You Can't Hide from the Corporate Cops - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-06-21/you-can-t-hide-from-the-corporate-cops <comment><USER2> At the risk of skipping a lot of (extremely entertaining - a highly recommended read about the innards of corporate shell structures amd shareholder rights) detail, the story boils down to 1) the common observation that laws are only as useful to you as your ability to get them enforced, 2) sometimes even very rich and able people can have a lot of trouble enforcing laws, in a rightful case, against someone determined who knows to cleverly play the legal system.

<comment><USER3> And 3) when you are buying a position in a company, take some time to get to know what you are buying. A half dozen shell companies through the BVI with no assets until you get to Hong Kong? I might dock that one a bit

<comment><USER2> Indeed, one wonders what sort of due diligence the investors conducted.. I suspect (since convoluted shell structures are not (at all) uncommon in practice) it could have been that they weren't actually aware of the full potential ramifications, or to the extent that they were, they didn't imagine it'd go to the (literally) extreme scenario. In any case, a tale of caution this certainly is.

<comment><USER4> There are plenty of Lenny stock punters who gamble full well knowing they don't know what's going on underneath. They expect larger returns in exchange for the added risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Local-currency emerging-market bonds sound like they'd be pretty illiquid. Packaging them into an exchange-traded fund might make them seem more liquid, but if someone wanted to get out of a big ETF position all at once, they might find that the liquidity isn't there. By selling the ETF they'll cause a fire sale of the underlying bonds. Right?

And every actual event undermines it! The bond index underlying EMLC was … um … up 0.45 percent yesterday. Obviously a $321 million bond trade is not a particularly big one, but still, it's a record for this ETF, and it just didn't have a whisper of an impact on bond market liquidity."

Only if you are assuming that who ever is holding the bonds now will want to just outright dump it and thus exacerbating the 3 month trend on that particular ETF… not to mention you have to ignore that there could be liquidations in portfolios (FX/Cash/Swaps/Equities/ other derivative contracts) going on to re-balance/cover losses as well as ignoring how central banks from India to Indonesia have been quite vocal in their worries…

</comment><comment><USER6> Or can you? If they ignored the suit so far, then there's probably a good chance they'll just stop travelling the the U.S., and then we'll see if Chinese courts enforce this or not...

<comment><USER7> Chinese courts and law enforcement won't enforce an arrest order from a subsidiary Deleware court in a foreign country.

Just as a US courts and law enforcement wouldn't enforce a Chinese provincial subsidiary court order.

<comment><USER6> I guess it's not _entirely_ unprecedented (apparently there is exactly one example in each direction), but yeah, I think they will not be arrested any time soon.

[https://www.chinalawblog.com/2014/03/enforcing-china- court-j...](https://www.chinalawblog.com/2014/03/enforcing-china-court- judgments-overseas-yeah-its-possible.html) [https://blogs.law.nyu.edu/transnational/2018/04/the- chinese-...](https://blogs.law.nyu.edu/transnational/2018/04/the-chinese- courts-enforcement-of-a-u-s-civil-judgement/)

<comment><USER8> Assuming they were travelling to the US for business purposes, this may, however, seriously cripple their ability to do keep doing business in the way they used to.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Neovim Newsletter #6 – Ship it! - <AUTHOR> https://neovim.io/news/2015/december/ <comment><USER2> May I wonder if anybody is making a derivative of (neo)vim with a tiny core and just a few features including vi-keys-combos, auto-indent, searching, piping and unicode support?</comment>


AVG can sell your browsing and search history to advertisers - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-09/17/avg-privacy-policy-browser-search-data <comment><USER3> I hate antivirus software with a passion. I've wasted too many weeks of my life hacking around bugs that antivirus programs introduced into my customers' systems.

A couple I've dealt with in the last six months:

McAfee Antivirus causes applications built with Unity 4 to fail when they call WWW.LoadFromCacheOrDownload() on a large asset bundle. This API call downloads a temp file and then renames the file to move it into the cache. But McAfee also opens the file for a virus scan. For a large file, the virus scan may not complete before Unity tries to rename the file, so the rename fails and you never get the asset bundle.

For one client I fixed this by patching Unity's .exe file to add a retry loop on the rename call. Unity 5 also works around this issue with the same retry loop.

AVG Antivirus causes updates to fail for applications that use wyUpdate. wyUpdate calls the CreateMutex() function in the Windows API to make sure another updater instance isn't already running. Bizarrely, when AVG is installed, CreateMutex() returns the wrong value, so wyUpdate thinks another instance is running and bails out. No updates for you!

Going back a few years, I tried NOD32 after some friends recommended it. It seemed fine, except the Alt+Tab key no longer worked. It was a known bug, unfixed for some time.

About 5-6 years ago, McAfee had a known bug - unfixed for nearly a year - <USER2> under some circumstances it would erase the entire hard drive. This was the ultimate in virus protection!

<comment><USER4> False positives are the other dark side of AV; here's AVG detecting completely innocuous "Hello World" programs as potential threats:

[http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/beginner/67634/](http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/beginner/67634/)

[https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mingwusers/kFrCqECTY_Y](https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mingwusers/kFrCqECTY_Y)

Along the same lines, it's rather common that keygens/cracks/patches are detected as false positives too:

[http://underlore.com/anti-virus-community-creates-false- posi...](http://underlore.com/anti-virus-community-creates-false-positives- for-fun-and-profit/)

<comment><USER5> Maybe the Ken Thompson Hack[1] is alive in the wild, or AVG just believes it is. ;)

1: Reflections on Trusting Trust: [https://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/hh/thompson/trust.html](https://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/hh/thompson/trust.html)

<comment><USER6> That's exactly what XcodeGhost is/was

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> AVG has a long history of doing scammy things. Starting from pushing toolbars heavily, flagging software that is harmless but poses competition etc. They will never change. Unfortunately, most of the public is not knowledgeable enough to understand this. In Czech Republic many people see this company as a national pride. I have been dealing with that company for a while and certainly do not agree with my fellow countrymen.

<comment><USER8> The thing that befuddles me is if someone came up to you on the street and handed you $100, you'd most likely refuse until you could figure out what the catch is. If someone offered you free movies or music on the internet, you'd either assume they were stolen or there was a catch. But when people download software that was both complex to build and intricate and expensive to maintain, they assume that there isn't a catch. I don't understand.

<comment><USER9> linux is free. What is the catch?

<comment><USER8> Significant expertise is required to install, configure (sound, sleep, 3d accelerators, multiple monitors, printers, scanners, projectors), and maintain the os.

<comment><USER10> > Significant expertise is required to install, configure (sound, sleep, 3d > accelerators, multiple monitors, printers, scanners, projectors), and > maintain the os.

Worked out of the box for me (sound autoconfigured, sleep via thinkpad acpi autoconfigured, intel gpu autoconfigured, external monitor via thunderbolt autodetected, one network printer/scanner autodetected via bonjour, other network printer/scanner had driver package from the vendor on the web, were projectors ever a problem?).

Did I do something the wrong way?

<comment><USER11> Linux does work out of the box if you buy hardware from a company that has a very large corporate install base (Dell, Lenovo, etc).

Linux also works really well if your hardware isn't bleeding edge.

The part where Linux becomes hard to use and requires expertise is learning the new UX, understanding what software and tools are no longer available and figuring out how to live and work with the alternatives that exist.

The degree of technical proficiency that you have is probably relevant to your "out of the box" experience - you are reading and posting on HN, which means that your level of technical knowledge is probably higher than most users given the typical audience of this site.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As a possible note of interest, I had to disable AVG in order to read this article.

<comment><USER13> How come?

<comment><USER12> Original link was to slashdot, I think. AVG said "Could be a Trojan Horse Host" and then gave me a cheerful green bar and said, "Threat has been successfully removed."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> A few Mozilla execs have left and gone there.

* Gary Kovacs: Former Mozilla CEO: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/garykovacs](https://www.linkedin.com/in/garykovacs)

* Harvey Anderson: Former Mozilla Chief Legal Counsel: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/harveyanderson](https://www.linkedin.com/in/harveyanderson)

* Todd Simpson: Former Mozilla CIO: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/tgsimpson](https://www.linkedin.com/in/tgsimpson)

* Rick Fant: Former Mozilla VP of Marketplace: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/rickfant](https://www.linkedin.com/in/rickfant)

<comment><USER15> It would be a lot more suspicious if you showed the reverse flow of personnel.

The above just indicates that some people might start to prefer, over time, a cushier job at a less-scrupulous corporation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> AVG is clearly circling the drain at this point and doing anything and everything to squeeze out as much revenue as possible before the music stops. Another example is AVG Secure Search, which is effectively malware snuck in with AVG installs. I recently spent a good many hours trying to get it off of my wife's computer, since it doesn't have an uninstaller and the removal tool they provide on their website doesn't work (or at least didn't on her machine). In fact, in researching the issue I came across multiple cases where it not only didn't work, it also deleted people's bookmarks. The program also appears to use common malware techniques to prevent manual removal. And of course, this kind of thing has been going on for years, and the company gives no impression of caring. It really seems like they're now using their experience with malware to... create malware.

</comment><comment><USER17> There is no shortage of scammy software companies like AVG, but what always cracked me up about AVG was their logo. Do you think it's a coincidence that it bears a strong resemblance to the Windows logo?? Why might that be, hmmmm? Maybe so a bunch of unsophisticated users get the impression it's a real product somehow related to Microsoft?

The company is a joke like all the other toolbar companies. I wrote to a number of financial journalists at the WSJ a few years ago begging them to write an expose on these firms and Google's compliance in allowing them to exist. No one ever wrote me back.

</comment><comment><USER18> When AVG was first launched it was a great AV product. Now, like most services have gone the evil direction. It became pretty obvious they went downhill after directing people who want the free version to buy their other products.

I've been uninstalling AVG and replacing it with Microsoft Security Essentials. I know a lot people will be upset over that because [their favorite AV] catches X% more viruses and malware than MSE. But you know what - MSE is light, made by the same company who made the OS, and catches most of the common viruses.

<comment><USER19> Last time I looked MSE had fallen way behind everyone else. I could be completely wrong now.

<comment><USER20> This may be an unpopular theory, but I believe an insecure system was in MS's best interest. This would explain their weak tools and poor security.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Who the hell uses an anti-virus in 2015? Those things slow down your PC by like 20% for almost no benefit at all. Just don't open suspicious executables (e.g. from torrents), keep your OS and tools up to date and lock your browser down when it comes to plugins and JS execution.

<comment><USER22> Exactly. It's amazing how many people don't realize that this is all you need to do. Antivirus is only for people who don't follow those two rules.

Well JS is fine as long as the browser is up to date. Normal people aren't going to be hit by zero-days.

<comment><USER21> Well, a couple of years ago I was hit by a drive-by virus. Just opening a website in (up to date) Firefox literally opened .exe files on my PC and infected the entire OS. I burnt my hands once - not again. This might be an anecdote to you but boy that scarred me - the idea that clicking a link could compromise my entire system like that.

Even then - an antivirus program is unlikely to stop such an intrusion. It's just utterly ineffective, and I got viruses before despite having an anti- virus. Also, my anti-virus always deleted my hacktools and own programs which was a nuisance. Hence I don't use it anymore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Just finished uninstalling AVG...

<comment><USER24> I recently switched from Bitdefender to AVG, and like you just uninstalled AVG.

I'm not sure where to go from here.

<comment><USER25> (Assuming you're using Windows)

Are you using a recent version of Windows (8, 8.1, or 10)?

Do you have automatic updates enabled?

Do you have standard Windows features such as User Access Control enabled?

Do you use the computer with a standard user account as opposed to an administrator (root access) user account?

If the answers to all these questions are yes, I'd say you don't need an antivirus solution. Don't listen to the scaremongers. Microsoft has got you covered.

<comment><USER26> Depends what you're doing. If you like to play with a lot of risky torrents, then Windows Defender may not suffice. I also don't think Windows Defender does a great job at protecting you against infected removable media either. Avira seems to be pretty good at all of that and light weight.

For risky websites, a combination of Chrome, WOT, ublock origin, HTTPS Everywhere and Sandboxie and/or Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit (zero-day protection) should suffice.

Using a Standard (non-Admin) Windows account and being up to date goes without saying.

<comment><USER27> Risky torrents are what VMs are for.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> And PCI compliance still requires antivirus ;(. What a crock.

<comment><USER29> Or a compensating control.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Is there any "good" antivirus? I personally don't use any antivirus software, but I usually install Microsoft Security Essentials for not-quite-tech-savvy family members.

</comment><comment><USER31> It used to be that government would go after those for deceived people for money. Bait-and-switch is one of the oldest form of fraud there is and its fairly easy to do with 40 pages "policy" written in legalize.

<comment><USER32> Well, the government isn't being effective against the true criminals here (the virus developers), and anti-virus isn't free, and government isn't subsidising AV software. Something's gotta give.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Went to look at the story with my AVG 'protected' laptop and couldn't view it because the website may be a trojan!

</comment><comment><USER34> Url changed from [http://slashdot.org/story/299691](http://slashdot.org/story/299691), which points to [http://news.softpedia.com/news/avg-proudly-announces-it- will...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/avg-proudly-announces-it-will-sell- your-browsing-history-to-online-advertisers-492146.shtml), neither of which are very informative.

I found the Wired article by using the 'web' link we added last week to search on the title (which I had to modify a bit). If anyone can suggest a better URL, we'll change it again.

</comment><comment> zero-rated Hasn't most free software been doing this all along? I assumed they already were.

</comment><comment><USER35> If you aren't paying, you are the product.

<comment><USER36> So how much did you pay for your GPL software? Or for posting your comment? Do you expect to pay with your privacy for those?

For sure there's no free lunch, but I believe you're making it too easy for AVG. An antivirus is a piece of software one normally trusts. It's a shame if this trust is misused. And let's not deceive ourselves that users will attempt to understand fully the technical stuff behind the data privacy statement they put out. While trivial for an IT person, the jargon will not be understood by non-techies.

<comment><USER37> Indeed.

The "If you aren't paying you are the product" is an anachronistic and ignorant trope leveraged in fanfolk wars. It excuses those things that are paid for and are further monetised. Take for example your music purchases and a "You might like..." suggestion list; you have paid for the system, purchased music, and surprisingly your purchases are being tracked and further monetisation is attempted. Vast troves of interaction data is accumulated and analysed ad infinitum[1].

Free lunches _do_ exist as well, as anyone with a good friend or child will attest to.

The slogans of hypercapitalism are rampant, none of which do justice to the complexities of context.

[1] Yes Apple is included in this, as we know from the extensive market research revealed via the Samsung lawsuit and the fact that Ping no longer exists.

<comment><USER38> "If you aren't paying, you're the product" is exactly correct when dealing with commercial software, GPL and otherwise. That's the idea behind the word "commercial." Commerce is taking place and somebody is making money, whether by offering paid support for GPL software at one end of the spectrum or by selling you out to advertisers at the other end.

I distinctly remember opting in to Apple's music suggestion service. Was that true for AVG's customers?

<comment><USER39> > Commerce is taking place and somebody is making money, whether by offering > paid support for GPL software at one end of the spectrum or by selling you > out to advertisers at the other end.

RedHat is a commercial operation that makes money by selling support contracts for GPL software they produce. But I haven't bought a support contract even though I use some of their software without paying anything, so am I the customer or the product?

<comment><USER38> You're neither. You're not a part of their business model at all.

Your relationship with Red Hat is very different from your relationship with Apple, Microsoft, Google, or AVG. That _should_ go without saying, but apparently it doesn't.

<comment><USER39> > You're neither. You're not a part of their business model at all.

Sure you are. Platforms have network effects. They're better off if you use their software than if you use Windows, even if you don't buy a support contract.

So the exchange is that you get free software and they get network effects. It's not an adversarial relationship where you have conflicting interests regarding how much they'll be paid or how much privacy they'll take from you, because network effects don't hurt you (as long as the vendor is not a monopoly) -- if you're using the software then they help you.

Sometimes there _is_ a free lunch.

> Your relationship with Red Hat is very different from your relationship with > Apple, Microsoft, Google, or AVG. That _should_ go without saying, but > apparently it doesn't.

That's the point. "If you're not paying you're the product" is thereby disproved. You can have a relationship with a commercial entity in which neither is true.

Worse, the implied alternative is also wrong. You can be paying _and_ be the product, as you are with Windows 10.

If you want something to take home, it's this: _Stop patronizing companies that convert your privacy into their money._

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Antivirus was one of the main original reasons I left Windows and started to lean to Free Software. In one hand I had the virus, in the other I had the antivirus, both options were terrible.

</comment><comment><USER41> Personally, I think if they a) are very upfront about this (clearly stated during install) and b) offer a paid alternative then I'd be fine with this. There's actually some synergy if they do things right: you were most likely infected by a site you visited (most likely a malicious ad), so if they also use this data to track sources (which isn't clear) then it could even make for a better product.

Of course if they aren't being clear about the data-for-product swap then I'm not in favor.

<comment><USER42> _Personally, I think if they a) are very upfront about this (clearly stated during install) and b) offer a paid alternative then I 'd be fine with this._

To be sure, you don't really know if you'd be fine with this because it's never been tried, and probably won't, because no company dealing user information out the back door has ever given any indication that they are open to giving up even a shred of this business line.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> The irony... a product that is suppose to protect you from malware becomes the very tool that engages in illegal and unconstitutional data-mining.

There used to be a distinction between services offered on the web and apps running on the desktop (spyware, illegal). Windows 10 changed all that (along with lots of help from mobile OSes). It's (constitutional) criminal behavior (eula or not) and should be classified as such.

<comment><USER44> >There used to be a distinction between services offered on the web and apps running on the desktop (spyware, illegal). Windows 10 changed all that

I don't think you've paid much attention, but that had changed long before Windows 10. This is just _Microsofts_ big foray into that dark market. For years other companies have done the same thing.

<comment><USER43> "I don't think you've paid much attention, but that had changed long before Windows 10."

You basically repeated everything I just said. You see... I do pay attention. Along with "lots of help from mobile OSes", Microsoft's big push into embedding spyware into a __Desktop __OS has completely changed the game. It has given applications - __running on user local machines __\- license to install spyware (which is still considered illegal under the law).</comment></comment></comment>


How To UPDATE THE KINDLE FIRE TO VERSION 6.2.1 - <AUTHOR> http://www.teamphones.com/android/how-to-update-the-kindle-fire-to-version-6-2-1-3449.html The software update which was promised by the Kindle Fire has commenced to roll out. The update was needed to fix its awful Wi-Fi connectivity, navigation, privacy and touchscreen issues. <comment><USER2> Hi nancymills, welcome to HN. Please have a look at the guidelines (<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>). One of them mentions not using uppercase to make title stand out - and that makes everyone's life a little bit better ;)</comment>


Gender Bias and Sexism in Language - <AUTHOR> http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-470 <comment><USER2> When I was a kid it was okay to say gay to mean anything really bad or anti- social. I said it a lot, my friends said it a lot. But after highschool I met some gay friends. And then I realized some of my friends in highschool were gay, but closeted. And after gaining some empathy, the word "gay" used in that way is really grating to my ears. It causes me to wince and feel uncomfortable and basically ashamed.

I feel that the word "bitch" is going that way now. I used to us it a lot e.g. "Stop bitching and moaning". But then I got married and realized my wife, her friends, and basically every other woman I know view that words as essentially and anti-woman slur. So now when I hear it in songs, when I hear it it jokes, when I hear it on TV... I wince a little. And you should too.</comment>


Body Hacking: Thoughts Regarding My Magnet Implant - <AUTHOR> http://www.iamdann.com/2012/03/21/my-magnet-implant-body-modification <comment><USER2> Body modification? Pacemaker here.

Every six months I have to go in for a tuneup, a wireless data dump & service testing. Having having one's heart slowed to sub-40bpm via a few taps on a screen is...odd. Printed report tells assorted stories of daily activity periods, odd events, heart rate hitting programmed thresholds, etc. There have been some confluence of proximity & programming causing twitching under some circumstances (couldn't sleep on my left side for a year due to a lead pressing on & convulsing diaphragm) which were fixed completely thru software settings. Have a minimum threshold programmed in, and if it's set too high (say, 60bpm) and I relax deeply can feel it kicking in with "go faster!"

Proved quite useful a couple weeks back. Suffered a random onset of aortic flutter (can happen to anyone, just sorta happens), where a natural short- circuit in the beat-signal nerves sent the heart rate up to 349bpm (neatly documented on the printed data dump). For most people, this means a very scary and tense race to the emergency room, with AED paddles & drugs to bring it down until the problem can be surgically eliminated. My pacemaker hit the brakes at 150bpm, leaving me functional to wander in to the ER at my convenience; there, a tech was brought in to set up a more aggressive flutter- control program (70-100bpm more aware of actual physical needs). That kept things manageable until the drive-thru heart surgery to fix the problem (1 hour to send a probe up a vein to find & burn out the short, 3 hours rest, then discharged). Wasn't what the pacer was installed to handle (ventricular resynchronization), but the "while we're installing this, let's add a wire and program in some other someday-useful stuff" has indeed proven useful.

Other body modification is a mechanical heart valve. I tick. I've been confused with clocks.

Yes, MRIs are completely out of the question now. Work near a small one and get nervous walking by the door.

OK, so these weren't exactly voluntary. Choice aside, being a cyborg does make for interesting experiences & conversations.

ETA: BTW, not looking forward to replacing the battery. At least the device has been saying the battery will last another four years - for the last four years.

<comment><USER3> That's a fascinating read.

This kind of control and capability makes me wonder if they won't someday become common in a preventative/health monitoring role instead of only for cardiac defects. The risk during installation and problems with MRI seem pretty serious, so I doubt it could happen soon, but it's not impossible.

I wonder what some sort of self-assembing/modular device that can be fed in chunks through a vein catheter or keyhole surgery, and built in-situ could be plausible.

Not sure what to do about the MRI issue though. They're only going to get more common as we figure out superconductors, and they have none of the radiation downsides of CT. Maybe non-metallic construction, or perhaps when milli-Tesla MRI becomes a reasonable alternative?

Is the battery in yours single use, or recharged via induction loop?

<comment><USER2> Pacemaker installation is now an arthroscopic outpatient process. (Mine was in conjunction with open-heart valve replacement - not so much an outpatient process, but they're starting to do 'em that way too now.)

Battery is single-use. I wouldn't want a rechargeable, because that would require far more frequent charging - to wit, much more room for error. Missing a charge would mean a dead...me. I'll take the ~5-8 year hard-way replacement.

<comment><USER4> Pity they don't use nukes anymore; they worked great, until people started cremating them.

<comment><USER3> According to [http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/Miscellaneous/pacemaker.h...](http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/Miscellaneous/pacemaker.htm) they're titanium cased and designed to withstand cremation, although I have no idea if that's true in practice.

What surprised me was that the total expected exposure was much higher for the patients spouse that the patient themselves. It's got twice the thickness of partner in which to be absorbed, but there's only close exposure for maybe 8-10 hours a day, and the inverse square to deal with.

<comment><USER5> "The whole body exposure is estimated to be approximately 0.1 rem per year to the patient and approximately 7.5 mrem per year to the patient's spouse." In the same units, 100mrem (patient) to 7.5mrem (spouse). Using the xkcd[1] radiation chart, that's the equivalent of a head CT scan every two years for the patient, and 2 plane flights a year for the partner.

1\. <http://xkcd.com/radiation/>

<comment><USER3> Argh, I've looked at that page several times, and each time I've managed to misread a 'm' on that 0.1 _rem_ figure.

Thanks for clearing it up!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's a cool idea, but let's not give short shrift to the MRI downside. MRIs are a big deal in today's medical world. Not being able to get one, depending on circumstances, can present anything from a mild inconvenience to a significant challenge. Especially if it's because of some piece of metal you elected to have implanted.

I type these words with a (non-elective) series of metal prostheses implanted in my hand and wrist. Luckily, I don't set off metal detectors unless they're turned to extremely high sensitivities. But MRIs are out. I don't want to get into TMI detail, but let's just say that I have an ongoing medical condition that makes the inability to get MRIs a big setback.

Tread carefully with this stuff. Look before you leap.

<comment><USER7> There's a reason I have a Rod of Asclepius and "DO NOT MRI" tattooed on my wrist. Apparently it's quite possible to go through an MRI with implant intact, so long as the techs know about it. The inventor of these implants' advice about MRIs can be found here: [http://www.stevehaworth.com/wordpress/index.php/welcome- from...](http://www.stevehaworth.com/wordpress/index.php/welcome-from-steve- haworth/magnetic-faq)

<comment><USER8> > _There's a reason I have a Rod of Asclepius and "DO NOT MRI" tattooed on my > wrist._

You realize there are other large magnets in the world besides those for MRIs?

<comment><USER9> What do you have in mind? I can only come up with particle accelerators, nuclear fusion reactors and special cranes on junkyards..

<comment><USER10> High voltage transformers, demagnetizers (used in workshops all over the place), and large electric motors all come to mind.

<comment><USER7> You can feel transformers from a (comparatively) massive distance away: I can feel a 230-to-12V transformer from 5 to 10cm, which is generally bigger than the transformer is. So you'd know to steer clear. I mean, IAmDann said here, [http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/g7lom/iama_24_year_old...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/g7lom/iama_24_year_old_with_a_magnet_implanted_in_my/c1li0ec) that he can feel subway power transformers while walking down the street.

Demagnetizers... isn't the whole point to enclose the field? I'd also expect a warning sign or two, or for you to pay attention and know it's there. This is one of those "make your decision, and then live with it" things, and part of "living with it" is being aware of these things (and that acquaintances with more humour than sense might try to hand you magnets you can lift tables with).

Large electric motors... Dunno, have no experience of them yet.

<comment><USER11> Do you get a sensation from switching power supplies vs transformers? Or is the frequency in a switching power supply too high to sense? (I've been studying power supplies a lot lately, so I'm curious.)

Tangentially on the topic of MRI safety, there's a fascinating story of a police officer who got too close to an MRI. The magnet yanked the gun out of his hand and the gun went off despite the thumb safety being engaged. (Nobody was hurt and the MRI received only superficial damage.) Apparently the strong magnetic field pulled the firing pin block out of the way, allowing the gun to go off. Details: <http://www.ajronline.org/content/178/5/1092.full>

<comment><USER7> Thinkpad switch-mode power supplies give almost no sensation, but I have gotten a distinct (and pretty distinctive) "buzz" from a Dell power supply. I'll point out others seem to be much more sensitive than I, as well (see jaa's comment, below; he can feel power cables. I can't). So the answer is... it depends? ",)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If you'd like a lower effort version: I glued a tiny, but powerful, magnet to my fingernail and then coated it with a few layers of nail polish.

It looked more than a little flashy, and it provided less sensation than it would've implanted, but it worked surprisingly well.

<comment><USER13> Couldn't you simply carry a magnetic ring? Or would that not work for some reason?

<comment><USER14> Where's a good place to get magnetic rings for this purpose? I searched Amazon and found things like magnetic bracelets marketed as alternative medicine to cure you. None of the reviews I found mentioned using them as an electromagnetic sensor, so I can't tell if they're useful for the purpose.

<comment><USER14> I found a friend who's had magnet rings; he pointed me to some info: [http://hackaday.com/2012/01/02/give-yourself-a-sixth- sense-o...](http://hackaday.com/2012/01/02/give-yourself-a-sixth-sense-on-the- cheap/) (follow the links; it links to "Holy Scrap" blog which links to a couple online magnetic-ring-sellers).

I also found a ring sizing guide: <http://pages.ebay.com/buy/guides/ring- sizing-guide/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Fascinating article. Speaking as someone who as worked around MRIs, I think the author underestimates the risk of being put in an MRI machine. It would be worth carrying a wallet card or wrist band noting that he has an implant (though emergency MRIs are relatively uncommon).

It's also worth noting that the fascial compartments of the hand can make infections tough to treat, and compartment syndrome can occasionally lead to serious problems requiring finger amputations.

Regardless, it's an interesting experiment that I'm glad someone who wasn't me performed.

<comment><USER16> Last I checked the MRI risk seemed low due to it's placement, shape, and the minimal strength of the magnet. Do you have any specific concerns?

PS: _What if I need an MRI?

Originally it was thought that the magnets would always rip out of the skin and attach themselves to the MRI. However, we now know of a few people who have the magnets have gone through MRIs and this did not happen. One person reported that the magnet just vibrated very strongly. Another person reported that the techs shielded his hand, as they would with someone who had shrapnel or other implants. However, there are several different types of MRIs, so we can make no guarantee of what will happen during your MRI, so you must discuss it with the technician. It is likely that they will give you a hard time about it, so you should be prepared for this and for any possible risks to yourself. It's also possible that the MRI might demagnetize your magnet._

[http://www.stevehaworth.com/wordpress/index.php/welcome- from...](http://www.stevehaworth.com/wordpress/index.php/welcome-from-steve- haworth/magnetic-faq)

<comment><USER15> Obviously I have no first-hand experience with implanted magnets, but MRI magnets are generally getting stronger. What is safe for a 1.5 tesla MRI may not hold for a 3-4 tesla MRI. The rapid magnetic oscillation has been known to heat up wires and cause burns.

There's some people horsing around with 4T MRI that might give you pause.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BBx8BwLhqg&feature=relat...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BBx8BwLhqg&feature=related)

<comment><USER16> Thanks for that, I suspect infection is still probably a more serious risk overall, but a 4+T MRI does give me pause.

PS: Then again at 10T you get to fly so it may still be worth the risk. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1vyB-O5i6E> ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't know that I would want an implant, but I'd like to try a haptic compass. You strap it on and it gives you a physical sensation of where north is, as if you were a bird with magnetoception.

Wire article on haptic compasses: <http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/esp.html>

<comment><USER18> The funny thing about these is that they don't really make you constantly aware of where north is. To answer that question you would have to concentrate on the vibration. What acutally happens is way cooler: You become subconsciously aware of the structure of the space surrounding you. This is something that everyone has to a leser extent i.e. you could point at the direction of various objects around you and tell me roughly how far away they are even without looking. When you have been wearing the belt for a few weeks you are able to do this even for objects that are not in you immediate vicinity. You get an actual feeling for the location of all kinds of things. Imagine having an accurate intuition for the location of your home town or the next highway exit! Another example: you could visit a city where you have never been before, wander around the streets without caring for where you go and then immediately find the shortest route back to where you started. And it would be about as hard for you as finding the way to the door of the room you're in right now.

<comment><USER19> Sounds neat. I just use my phone.

<comment><USER20> You say that as if it's just as convenient to get out your phone and get your map up as it is to just intuitively know where to go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I hope technology such as this can help make the world of body modification a little more palatable to average folk.

The vast majority of people go only as far as some piercings and maybe a tattoo. We need to get away from the absurdity of contemporary body mod culture: tooth sharpening, scarification, branding, horn implants, sclera tattoos, gauging, suspension, tongue bifurcation, lip discs, genital modifications…it's _too much_.

That kind of modification is a dead-end because it doesn't fulfill its nominally transhumanist goals. But regular people could warm up to things like magnets and RFID tags, or, say, internal sensors to let you know of impending health problems. That sort of body modification provides _actual value_ in the form of information that would otherwise be unavailable or inconvenient to obtain. I think that's where we're headed in the next couple of decades.

<comment><USER22> > We need to get away from the absurdity of contemporary body mod culture: > tooth sharpening, scarification, branding, horn implants, sclera tattoos, > gauging, suspension, tongue bifurcation, lip discs, genital > modifications…it's too much.

... why?

> That kind of modification is a dead-end because it doesn't fulfill its > nominally transhumanist goals.

Does art have to?

<comment><USER21> No, as an art form it's great! But there are also plenty of mods that serve practical purposes. People who are put off by the artistic culture won't see the benefits of other mods. For their sake, we should show that there is another side.

<comment><USER22> Oh, I see. I didn't read that in your earlier post. Yes, I could see the benefit; though I can understand why people would be very concerned about a few of these, especially the RFIDs, for religious reasons (Mark of the Beast)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > I also figure that if I'm ever incapacitated and put in an MRI machine > without the ability to give the doctor any forewarning, a tiny magnet > getting ripped out of my finger will be the least of my concerns.

It might be a rather bigger concern for the owner of the MRI though...

<comment><USER24> > It might be a rather bigger concern for the owner of the MRI though...

Not to mention all the other patients who need the MRI machine your "sixth sense" just shot a hole through.

<comment><USER25> The thing is half the size of a grain of rice, and isn't such a strong magnet. I don't think it's gonna cause major damage. Wheelchairs or oxygen tanks cause damage. Quarters and dimes are just annoying and need to be fished out.

(This my recollection from my friends who've done research with MRIs. I have no first-hand experience with them except once as a patient.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I've had two tiny disc magnet implants in two fingers for over three years now. I originally had it implanted as part of an idea for a novel man-machine interface I came up with for my Master's degree research project at the Uni of Reading (UK).

The early reports of electrical fields inducing sensations had intrigued me, so I set out to explore the possibility of controlling the magnet with an external electromagnet, which in my final design was a simple coil ring worn around the finger, and use it as a sensory substitution man-machine interface. After measuring the frequency response, sensitivity etc characteristics, I finally put it into a practical application demo by using the interface to couple an ultrasonic ranger and a mobile phone to myself. The ultrasonic ranger was used to feed the distance information and I learnt pretty quickly to judge distances and move about with my eyes closed. In the phone scenario, I encoded characters as Morse Code pulses and could "read" the incoming text messages. My morse skills weren't that good but it worked!

The internalization of the sensory information, with the magnet being inside the body, made a qualitative subjective difference as opposed to simply having a magnet glued to the finger.

There's a bit of info on this and pictures/xrays on my blog: <http://www.jawish.org/blog/plugin/tag/smii>. The details on the interface is on the paper we published: [http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5898...](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5898141)

My best experience with real world magnetic fields? Wires. It was mind blowing to be able to feel the field around a wire which we usually think nothing of. The power cable to the electric heater generated a field I could "touch" about 4-5 inches away! What does touching it feel like? Like touching a stream of air. :)

<comment><USER7> I've read that paper, and I'd like to say thanks; being able to point at graphs that say I'm not imagining the sensation from my implant has occasionally been helpful. ",)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> > While a magnet implant doesn't technically count as a "sixth sense" (it's > more of an extension of our existing sense of touch), the way that the body > internalizes these tiny magnetic vibrations feels truly foreign.

Let's just start by dispelling the myth that there are "five senses", and then we can agree that this does provide an additional sense. The inner ear is an orientation sensor and orientation is clearly a sense, therefore there are more than "five senses".

<comment><USER28> "proprioception" is one name for the sense of spatial orientation.

<comment><USER27> Proprioception means you can sense the position of your limbs. That is different that what the inner ear provides. You can be blind, deaf, and paralyzed from the neck down, and you will still be able to know when the airplane is starting to descend, even though you will have lost all proprioception.

<comment><USER29> As someone who flys with pilots they will tell me "You may think the plane is descending but you don't _know_ the plane is descending until the instruments confirm it" :-) One of the fun things they do is fly various patterns that give your inner ear signals that you are doing one thing when the plane is doing something else, its part of a ritual to always check your instruments.

Anyway the notion of extending sense is interesting, and I wonder if anyone has implanted a hall effect sensor (rather than a magnet) and had the eddy current run to the nerve nexus in a finger tip. You would not be able to pick up paper clips but you should be able to 'feel' all sorts of electro-magnetic phenomena.

<comment><USER7> Integrating with nerves is have-you-a-pet-surgeon territory, and pretty much all of this stuff is done by piercers, or insane amateurs with no respect for their own bodily integrity (see the amazing Lepht Anonym). Few doctors will touch this stuff, for liability or Hippocratic Oath reasons.

The only people I know who _have_ done it are Dr. and Mrs. Warwick, who used it to do nerve-firing-over-IP from New York to Reading.

And your inner ear is fooled because the gloop in the organ-I-can't-remember- the-name-of suffers from inertia, registering false movements (or false lack of movement). Which is why spinning around in a circle for a while makes you dizzy; your ear is registering the movement continuing, your visual cortex is seeing everything staying still, and your brain has no idea how to integrate the two. ",)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I have an rfid implant, but I haven't found any real uses for it. Of course I thought about what I was was going to do with it before I got the implant, and had some ideas and got the implant thinking that tinkering with applications would shine new light, but in the end it's quite lackluster to have one. It's also strange how exotic it seems to have one when you don't have it, and how pedestrian it feels when you actually have it.

I sort of read that same feeling between the lines of the article. It's a bit of a novelty when you first get it, but after a while it's not all that special.

</comment><comment><USER31> Related: Nokia has some patent application for a magnetic tattoo and/or skin patch that would provide haptic feedback from a magnetic field projected by your phone: [http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Se...](http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch- bool.html&r=10&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=Nokia.AS.&OS=AN/Nokia&RS=AN/Nokia?fvrewsd)

Not sure how they would shield from outside interference/have the field coming from your pocket reach your hand in all situations though.

<comment><USER32> There was a House episode where a prisoner had a low-quality tattoo containing too much iron (or something). The prisoner went into the MRI and the experience was excruciating.

Not sure if there's any grain of truth to that or not. It was Hollywood.

<comment><USER19> MythBusters covered this one in one of the earlier seasons. They couldn't produce any sort of effect even with unlikely high metal concentrations in the ink.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Here's Quinn Norton's talk at 23C3 (five years ago) about functional body modification, including her personal experience & some of the problems with embedded magnets: warning it's a little graphic <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voA7Uz7uABE> There's a text-and-picture summary here if you don't want to watch the video, also with graphic photos: [http://www.we-make-money-not- art.com/archives/2007/01/quinn-...](http://www.we-make-money-not- art.com/archives/2007/01/quinn-norton-on.php)

</comment><comment><USER34> I got mine only two weeks ago, and I'm looking forward to exploring that new "sense".

I was kinda surprised the most frequently asked question when ppl heard about it – and the one that came pretty unexpected for me – was "why?!".

thanks for the article!

<comment><AUTHOR> I love meeting other people with the implant and doing a "magnet handshake" by brushing the fingers next to each other.

<comment><USER35> I have one too! I'm kind of surprised that there are not one, but two other people on HN with magnet implants.

And I too am really surprised when people ask "why?" Is it not obvious?

<comment><USER36> _And I too am really surprised when people ask "why?" Is it not obvious?_

No, actually, it isn't. Is it just because it's "cool" (like a piercing) or is it serving some practical purpose for you beyond that? Genuinely curious.

<comment><USER35> It augments your sense of touch. I suppose this isn't obvious (however it seems obvious to me that many people would want to augment their senses).

Does it serve a practical purpose for me? No, I have it because it's "cool" but not at all in the same way that piercings are "cool." It's cool because I can feel motors, power transformers, etc.

It's also very useful for picking up dropped paperclips.

<comment><USER36> Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Note: OnSwipe damaged site, and adding ?onswipe_ redirect=never goes into a redirect loop.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I actually noticed that last night and forgot to deactivate it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I've followed magnetic implants for a while, always considering getting my own, as well as an RFID implant. I'm also a fan of BMEZine and there can be quite a few overlaying interests in the two communities. Whiles its not as good as it used to be when Shannon (guy mentioned in OP's article) was editor, I suggest people subscribe if they're interested in such things.

<comment><USER39> Why not get a magnet ring? It's nondestructive and gives you access to many of the same sensations.

<comment><USER7> Nate (<http://feelingwaves.blogspot.com/>) recommends supergluing a small neodymium to your fingertip as the best model of how the implant actually feels; I haven't tried it, myself.

<comment><USER40> I have. I should repeat it with a stronger magnet. I just used one from the 'random magnets I've accumulated since I was a kid' pile and picked one primarily for the size, but it only allowed me to sense sizable motors. A simple band-aid was all the social camouflage it needed, which was nice.

<comment><USER7> I meant to compare with the sensation from my implant. (",)

It's also been tried with sticking tiny magnets to the fingernails, then varnishing on top: [http://www.psfk.com/2010/06/fingernails-implanted-with- magne...](http://www.psfk.com/2010/06/fingernails-implanted-with-magnets.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I design toys that use magnets.. I end up carving my own tools out of wood so I can epoxy them in proper places.

They are super annoying to make stay where you want them.. I would go crazy if I had one inside me.

<comment><USER42> Hah! I can imagine epoxy covered magnets sticking to my little finger.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Man, the last time I read about these was back during the original trials when it was still pretty finicky. Feeling seriously tempted now.

</comment><comment><USER44> I never heard of this before, but I want one so bad right now. However, the MRI thing is a real deal-break for me... oh well :(

</comment><comment><USER45> I found these quite interesting, but I'd never get one implanted: using small screwdrivers and wrenches would be a pain, it affects the phone's magnetometer and you have to be careful not to cut your finger or when lifting anything heavy (and using all your fingers' strength)...

<comment><AUTHOR> I've had no issues with screwdrivers or wrenches, it doesn't affect my iPhone at all (I've brushed that finger over every inch of that device trying to feel inside it) and it was surprisingly easy to adjust the way I carry heavy things.

<comment><USER45> Hmm, well that's pretty good, then...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I thought something that was cooler (and less permanent) was the feelspace belt: it has a compass module and a bunch of of vibrating motors, so you can always 'feel' magnetic north

<http://feelspace.cogsci.uni-osnabrueck.de/>

</comment><comment><USER47> Looks like a pretty simple device. Now, when can we start seeing more improvements (particularly use/assembly related) on open source EEGs? I'm far more interested in monitoring my brain activity outside of my psychologist's office. Odd signal activity and all that...

</comment><comment><USER48> I was thinking about getting this done, but then I realized that recently I've been doing so much metal machining work, that the concept of picking up metal filings constantly with my finger just sounds painful.

</comment><comment><USER49> Contacted Steve Haworth today to arrange an appointment to get one implanted. Been wanting one for a few years now, this article tipped the scales.

</comment><comment><USER50> Is this magnet powerful enough to damage magnetic media (HDDs, Tapes, etc)?

<comment><USER51> It's actually surprisingly hard to intentionally damage most magnetic media (except audio tape and really cheap magstripe cards and you probably aren't going to see either today) with permanent magnet, so one can safely assume, that this is not a problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> what happens if you actually operate one of those cloth retail super magnets de-taggers? does your hand get pulled away or inside it?

</comment><comment><USER53> Obligatory: Magneto

<comment><USER54> 1\. Not obligatory 2\. He's not using the magnet to generate AC electricity 3\. If he were to face comic character Magneto, it would be much like the MRI case 4\. If you're asserting he is Magneto, he has no ability to shape, or even move metal at a distance.

Can you explain what you were trying to say using more than two words? I really don't follow what you're trying to get at. Both words seem meaningless and wrong in this context.</comment></comment>


Google's Project Tango – transmogrified reality - <AUTHOR> http://uploadvr.com/youve-heard-of-ar-and-vr-but-google-is-talking-tr-transmogrified-reality/ The article mainly covers Noah Falstein's talk.<p>Here's a link to the project itself: https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#project <comment><AUTHOR> The article mainly covers Noah Falstein's talk.

Here's a link to the project itself: [https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#project](https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#project)</comment>


Generation Snowflake: hysterical young women who can't cope with being offended - <AUTHOR> https://www.thesun.co.uk/uncategorized/1254262/meet-generation-snowflake-the-hysterical-modern-kids-who-cant-cope-with-being-offended/ <comment><USER2> Bonus points for using the gendered term 'hysteria' to describe women.

Has everyone forgotten that people have always been offended, and offended about people being offended? "Bloom County" from _1982_ used the term "offensensitivity". [http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1982/11/14/](http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1982/11/14/) .

It's rather like disdainfully calling 20-year-olds "hipsters", forgetting the disdain towards "slackers" of 30 years ago, or the belief that calling people a snowflake is somehow different than the claims that Dr. Spock ruined American youth with his 'permissive' teachings, or the even older cries of woe, like this quote from Life Magazine, March 29, 1949:

> We have reared a bunch of weaklings in our young marrieds of today. Too much > has been handed to them on a silver platter without their having had to work > for it, and they lack the intestinal fortitude to meet life as a challenge.

</comment><comment><USER3> I sure love articles that take a small group of people and makes broad negative generalizations about them. This surely is important reading, and not just angry writers upset that someone might think differently than they do.

</comment><comment><USER4> Christ, what an asshole.</comment>


Some Principles for Fearless Learning That Will Take You a Long Way - <AUTHOR> https://thestempedia.com/blog/some-principles-for-fearless-learning-that-will-take-you-a-long-way/ <comment><AUTHOR> Our mindset is the biggest building block for our personality. And it wouldn't hurt if we educate ourselves on how we can be more efficient. Here are some principles that will help you grow.</comment>


What Great Artists Need: Solitude - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/02/what-great-artists-need-solitude/283585/?single_page=true <comment><AUTHOR> See also "Solitude and Leadership:" [https://theamericanscholar.org/solitude- and-leadership/](https://theamericanscholar.org/solitude-and-leadership/)</comment>


The megapixel myth - <AUTHOR> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

<comment><USER2> I used to work for... A press agency you've all heard of. We had lots of big prints up about the place. Now, some of these were shot on films like Fuji NPZ (ISO 800 colour negative) or first-generation photojournalist DSLRs (e.g. Nikon D1H, 2.1MP). At 60x40", they looked _great_. Nikon knew this; their second generation was "only" 4MP (D2H).

What matters in resolution is lp/mm; that is how many distinct pairs of black and white lines can fit within 1mm. See here: [http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/size_matters.ht...](http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/size_matters.html) The long and the short of it is, unless you are shooting on a tripod with a cable release and a prime lens, there's really not much point worrying about megapixels. I once had a huge row with people on a mailing list about this; try as I might I couldn't make them understand the simple idea that it doesn't matter how many pixels you have if they can't all be assigned distinct values, there's no additional resolution there. They were the kind of people that bought the most expensive DSLR and stuck the cheapest lens on it. Then again if you'd spent 5 grand on a camera and someone did the maths for you you might be upset too... ;-)

Also note that cinema is only 2000 pixels across.

<comment><USER3> lp/mm is just a unit of measure for resolution and is directly constrained by the number of pixels. You can't resolve 10 lines with less than 20 pixels and in practice you need more.

The article you quoted compares the same resolution in different sized sensors to show that smaller sensors need to resolve more lp/mm in sensor area to achieve the same file in the end. It shows that for the same MP count a larger sensor is better. What we are discussing is the opposite, for the same sensor size MP count is better. And as far as resolution is concerned that tends to be the case, even if the lens is the biggest bottleneck.

In DSLRs we're getting to a point where resolution is more constrained by camera movement and lens quality than number of pixels but at the same time both those bottlenecks are being addressed with modern lens design and anti- shake techniques. We've come a long way in actual practical resolution from the 2MP/4MP cameras you mentioned.

<comment><USER4> > for the same sensor size MP count is better

That's very wrong. The number of photons is limited, the effective light- sensitive area drops with more MP, and with small sensors with more MP you then get more noise than a signal. It's hidden by post-processing but that also drops the real information. So less MP is better in a lot of common circumstances.

<comment><USER3> If you keep reading:

>And as far as resolution is concerned that tends to be the case

I was only talking about resolution. Lower MP gives you less noise but it won't give you more resolution. In the extreme case where you push the ISO maybe the extra noise can overcome the extra resolution. To make it simple lets say that at base ISO on a sunny day the higher MP will out-resolve the lower MP for a given sensor generation.

My point isn't that low MP isn't good for many applications it's that saying that higher MP doesn't lead to higher resolution is just wrong. If you want resolution you need pixels to produce it and current cameras are mostly not wasting the resolution away.

The excessive MP problem only really exists in consumer compacts. High-end compacts and DSLRs haven't been stretching the limits too much. The highest MP DSLRs right now have 24MP on a full-frame sensor, which is about the same density as 10MP on an APS sensor. Some of the APS ones have pushed that on to ~16MP with accompanying improvements in the individual pixels. Maybe you're thinking of camera phones with 8MP, those may very well be in the extreme case you mention where noise overcomes the extra resolution.

<comment><USER4> If you exclude professionals, nobody buys "full-frame" sensors. Excluding professionals, people don't even know what that means. Nobody brags about sensor size, everybody brags he has "more MP" than before.

Also almost nobody wants to make photos only in the direct sunlight. Normal conditions are conditions with less than optimal light.

So excluding "full-frame," more MP is actually worse, and people buy simply by believing "bigger number better."

Edit: Let me stress once again: I'm not discussing a scenario of a "professional with a slave to carry all his equipment and another guy to set and hold the lights" but a "normal person" carrying not-too-expensive camera or even his phone and expecting "more MP better pictures."

<comment><USER3> I was only mentioning full-frame as those are the highest MP DSLRs available. I then mentioned APS cameras, which a lot of people do buy, especially the entry level stuff. In that segment and even in less than perfect light the higher MP cameras have been getting better, not worse.

There's an argument to be made that if the manufacturers had stopped at say 12MP (to pick a number) and put all their effort into noise we would have better cameras now for the kind of use people actually put them through. In fact Nikon did just that at the high-end with the D700 and D3. There isn't however much of an argument to be made that the 16MP APS cameras of today are worse than the 12MP cameras of a couple years back. The latest models seem to have both more pixels and lower noise.

Maybe you'd like a lower MP camera with even lower noise and maybe you can't buy it because MP sells cameras and thus shapes development. That could be a problem, but saying "excluding full-frame, more MP is actually worse" isn't really true. My impression is the complaints about MP are mostly right in compacts and everywhere else tend to be geek snobbery.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> While he's got the ratios right, he's got a tolerance for bad printing that I don't share. VGA for 4 x 6? Maybe if you thought your 110 Instamatic made good enlargements (in those days, 4 x 6 was a premium print). That's newspaper resolution. Double up the dimensions (1.2 MP) and 4 x 6 is just acceptable to my eyes (and it didn't used to be when printer dithering algos weren't what they are today).

<comment><USER6> Agreed, with a 12 megapixel camera I never felt printing anything over 16 x 20 was acceptable, even with my 22 megapixel 5dmk2 I don't go much larger than 20 x 30.

<comment><USER7> It all depends on how closely you're viewing them. We have a bunch of photos shot with a 5D (12MP) printed about four feet tall. They look great from a normal viewing distance. Of course, when you put your face six inches away, you can start to see some digital artifacts (stair stepping, etc.) but that's not a problem.

The maximum necessary resolution is related to the intended viewing distance.

"The standard definition of normal visual acuity (20/20 vision) is the ability to resolve a spatial pattern separated by a visual angle of one minute of arc." From that the maximum resolvable dot size can be calculated for a given viewing distance.

[http://www.ndt- ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Pe...](http://www.ndt- ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/visualacuity.htm)

<http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html>

(Sidenote: billboards usually printed at around 20-30ppi)

<comment><USER5> 20/20 is actually pretty bad eyesight. It's "normal vision", not perfect vision, and when my eyes are "corrected" to 20/20, they're about a quarter- diopter shy of maximal acuity. There is a huge difference to my eyes between pictures printed at a 200-line screen and one printed at a 150-line screen (all other things, like stock and varnish being equal) at a distance of more than one metre (from head-height on a couch to the magazine at the far end of a coffee table). If I were printing from a 12MP original at about four feet tall, I'd certainly run the source through something like Genuine Fractals Print Pro (even a good giclee pattern can't make up for squared-off curves). At four feet in the long dimension (giving a realistic viewing distance of about six feet) I'd notice raggedness at a glance at less than about 80ppi -- but then the dye clouds from a 4x5 negative printed at that size would drive me batty as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Not to mention that most of those tiny cameras with huge pixel counts don't have optics good enough to resolve those pixels, so they _really_ are pointless.

</comment><comment><USER9> The article's heart is in the right place, but it overstates the case. For example, "Sharpness has very little to do with image quality, and resolution has little to do with sharpness" goes too far if you have a pretty good lens and you're pretty good at avoiding camera shake.

Pixel count is not nearly as important as marketing makes it out to be, but it is important.

</comment><comment><USER10> If I'm not mistaken, the Mars Rover had a 1 megapixel camera. :)

<comment><USER7> Not only that, but it's a monochrome sensor with a filter wheel. It takes the same shot with multiple filters and the resulting images are merged back on earth.

My friend worked on that project.

[Edit]

It has 12μm x 12μm pixels whereas the 5D has 8μm and the 5DmkII has 6μm pixels. However each pixel on the Canons contain three (RGB) photosites to the rover's one.

<http://www.mwoa.org/Ch31.pdf>

<comment><USER11> No, the Canon sensors also have only one photosite per pixel -- they're still using a Bayer filter on a monochromatic sensor.

<comment><USER7> Ok, here we're getting into confusion about terminology here.

To clarify:

In the Bayer filtered Canon CCD each individual photosensor is covered in a colored filter [1] in a pattern such as:

B G G R

So when capturing an image 1/4 of the sensors are capturing blue light, 1/4 capturing red, and 2/4 capturing green.

In contrast the CCD in the rover's cameras do not have filters in front of individual photosensors. Instead, there is a set of filters on a disc which are mechanically positioned in front of the sensor. Using this method three images are taken. On each with a red, green, and blue filter covering 4/4 of those same sensor elements giving you 2x-4x the number of elements capturing each color and thus much higher image quality at a given resolution.

B B B B then G G G G then R R R R

Similar multi-shot technology was used in the early days of terrestrial digital photography to provide better color, exposure latitude and resolution. [2] for a bit of discussion on multishot vs. single shot medium format digital camera backs.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter>

[2] [http://www.luminous- landscape.com/reviews/cameras/h3d50ii.sh...](http://www.luminous- landscape.com/reviews/cameras/h3d50ii.shtml)

<comment><USER11> The part that threw me off was where you said that the Canon sensor contains 3 photosites per pixel -- which based on this pots leads me to believe that you meant that it uses 3 photo sites to record each pixel, which is still not entirely accurate; the Rover's capture every color at every photosite, so they use all of their sensor's resolution. Canon (and everyone else but Foveon, for that matter) making a single-shot sensor can't do that, they instead sacrifice the real resolution of the sensor due to the Bayer filter, and use interpolation to make up the difference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> What annoys me a lot is increase in megapixels in camera phones and stagnation in tesktop\notebook screen resolution. I don't need multimegapixel camera in phone. To share photo with friends on facebook or twitter 0.3MP is more then enough but processing of multimegapixel image is not easy task for small ARM processor, so you get very slow response at all phone photo capturing and processing applications and getting annoying delays.

According to desktop screen resolution you are lucky if you can get screen with more then 2MP resolution. And this situation is same for years. It even getting worse after switching to wide screen because now you are getting less pixels on same diagonal and resolution.

<comment><USER13> You cannot directly compare digital camera megapixels with display megapixels. The former uses Bayer-interpolation (except very few cameras with Foveon sensor) while the latter has true RGB pixels. In the other words, the digital camera's pixel count of two million is shared between R, G, G, B pixels (500k of each – yes, most sensors have double green pixels). A Full HD monitor has 3 * 1920 * 1080 (sub)pixels.

Because of Bayer interpolation, the true resolution of 3MP sensor roughly equals 2MP screen resolution.

(Yes; I fully agree with your point that a phone doesn't need megazillion pixels. Sensor size is more important factor when speaking of image quality. [Not to mention the optics.])

<comment><USER12> I'm not comparing them directly I'm comparing increase in resolution for camera phones and monitors. Resolution for mainstream camera phone changed from 0.3MP to 5 MP (same Bayer-interpolated megapixels, technology is the same) but I still need to use same 2MP (true megapixels) monitor for years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Olympus has a great page for consumers to understand pixel-print size relationship: <http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/208_741.htm>

For example, my D300s (12M) at 4288x2848 pixels can be printed at 300dpi (professional photo prints) at a maximum size of 14.3x9.5(inch) = 36.32x24.13(cm) = a little bit smaller than an A3.

The same picture can be printed @150 dpi on an A1 (84.10 cm x 59.40 cm) leaving a little bit of border.

</comment><comment><USER15> The article referenced this:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/technology/08pogue.html?_r...](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/technology/08pogue.html?_r=2&oref=slogin)

The one company that seems to have a clue about this is actually Apple. The iPhone 4 has a 5mp camera in it. Some pundits say things like "I wish it had 8 megapixels or more". In doing so, they show their complete ignorance.

Most people couldn't tell the difference between 5 and 8 megapixels. What 8 megapixels buys you is larger files, more noise and slower processing (on a sensor this small). The size of the pixels matter. It's one reason DSLR images tend to be so much better: they have hugely bigger pixels.

I'd love to see more good 5-8mp point and shoot cams rather than these ridiculous 14+ mp noise factories.

<comment><USER16> Canon, Nikon and Panasonic reduced the number of pixels or kept them the same in their high end small sensor compacts. (Canon G11: 10 MP down from 14.7 MP in the predecessor; Canon S90 and S95: 10 MP; Nikon P7000: 10 MP down from 13.5 in the predecessor; Panasonic LX5: the same 10 MP as the 2006 model and a slightly bigger sensor.)

The newest iPhone has a tiny 1/3.2" sensor, those high end compacts usually have 1/1.7" sensors, that's quite a bit more than double the area. Their pixels are consequently a bit bigger. If Apple made the right decision Canon, Nikon and Panasonic must have, too.

They get it and they know that at least their best informed customers (those who actually buy high end small sensor compacts) will also get it. They are probably only (unnecessarily) afraid of the general public, all those who buy the cheapo point and shoots. If you are willing to pay you get appropriate pixel densities.

<comment><USER17> You might want to reverse that order: "If Apple made the right decision Canon, Nikon and Panasonic must have, too."

Canon and Nikon are optics companies. If ~they~ made the right decision, then Apple has weight in their position, too. I don't know enough about Panasonic to state an opinion (I'm neither saying they're bad, nor am I saying their good. I simply know little about them)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Are Ken Rockwell and Lew Rockwell related? They seem to share a web designer.</comment>


Tips on how to be a non-technical founder - <AUTHOR> http://kiss.bo.lt/frnou

<comment><USER2> For all web designers out there: don't underline text unless it's a link. Ever.

<comment><AUTHOR> Funny. I thought the same at first glance. I actually hovered over each underlined text block out of habit, even though subconsciously after the first one I knew the others weren't links.</comment></comment>


Performance & Load testing with Log Replay - <AUTHOR> http://www.igvita.com/2008/09/30/load-testing-with-log-replay/

<comment><USER2> Does anyone have any tools or thoughts on how to turn live traffic (from log and/or tcpdump) into test load for a write-heavy site? (I've found this useful for regression testing and performance in the past on a mostly readonly site).

At the least, it would seem to require a storage snapshot (db+backend storage) timed with the beginning of the log capture, so to get correct responses.

The test could then consist of checking all HTTP responses are the same, and that the db+storage has changed in the same way in the test env as it did on live.

With our current setup (mysql+webdav storage) this seems challenging, particularly since both of these are very large.

Is anyone aware of any tools or work in this area?</comment>


Show HN: Signature Maker (my weekend experiment) - <AUTHOR> http://signature-maker.net/

<comment><USER2> Make the drawing area bigger! It's extremely hard to write signature fluidly in tiny area with digital devices.

</comment><comment><USER3> nicely done, although taking a photo of an autograph works surprisingly well</comment>


Secessio plebis - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secessio_plebis <comment><USER2> The last secession was in 287 BC. Why were there not secessions after it? The reason has to do with the growth of the Roman Empire. Rome's conquests really went into overdrive after that and they conquered many kingdoms. Along with those conquests, there came a lot of slaves. This totally changed the dynamics. After a while, the wealthy depended not on their poor fellow Romans to farm or make goods, but on slaves. Now it did not matter if the plebes didn't not show up.

I fear that globalization may have served the same function in the United States. The wealthy don't depend on their poor fellow Americans to provide goods for them and work for them. They depend on good produced oversees and even for domestic production on immigrant labor(look at who gets employed in fame labor or domestic help). They have an alternative to their fellow poor Americans.

Now, a strike in the US has a good chance of resulting not in long term employee benefits like it did before, but in the plant being moved oversees.

Unfortunately, this has bad consequences. When the relatively peaceful secession was no longer an option, Rome devolved into outright violence in the Roman Revolutions which saw demagogues and authoritarians mobilize the disaffected poor to kill their enemies and establish their power. When it all ended with the ascension of Augustus in AD 31, Rome was a republic in name only, but in reality a military dictatorship. And the people were generally happy with it because it brought peace after decades of violence and bloodshed.

I hope our democracies can find a better solution to the issues of wealth inequality, before this story happens to us too.

<comment><USER3> Also worth mentioning was the consolidation of small free-held farms into large estates held by senators and run by slaves.

This consolidation was partially driven by war debts; Roman citizens accrued debts during the wars of conquest, while the generals won the spoils with which they could purchase the land of indebted citizen farmers. It was also driven by economies of scale; the larger estates were more efficient, had lower costs of operation, and had the market contacts to grow the crops that generated the best profit when shipped.

Of course this means Italy basically stopped making food when senators could sell oil at higher margins, and began to depend on Sicily and Egypt to produce the grain for Rome, with the latter eventually becoming the _personal_ property of the emperor. This would cause serious problems later, but the senators profiting neither knew nor cared.

<comment><USER4> > Nexum was a debt bondage contract in the early Roman Republic. Within the > Roman legal system, it was a form of mancipatio. Though the terms of the > contract would vary, essentially a free man pledged himself as a bond slave > (nexus) as surety for a loan. He might also hand over his son as collateral. > Although the bondsman might be subjected to humiliation and abuse, as a > legal citizen he was supposed to be exempt from corporal punishment. Nexum > was abolished by the Lex Poetelia Papiria in 326 BC, in part to prevent > abuses to the physical integrity of citizens who had fallen into debt > bondage.[26]

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This exists in modern American history as well under the term 'solidarity'. For example, in the 50s if the teachers union went on strike, so did bus drivers. It made labor movements strong.

We're far from that type of world now. If you take the recent issues at Amazon, we had an isolated case of solidarity with one tech engineer backing up warehouse workers. That won't get it done.

The general public, in it's vastness, ironically, vastly underestimates it's power. All it takes is for us to stop going to movies, restaurants, flights, etc , and suddenly we are not powerless against any industry.

The rest of Amazon does not backup the warehouse workers. It is something to think about, we all play a part. Lack of solidarity is one of the most disheartening developments of our present.

<comment><USER6> I have a sense part of that is the "Oh Dearism" \- we just watch sad news each day and it makes us think all that can be done is say "oh dear" \- reflected in this short video by Adam Curtis - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok) (also featuring Charlie Brooker, creator of Black Mirror)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Just for your interest inspired by the "secessio plebis" there was an initiative (failed) against Mussolini's government in 1924, after the killing of Giacomo Matteotti:

[https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secessione_dell%27Aventino](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secessione_dell%27Aventino)

(not too bad in Google Translate)

Shorter article on en.wikipedia:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aventine_Secession_(20th_centu...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aventine_Secession_\(20th_century\))

so it is still an used expression in italian to "retire on the Aventine Hill", particularly regarding political debates meaning "to boycott".

</comment><comment><USER8> One thing I don't really have a sense for is how much did Roman culture change over the centuries of its existence?

The article says there were estimated to have been five of these _general strikes_ over a two century period.

That feels a bit like saying there were a handful of major upsets on /r/politics over the past couple hundred years — the timespan seems very long!

Was Roman culture pretty static for a very long time?

<comment><USER9> It just takes the plebes a few generations to get riled up and protest. Boiling frogs and all that.

And there are loads of books on Roman culture - interesting reading of you have the time - and the empire was vastly different across the whole area of influence.

Edit: Start here: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_a...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire)

It's !w about this long book(s) and it's fascinating.

<comment><USER10> I have not read it, but I believe that whilst a seminal work that modern scholars draw a great deal from, it is neither the entry point for the casual reader, nor is it the latest thinking on many parts.

Can I recommend 'SPQR' by the wonderful Mary Beard as a better entry point.

<comment><USER11> I actually did not like SPQR, though I concede it may be a better introduction to someone who otherwise knows nothing. I found it too informed by 21st century perspectives, too set on telling me what to think, and uninteresting for that reason.

 _But_ , I know the subject material better than the average reader, and there is no single older work I can think of that covers the same time period. Gibbon's _Decline and Fall_ is really much broader than Rome: he covers the Empire all the way to shortly after 1453, and not just Rome as such, but the broader theater of Europe and the East. But it does not cover the Republic or the early Empire. Gibbon surely is guilty of some anti-religious bias (which he confines, for the most part, to a single chapter), and there are a few things we have learned through later archeological research - but not much that would be of interest to a general reader - and a few things he did just get plain wrong. But as a whole, the work still stands tremendously, and for a non-academic historian, there's nothing wrong with it - except that in this case, you're not getting the whole history of Rome.

I actually think its a great read for a casual reader, as long as they're looking for a history of the time period specified. It is long, not dry at all, and the style is very refreshing. But for the earlier history of Rome, I'd do what Gibbon did for his work: go to the primary sources. Read Livy, Plutarch, Caesar, and the like. Read the Romans as they presented themselves, without anyone else interpreting it for you, or putting any kind of lens in front of you. To be sure, all the Roman writers had biases too, and where history gets hazy, they are sometimes much more eager than a modern writer would be to plunge into myth - though they are usually willing to say so, and often present interpretations of what they think actually happened. To be sure, there will be a lot of things we never _know_ , things there can never be any evidence for aside from stories. But if nothing else, it adds color.

I've also found that modern academics are far too skeptical for my taste, and too ready to take absence of evidence as evidence of absence; generally too ready to deem myth as having no basis in reality whatever, improbable stories as impossible, unlikely ones as highly improbable, and even entirely plausible ones as exaggerated or unlikely, if any historian has lately, in need of making a career and publishing papers, an axe to grind against it. Half of any modern academic history nowadays seems dedicated to sneering at the gullibility of earlier historians. To be fair, maybe this isn't a new trend, only an old one refined to new heights - I recall a passage in _Decline and Fall_ where contemporary writers were shocked at the numbers involved in the Goth migration, and suddenly realized that maybe accounts of army size in the Persian War weren't so crazy after all.

I don't know. Maybe the best thing for someone unfamiliar altogether with it all is to read SPQR, then, if they are still interested, read Gibbon and the more popular and accessible primary sources.

<comment><USER12> Agreed on all accounts, especially the importance of reading historical books from the past (I.e. books on history that were written 50-100-300 years ago). Modern culture, including academia, is permeated by a particular type of thinking, one that is extremely shallow and historically ignorant in terms of the history of thought, or ways of thinking. The past is indeed a foreign country, but we (Western) moderns don't seem to understand this when discussing previous times and civilizations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A similar popular revolt to these secessii plebies took place in Industrial Revolution - era England in the years before 1832. The districts -- called boroughs -- were laid out according to agrarian-culture history instead of population. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832)

The United States presently has a similar imbalance of political power between states with large cities and more rural states.

These sorts of imbalances can lead to instability.

</comment><comment><USER14> After the uprising of the 17th of June

The Secretary of the Writers' Union

Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee

Stating that the people

Had forfeited the confidence of the government

And could only win it back

By increased work quotas.

Would it not in that case be simpler

for the government

To dissolve the people

And elect another?

(Die Lösung, Berthold Brecht, 1953)

<comment><USER15> A brilliant expose of the truth of the matter: the people always get the governments they deserve, and thus: vice versa.

<comment><USER16> Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

\- H. L. Mencken

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm in.

<comment><USER17> Let's do this, chums!

<comment><USER18> Um... society already is...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Until a vaccine is found for the virus, I think states will next begin limiting interstate travel. Or at least forcing a two-week quarantine on incoming visitors, like what Hawaii has done.

These states, or cluster of adjacent states, can effectively become their own operating government.

If the next door state has the virus running rampant, because they did a terrible job with their quarantine, then so be it. They will get travel restrictions from freely entering.

The interesting thing is, this scenario puts these cluster of states into positions of independence. The only thing missing, is to declare their own currency. At which point, the federation government will declare war.

</comment><comment><USER20> As Elon Musk said yesterday on Joe Rogan:

"If no one is making stuff... there is no stuff!"

<comment> chroem- Maybe it's just me, but generally I would expect a higher level of competence from the leaders of our public and private institutions, than "throw bodies and money at the fire" would imply. If there had been any sort of long term planning or disaster preparedness, we wouldn't be forced to choose between our personal wellbeing and the continued operation of our economy. Unfortunately, that long term thinking fell outside the scope of next quarter's earnings. The fact of the matter is, the emperor has no clothes.

<comment><USER21> > If there had been any sort of long term planning or disaster preparedness.

Any politician that would have said "hey, we need to prepare for a global pandemic" would have been a laughing stock. Bill Gates knew (see ted talk), the rest of us didn't.

I think the only teacher we accept is a pandemic itself. Therefore I'm very happy it's Covid19 and not something worse.

Let's hope we learned our lesson and are prepared next time.

<comment> chroem- It's not just the politicians though: the private sector deserves just as much of the blame. Watching this unfold from inside BigCorp has been truly eye opening. In a company of 100k people, nobody thought about preparedness or risk management. Instead, BigCorp bought its own stock on margin, and now it has to throw thousands of human beings at a worsening viral pandemic in order to generate cashflow. People are going to die so that the company can stay in business.

<comment><USER21> I don't know if you are running your own business, but it's just so hard to take into account all kinds of possible risks. It's just impossible to work like that. Most of the time you gamble which resources to put where. Else you end up in analysis paralysis.

<comment><USER22> We're talking about very large businesses. Risk analysts should have been anticipating a pandemic given the several near-misses (Ebola, SARS, MERS, H1N1, ...) that we've had recently. If you're a large business that risk is going to be significant enough to consider.

When I took family holiday insurance in early January, I had to check that pandemics were covered, and they were specifically mentioned. So I'd expect them to be a general part of risk analysis.

A pandemic that's covered by insurance is a massive risk for an insurance company, so it's always going to be a paragraph in business insurance, I'd expect. Which should raise the question, "as this can't be insured against, for us, what's our contingency".</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Adobe to lay off 600 workers - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/03/BUE114DS4L.DTL&tsp=1 <comment><USER2> Ouch, that's a pretty big cut :-( The biggest in tech since KLA Tencor in mid November (okay, only a few weeks, but with the pace of change at the moment, still a big deal).

Adobe are also not going to exhibit at the next MacWorld - some real cost cutting going down.. [http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/03/adobe-not- exhibiting-at-...](http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/03/adobe-not-exhibiting- at-macworld-expo-san-francisco/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Are these engineers or just marketing types?</comment>


Ask HN: What 5 software tools do you use most for work? - <AUTHOR> What 5 software tools do you use most for work and what is your job? Another way of asking this: What software tools would someone need to learn if they had your job? <comment><USER2> Terminal (this is a requirement if you want to do any software related job other than .NET I guess), some sort of a text editor with code code highlighting (Sublime), internet browser (reading documentation is a big part of my job), email client (reading & replying to work emails), version control (git).

Those are basics but there are additional tools which you'll probably need to use daily as well (JIRA, Slack or their equivalents, for example).

</comment><comment><USER3> As developper:

1\. a GNU/Linux (Ubuntu or Debian)

2\. urxvt or terminology, I use always the same commnands (cd, ls, git, emacs, find, ag)

3\. emacs with elpy, rainbow-delimiters and web-mode using monokai theme

4\. i3 window manager

5\. weechat

And I am looking for a proper email client (webmail or whatever).

</comment><comment><USER4> Software team lead / manager. Aside from the self-evident non-role-specific stuff (browser, email, slack):

1) Jira 2) [Text editor of choice] 3) Mac/Unix command line 4) Git 5) [To-do manager of choice]

</comment><comment><USER5> Firefox, M$ Office (:/), XenCenter, RoyalTS (all on Windows), and misc. Linuxy stuff..

I'm the IT Guy for a small non-profit research and development company in the higher education sector.

Firefox is used for Spiceworks, various web-based management consoles for our storage devices (and webmin on Linux VMs), and general web stuff. M$ Office is mostly just Outlook and Excel. XenCenter to manage our XenServer infrastructure, and RoyalTS is for RDC-ing to various servers and workstations. Most Linux admin is done via webmin, or shell.

</comment><comment><USER6> Emacs, Eclipse, Lein, Maven, Node. Two additional ones are in my kit box by default, for different reasons, Java and MS Office. Java is required for Lein, Eclipse, and Maven, and occasional Java components. Node is needed for tool automation, in my case. Emacs is used for general editing needs, and Clojure coding. MS Office is needed because any delivery which does not include documentation doesn't count, and many I work with require documentation in MS Office form.

</comment><comment><USER7> Research engineer

Every single working day for the past 3 or 4 years vim, terminal, C++, Chrome, and just recently CUDA.

<comment><USER8> Sounds fun =)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Data Scientist:

SQL Developer, SAS Enterprise Guide, SAS Enterprise Miner, Excel, Jira

We are a "SAS shop", therefore SAS is a must. Knowing other SAS products helps to recognize when a statement like "it is not possible" in reality means "I am not in the mood for working".

</comment><comment><USER10> Full stack freelance engineer:

Visual Studio Code, iTerm, Trello, Google Chrome, and Skype :(

<comment><USER11> don't like skype?

<comment><USER12> I'm sorry, you are breaking up. Can you repeat that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> SW Developer, Growth Hacker, Founder

Heres the list:-

1\. Operating system ( mostly Linux )

2\. Desktop ( mostly gnome )

3\. Keyboard/mouse/LCD .... drivers .. ( can't work without them, eh! )

4\. Browser ( mostly firefox )

5\. Google ( its a SW tool alright! )

</comment><comment><USER14> Doing Go web application dev:

• Linux (Fedora 25 atm), as debugging in Go only works well on Linux. Would use OSX if Go debugging actually worked properly there. ;)

• Gogland (JetBrains Go IDE)

• Terminal

• pgAdmin (PostgreSQL GUI)

• Git

• and various web browsers

</comment><comment><USER15>
      1. Gnome Terminal
      2. Neovim
      3. Google Chrome
      4. Pymodoro (https://github.com/dattanchu/pymodoro)
      5. Git

</comment><comment><USER16> Game producer:

Unity, Sourcetree, Trello, Sketch.app, Apple Notes

</comment><comment><USER17> CTO: 1\. Chrome 2\. Pycharm 3\. Docker 4\. Git 5\. Boto

TBH though, a lot of my time is spent in Gmail (in Chrome) these days.

</comment><comment><USER18> Sysadmin/web developer: kubectl/docker, Terminal, Intellij/jetbrains IDEs, Unix tooling, Git

</comment><comment><USER19> Hourly Programmer: * VS Code * TypeScript * _technically_ open source orchestration platform * Vivaldi * Sketch.app

</comment><comment><USER20> As a quality owner, I use Lotus Notes, Jira, PPT, Excel, and other in-house DB applications.

</comment><comment><USER21> Freelance Data Analyst/Data Engineering/Data Science...

R, Python, Jupyter, Tableau, MySQL Workbench

</comment><comment><USER22> Fullstack engineer

IntelliJ at home(Eclipse at work), Sublime, Office Suite, Sequel Pro, Chrome Dev Tools

</comment><comment><USER23>
      1. Cygwin (Babun)
      2. Sublime Text
      3. Slack
      4. Chrome
      5. Mercurial

</comment><comment><USER24> C# Software Developer: Visual Studio, VS Code, SQL Server, web browser, slack

</comment><comment><USER25> Infrastructure engineer: iTerm, Sublime Text, 1Password, Slack, Google Chrome.

</comment><comment><USER26> Product Designer/Developer

Sketch, Visual Studio Code, iTerm, Chrome Dev Tools, InVision

</comment><comment><USER27> Marketing web developer. Do web applications count?

Atom, git, PHP, Databricks, Google Docs

</comment><comment><USER28> Notepad++, Oracle SQL Developer, Google Chrome, Skype for Business

</comment><comment><USER29> [1] PhpStorm [2] adminer [3] Gdocs [4] Putty [5] Dropbox

</comment><comment><USER30> Software Engineer: iTerm, TextMate, Enpass, Ruby, Git

</comment><comment><USER31> Emacs, gcc, Android Studio, Putty, and, um, Outlook.

</comment><comment><USER8> \- GNOME Terminal

\- Sublime Text 3

\- Chrome / dev tools

\- Virtualenvs / Virtualenvwrapper

</comment><comment><USER32> Marketing consultant:

Facebook ads

Google ads

Microsoft excel

Google analytics/analytics of choice

Mailchimp/Email automation of choice

Zapier

</comment><comment><USER33> ssh, zsh, tmux, xterm, vim. In no particular order! I work in telco as sw dev.

</comment><comment><USER34> Emacs, Chrome, Pry, Heroku, Git

</comment><comment><USER35> Linux Haskell (stack)

emacs (magit, intero)

</comment><comment><USER36> WHAT SOFTWARE DO USE IN YOUR EVER DAY FIFE OF BEING HACK

</comment><comment><USER37> \- Visual Studio

\- Team Foundation Server

\- Git

\- Outlook

\- Chrome

</comment><comment><USER38> * Visual Studio

* Notepad++

* Search Everything

* Terminal

* Google Chrome

</comment><comment><USER39> \- Xcode

\- iOS Simulator

\- git

\- vim

\- bash (to automate things)

</comment><comment><USER40> vim, tmux, bash, perl, make</comment>