion to a different format directly accomplishes that goal.

<comment><USER10> Uploading a file somewhere public is barely publishing.

There are issues of formats, making it easy to find with search, marketing and metadata to name a few.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This isn't _exactly_ publishing.

Serious question: How would this be different (and better) than Wikibooks from the Wikimedia foundation?

<http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page>

<comment><USER12> If you put your book on Wikibooks, you don't own it.

<comment><USER13> Do you have a citation? I checked wikibook's Terms of Use and it didn't say anything about giving up ownership.

<comment><USER12> I should have phrased it better. Thank you for making me go look.

[http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Copyrights#Contributo...](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Copyrights#Contributors.27_rights_and_obligations)

Your submissions are automatically and irrevocably licensed GFDL and CC-BY-SA. Copyright isn't transferred, but since you cannot revoke the licensing you have (in effect) given up ownership.

<comment><USER14> You have in effect given out an irrevocable license to your work. This isn't practically or legally the same as giving up ownership, though it's certainly ceding a sizable measure of control.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The _Modern Perl Book_ was also written via Github: <https://github.com/chromatic/modern_perl_book/network>

</comment><comment><USER15> I wonder when people are gonna write "choose your own adventure" books w/ github. Could call it "fork your own adventure"

</comment><comment><USER16> My schoolmates and I wrote a collaborative paper using git back in college. It was great for critical feedback, sometimes we would delete each other's entire paragraphs in a single commit.

</comment><comment><USER17> I've no idea if it would be work, but I'd love to see a web app for authors and editors that used git on the back end to manage things.

</comment><comment><USER18> Sounds familiar:

<http://www.inkling.com/blog/art-content-engineering/></comment>


NuVoc: J Vocabulary - <AUTHOR> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/NuVoc <comment><USER4> I have been wondering if there are dialects of J that sacrifice brevity but retain the computational model. I do not know J but the way I understand it, it would be rather easy to develop two-way translation.

<comment><USER5> You can do this in J; nobody does. It would probably be more approachable to many people to write:

        mean =: sum reduce div size

Than:

        mean =: +/ % #

But less of your program fits on the screen at once, so you don't have as broad a view. Then again, people who haven't used an APL dialect won't know what they're missing anyway.

<comment><USER6> Whence this assumption that filling your entire screen with characters is helpful for understanding your program?

<comment><USER7> These operators are like the word "whence": a denser notation that could just as easily be written out in full, in a way more friendly to non-experts in the language - for example, as "from where" \- but if you're already an expert thinking in terms of these dense operators, why not write that way? It's only natural.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is wonderful. I remember using [http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/vocabul.htm](http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/vocabul.htm) some time ago and you would often have to study an entry for a long time to make {. or {: of it.

<comment><USER9> J manuals (J for C, I think) mention that in J array is a central object, so when you have primitive operations you have more of them, because an array allows you to do more things than a scalar.

There is a set of more frequently used operations, and there are others, which provide convenient shortcuts in some cases or are useful in some relatively narrow areas. Basic operations with arrays are: {. - take the first item, {: - take the last item, }. - take everything except the first item, }: - <USER2> everything except the last item. Then there is "generalized" sorting operation /: - ascending and \: - descending, array reversal |. , you can take unique elements of array with ~. , subtract one array from another with -: and apply dyadic operation between elements of an array with / \- for example, +/ 1 2 3 makes 6. You can append arrays with , - for example, 1 2 , 3 4 makes 1 2 3 4. You can "zip" arrays with ,. - 1 2 3 ,. 4 5 6 makes array of pairs 1 4, 2 5 and 3 6. Then you also have several built-in ways to partition array - <USER3> first or last element of array as separator with ;. , making prefixes or suffixes of increasing length with \ or \\. , you can group elements of one array by elements of another using /. - for example, 1 1 2 3 3 4 /. 'abcdef' will produce groups ab, c, de, f . Then there is ability to combine array items with weights using #. - like, 2 hours 3 minutes and 4 seconds total 24 60 60 #. 2 3 4 -> 7384 seconds - and do that backwards with #: , get array length or filter array elements with # , get cartesian product with { ... and that's about it. Pretty powerful, well thought-out set of highly orthogonal operations. Add scalar operations - where complex numbers and arbitrary precision are built-in - and you have a good base for a universal language.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Pricing a Bug Bounty/Security Disclosure? - <AUTHOR> I'm hoping to harness the collective wisdom of the HN community in pricing the below find. Company is a well-established SaaS provider and assumes the security burden of safely handling large, raw data extracts from the CRM, e-commerce, marketing, and ERP systems of its customers.
Data At Risk
The  vulnerability exposed highly-sensitive data belonging to a single global Fortune 500 client. This included:
* a transaction-level feed of customer purchases * 360-degree lifetime customer value across each line of business * performance of marketing tactics and advertising channels used to drive purchasing habits * fine-grained details into the performance of focused market segments.
The dataset spans several years. It was preprocessed to remove PII/SPI and includes no information that could be used to tie purchase data back to an individual person.
The exposed information holds little to no value to the general public.
That said, it would be extremely valuable to related companies and the agencies working on their behalf. It is an extremely competitive industry with razor-thin margins. Even small improvements in the efficiency of customer acquisition and sales programs can move the needle.
Finally, an adversary can easily modify this data and the rules used during reporting - thereby skewing results and possibly resulting in large-scale misappropriation of marketing spend.
Control of Underlying Infrastructure
The vulnerability also exposed:
* unfettered access to scaling controls tied to the number and type of EC2 instances powering the underlying platform * method to place and subsequently execute malicious code on said instances
CVSS base score is a 9.4: http://bit.ly/328WOXl <comment><USER2> Are they have bug bounty program? If they don't have and you are not hacking with their permission, you are doing illegal hacking so they can take legal actions against you, although your finding is valid.</comment>


Framework-agnostic package which provides powerful ACL abilities to Node.js - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/RomainLanz/node-fence <comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, I just released my first package and I want to heard some feedback from you!

This is a beta release and should better not be used in production. If you have any questions I'll be happy to answer it.</comment>


Show HN: Programmatically Generate Diagrams for GitHub Readmes - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Schachte/Mermrender <comment><USER2> FWIW Gitlab already renders Mermaid natively, and it's totally client-side (done in the browser) which means there's no rendering server to install, no image to host differently is each branch, etc. Cf [https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/markdown.html#mermaid](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/markdown.html#mermaid)

<comment><USER3> Wow, thanks for this! I had no idea, this is extremely useful.

<comment><USER2> It is. We write all our technical documentation (as well as specs, etc. even meeting minutes) using markdown with embedded mermaid diagrams, and during CI have it transformed (via pandoc and ad-hoc scripting) into PDF with corporate company headers. Looks gorgeous and has all the benefits of version controlled textual doc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great work! Would you be interested in adding capabilities for PlantUML? The syntax is very similar. If so, I'll donate $50 to you or your favorite charity.

Demo diagrams with syntax examples -- see the final one for an example document that I want to render for my team's devops pipeline:

[https://github.com/joelparkerhenderson/demo_plantuml/](https://github.com/joelparkerhenderson/demo_plantuml/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey there! Not a bad idea. Can you make an issue on the repo?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Unfortunately Github doesn't support Mermaid language natively. Meanwhile, I've created an extension (Firefox & Chrome) that adds support for it: [https://github.com/BackMarket/github-mermaid- extension](https://github.com/BackMarket/github-mermaid-extension)

</comment><comment><USER6> I will chip in as a happy user of PlantText[1]. It allows you to edit PlantUML diagrams, renders them, and you can either download them as PNGs, SVG, or ASCII. I'm pretty sure you can also directly link to an image, although I'm not sure about ToS, so don't do it without fact-checking. Oh, and it saves your content locally.

[1]: [https://www.planttext.com/](https://www.planttext.com/).

</comment><comment><USER7> This is nice. Good stuff.

I've always automated my Markdeep[1] documentation's inline PlantUML diagrams with a few scripts here and there (simply looks for .puml files, exports PNG and SVG and hosts everything on a static site), but I've never imagined using a service for supplying the generated output. I want to bounce off this idea somehow.

[1]: [https://casual-effects.com/markdeep/](https://casual- effects.com/markdeep/)

</comment><comment><USER8> I did a big heads down on this about 6 months ago as I was writing a paper and needed a ton of sequence diagrams to explain protocols.

PlantUML is a major pain. I didn't know about Mermaid at the time.

Latex has a ton of code for building better charts but they're all very very low level.

What's needed is a higher level abstraction here.

It should be possible to have much higher level charts without having to be a latex god.

</comment><comment><USER9> _Question_ : how does the local embed link translate into an asset uploaded to github user content?

[https://camo.githubusercontent.com/461a806ab46b5db76dcb02048...](https://camo.githubusercontent.com/461a806ab46b5db76dcb02048e6a38705399202d/68747470733a2f2f692e696d6775722e636f6d2f365647324a57632e706e67)

<comment><AUTHOR> It would work the same way as imgur or another image hosting provider. The app is in it's beginning phases to show the concept, but I'm adding blob storage on Azure. The image would get interpolated no different than anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> That is a clever method for embedding, and I like the minimal syntax.

We've been using Plectica[1] for these sorts of diagrams and finding it to be pretty great. Not sure if they support export to svg out of the box yet though.

[1]: [https://plectica.com/welcome/technologists](https://plectica.com/welcome/technologists)

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, that's a neat tool! I've actually been kind of looking for something like this for work. Thanks for sharing.

<comment><USER11> Lucidchart?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Readers may also want to check out nomnoml.com. It's definitely a more stripped down version of Mermrender. I used it for my thesis paper and was happy enough with it. I'll definitely be checking this tech out.

</comment><comment><USER13> Used WSD web sequence diagram at Amazon, handy, never thought it was too much of a pain to snip it out and embed that somewhere; but I get the idea.

</comment><comment><USER14> mermaid-filter is also a great part in the tool-chain, especially with pandoc.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is your favorite web font? - <AUTHOR> And which one do you regularly use? <comment><USER2> If it is a text heavy site Railway by Google for me. Otherwise I typically use Roboto.</comment>


Chrome's turning 10, here's what's new - <AUTHOR> https://www.blog.google/products/chrome/chromes-turning-10-heres-whats-new/ <comment><USER2> Here's what's not new: lack of anti-tracking protections

<comment><USER3> Meanwhile, Mozilla is pushing forward in that area!

[https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2018/08/30/changing-...](https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2018/08/30/changing- our-approach-to-anti-tracking/)

I'm almost 100% Firefox at this point. I trust Mozilla.

<comment><USER4> I trust Mozilla and have zero trust in Google. But I just switched back to Chrome after an experiment with Firefox. It's just too much of a resource hog vs Chrome. Hopefully they sort that out soon.

<comment><USER5> Really? What use case? I've had the opposite experience, ff uses much less ram than chrome.

<comment><USER4> Anecdotally lots of tabs open (30+) in Firefox uses more RAM than Chrome and brings my 2017 MBP to its knees.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Their Android screencasts look nice but my Pixel 2 still doesn't have that slick new launcher (I _am_ on Pie, however). Did anyone get that update?

<comment><USER7> You have to turn on "Swipe up on home button" in Pie to get it.

<comment><USER6> Oh my, that's it. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Like the new Gmail design, I do NOT like what appears to be a similar design applied to Chrome. Everything old is new again I guess. Material design is out; bubbly everything is in. Changing these for no described nor apparent reason is not "boost your productivity".

<comment><USER9> Yes, seems Google just suddenly changed their design language within the last 18 months into a strange rounded-material style for no real reason. And it doesn't look good at all to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The new design is pretty good actually (change is good this time around, to defy the stereotype!). But, how do I get it updated on my Win 10 machine? It seems the update does not carry forward everywhere with you.

<comment><USER9> Go to Help -> About Google Chrome to get the update option.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'd like to see more sportsmanship between browsers (not just Chrome). As an example "Search for a website in your Omnibox and Chrome will tell you if it's already open and let you jump straight to it with "Switch to tab [a good idea we took from Browser X]." (here Firefox, as far as I know)

</comment><comment><USER12> How about fixing some bugs? Chrome/Chromium for Linux stopped remembering which windows are minimized and which are not after a restart. Such an annoying bug that surfaced less than a year ago. Still not fixed.

<comment><USER13> I wonder if that's a Chrome bug or a bug in a popular window manager users are using.

<comment><USER12> It's a Chromium bug: [https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=827711](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=827711)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> That browser is feeling less and less like a Mac app every release. :-(

<comment><USER15> I have to agree with this comment. It looks really out of place now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> That password piece seems particularly dangerous, and a huge lock in.

<comment><USER17> It asks before storing passwords and, in case of generated passwords, also displays the password - so it seems okay for me. Or do you think it's a lock- in because of missing export options?

<comment><USER13> Exporting passwords from Chrome:

[https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95606](https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95606)

"Export: To the right of "Saved Passwords," click More : > Export passwords"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm sure Blink will continue to improve, but I'm not impressed with anything in the post - certainly not the design refresh.

</comment><comment> forgot-my-pw > When it's time to create a new password, Chrome will now generate one for > you (so you're not using your puppy's name for all of your passwords > anymore).

One less reason to use a password manager now.

<comment><USER19> Yes, for the casual internet users like my parents. I rather have my passwords stored in an encrypted container with a password I'm sure it's not linked to something I have online.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Why anyone thinks that reduced contrast is an improvement in usability needs to talk to someone over the age of 10.

Seriously.

Also, what's with the smaller icon on the start page?

Not a good change for me.

</comment><comment><USER21> The current chrome tab design is iconic, I hope they took that into consideration.

</comment><comment><USER15> Just upgraded; the UI is fucking ugly.

</comment><comment><USER22> I doubt anyone gives a toss if Chrome is having a "10th birthday" except Google.

Never liked how this browser forces updates down your throat including "new looks" without any choice. Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission. Google enjoys forcing itself on users regularly without consent. Which is creepy when put like that.

<comment><USER23> >Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission.

Just like all of the websites that you browse, you can't have control over the styles or the updates that someone pushes to their servers, forcing you to download the latest page and install the latest service workers without your permission.

<comment><USER22> A website is obviously something that changes according to third party wishes. I am visiting _their_ domain from _my machine using my browser_.

Software I decide to install on my machine, is under my control. I could update it, re-install it, delete it, change it.

I don't appreciate this mindset that software is like a "website" that is controlled by someone else. If that's what you want, then that's your preference.</comment></comment></comment>


Reducing system jitter (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://epickrram.blogspot.com/2015/09/reducing-system-jitter.html <comment><USER2> I wonder if authors considered using a real-time patch of Linux such as PREEMPT_RT [1] or Xenomai [2] ?

[1]: [https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_Patch](https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_Patch) [2]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenomai](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenomai)

<comment><USER3> We did look at trying out a real-time kernel, but decided that if we could achieve tolerable latencies with a stock kernel + tunings, then that would be preferable.

When ~2us jitter becomes an issue, we'll revisit our options, and no doubt share our findings.

Thanks for the link to Xenomai, I hadn't come across it before.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Idea for a Developer Exchange – would you use it? - <AUTHOR> Developers and companies sometimes are interested in exploring new technologies and stacks but are very happy where they are at their current employer. Dedicated time allocated to training alone seems like it's hard to come by, you get pulled back into work, there is also an associated cost to this.
What if there was a developer exchange?
The problem: Company A wants to learn about Tech X
Company B wants to learn about Tech Y
Make sure that Company A and B are not competing in the same market space.
How it works:
Connect these two companies and agree to have them send developers over to each other and work with their existing team(s) and gain knowledge of that technology. Their employer, would pay them for that time at the other company. They would learn about the new tech stack from the other companies devs actually using it. The developer would ideally come back with real experienced gained and be able to contribute to the host company while present.
Think of it as open-sourcing your developers knowledge and development.
What do you think?
Would you be interested in this as a developer? Would you be interested in this as an employer to have your developers knowledge and experience expanded? <comment><USER2> It sounds like a decent idea, but the tech giants are so broadly vested that they are competing with each other in something.

I think you have to get this right in Silicon Valley for it to work everywhere else.

Unlike some simple SaaS that you can build while living in Thailand, this has to appeal to THE place where such ideas can work, before it can spread everywhere else.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is how I make money sometimes... resource hire or consult gigs and help out with new tech, automation, delivery/process or do/fix things the development team can't do. So I would like to continue being paid, and the company has the confidence knowing I'm delivering what they're paying for. Any other way is just not something I'd do.

What I will do and currently do is keep in contact with guys from old companies and they are welcome to flick me a mail and I'll reply with some guidance as far as is practical

</comment><comment><USER4> Etsy has done this with Twitter, PagerDuty and a few others.

[https://codeascraft.com/2012/09/10/the-engineer-exchange- pro...](https://codeascraft.com/2012/09/10/the-engineer-exchange-program/) [https://www.pagerduty.com/blog/etsy-engineer- exchange/](https://www.pagerduty.com/blog/etsy-engineer-exchange/)

</comment><comment><USER5> I like the idea. I've heard of programs like this within very-large companies (team X will send some devs to team Y to evangelize a new technology and visa versa), but I've never thought of it happening between companies.

I think it's worth a shot. I think a lot of devs and companies might be uncomfortable with the idea at first, but that's what early- adopters/trailblazers are for (to show everyone the way, and prove that the concept works).

</comment><comment><USER6> My concern is what are the odds of this working out.

Your company wants to use spark. And you literally have no-one in the company who has ever used spark or wants to read a book on spark.

And there is a company that knows spark, and happens to need a skill you know. And no one in this second company knows it, nor does anyone in the second company want to read a book or learn about it.

</comment><comment><USER7> i actually have been doing this a bit. I asked on hacker news and someone else I found online. Told them I would help them/lend them my core skillset for theirs.

I think it would make sense as a community, it does e.g. HN, or maybe an accelerator type thing where you get a few gurus together IRL and help/hack on eachothers projects so that in reality like 5 companies all helpn eachother, but directly. not advice, or not just, but code, legal design, hardware marketing etc. everyone buys in with skill instead of money.

i think helping and learning from people is strong and getting help outside core.

</comment><comment><USER8> I know for a fact my company would not use this method. All of our programmers are too busy.

something online might work better.</comment>


My Year of No Shopping - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/15/opinion/sunday/shopping-consumerism.html <comment><USER2> I often purchase electronics to then have them sit and collect dust. Thinking I need to change up the habit somewhat.</comment>