Technology Still Sucks - <AUTHOR> http://www.andrewluetgers.com/2014/02/11/technology-still-sucks/ <comment> loup-vaillant _Title:_ "Technology Still Sucks"

 _Content:_ "The batteries of Android phones don't last, and Apple's phones don't play with the web well." There are other minor details.

 _Conclusion:_ none.

Frankly with such a title, I expected more. Wasted my time. Don't waste yours.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting what were you expecting based on that title?

<comment><USER2> I was expecting some general trends that are not improving, and that indicate things that the industry should work on. There definitely are some (sigh).

Instead I see:

\- Android phones have bad USB ports

\- Android phones have bad batteries

\- iOS phones have a bad browser

\- Some ramblings about WiMax (huh?)

\- A conclusion that wonders if we will feel like idiots when these problems are fixed (huh?)

Which of these problems are not being fixed? Android battery life seems to be improving, at least in the devices that I tend to look at (Moto X, Moto G, LG G2, Note 2/3). The only Android device that I have had USB issues with was a SGSII (funny that his was the same :) ), but in general improvements to battery life improve that problem as well, as they reduce the number of cycles on the connector.

I know nothing about iOS and its browser, but there is a good chance alternatives will form there as well.

Should we really be focusing on some sort of idea that because things aren't perfect and tradeoffs have to be made, "technology still sucks"? It feels a bit like saying that all cars suck because my GT86 can't haul my boat.

(Note: Don't take the above as bashing. The story is just a guy ranting on his blog, and not every blog rant has to purport to be something profound to serve its purpose. There is nothing wrong with that.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry to disappoint, this is just one mans frustration with technology and why it still sucks for me as an example of a systemic issue that will probably never go away.

As for a conclusion that can be drawn, maybe -

"This is why technology still sucks, big time. You have these arbitrary boundaries of platforms that for a million stupid reasons can't accomplish the most fundamental, basic chore like keeping a charge or wrapping text or playing a video and you are supposed to just accept this without question."

Sorry to wax philosophical about technology and not deliver enough research and bullet points and trends and obvious conclusions but it would be interesting if you had any opinions on how these seemingly petty issues shape our behavior without us thinking of it. Reading the web on an iPhone IS a horrible experience yet nobody admits it. I conclude with a thought that I was hoping would lead to discussion of this unquestioning adaptive behavior we have with broken technology but as with most comments on HN it goes meta instantly.

<comment> loup-vaillant > _it would be interesting if you had any opinions on how these seemingly > petty issues shape our behavior without us thinking of it._

Oh, so _that_ was your main point. Much more HN worthy. Too bad it got lost in the boilerplate. You should write tighter: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3QzdIMoLkk](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3QzdIMoLkk)

To answer your question, this problem is called "status-quo bias". As long as they believe it's the default, people tend to accept things as they are. A browser that sucks. Manual processes. Even torture and other atrocities, at some places and times. On the other hand, people resist change.

From there you can get to many absurdities. My latest is the attitude towards device drivers. When a device doesn't work on Windows, it's the fault of the device maker. The onus is on them to provide suitable drivers. But when a device doesn't work on GNU/Linux, it's because _Linux_ sucks. Why? Because "everyone is using Windows", so if I have a problem, it can't be from the one thing everyone uses. Linux on the desktop is not as established, so it's more suspect. My graphics card is popular and got stellar reviews dammit, so if it doesn't work on Linux, that must be because those kernels maintainers are morons.

Or the golden prison Apple lock us in: perfectly acceptable for the iPhone, while anyone who tries that on the desktop would probably be sued. Guess which is the default on which platform.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> A title after my own heart, though I think you're using hyperbole in the same way I do.

I agree that charging is a weak point of modern portable computing. Having a phone with wireless Qi charging helps me appreciate that some innovation is happening, while not especially quickly. The fact that I still need to connect my tablet and laptop to charging cables betrays a curious indolence in the industry. Wired charging is not for 2014. It was for ten years ago.

My own rants: [http://tiamat.tsotech.com/technology- sucks](http://tiamat.tsotech.com/technology-sucks)

</comment><comment><USER4> Maybe Technology Is Not Perfect, but it doesn't suck.

>>"These devices are on an upgrade cycle that is ridiculous and its the height of first-world whining to complain about your "old phone" when, for goodness sake, it gives you the internet in your pocket with what not-so-long-ago would have been subject to export controls as a supercomputer."

You complain about first world whining, and then whine about iOS not reflowing text? I don't understand the objective of this article.

</comment><comment><USER5> Maybe if the author were using something less powerful than a processor that "not-so-long-ago would have been subject to export controls as a supercomputer", the battery would last longer ;-)

But then again it wouldn't run Flash or a browser (reflowing or not). The phone he wants today will be available in 5-10 years.</comment>


Show HN: Rate My Roommate - <AUTHOR> https://www.ratemyroommate.io/ <comment><USER2> Reminds me of how first Facebook started, but in the current environment this is a giant violation of policy and in a litigious society like US, you may be biting on more than you can chew.

Definitely a no no.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would strongly suggest taking this app down. Some of the data points are very private and personal, which means that the potential for abuse is high.

</comment><comment><USER4> This seems like a violation of roommate privacy.</comment>


How to act against ACTA - <AUTHOR> http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA

<comment><USER2> My (slightly altered) version: <http://nul.co.za/freedom.txt></comment>


How to know if where you live is "up and coming": fried chicken vs. coffee shops - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@Sam_Floy/how-to-know-if-where-you-live-is-up-and-coming-fried-chicken-vs-coffee-shops-546080119f98 <comment><USER2> A more interesting indicator that authors may consider is how many people living in the area do jogging.

When I moved to London's SE4 postcode three years ago (it's pretty close to Peckham, FWIW), the regeneration of the area has just started and the more middle-class looking people appeared around, the more men and women in running gear were visible in the streets in the morning. Poor on average take worse care of their health and fitness, so tapping into Runkeeper's data may prove useful.

In the meanwhile, during these three years, the value of my home grew more than 100%.

<comment><USER3> Jogging, fried chicken, and coffee shops.

Yup. You'd be paying fines and penalties if you posted this from the USA. I doubt there'd be criminal prosecution under 42 USC unless you repeatedly continued posting this kind of content after warnings, but that is not legal advice.

It's illegal for anyone involved in the housing or real estate industries to propagate racist information. Also it's illegal to advocate racist opinions about housing policy in public discussions.

And jogging is just as obvious as fried chicken and coffee shops.

<comment><USER4> Wait,

What?

There is a law against giving racist real estate advice?

That, isn't actually true, is it? You are joking?

Is that actually true?!

<comment><USER5> I know that my wife isn't allowed to answer the question "Are the schools good here?" with anything other than "This home is in school district 123", or "you'll have to do your own research". It's considered "steering". (Because Good Schools is considered a dog whistle for "white neighborhood")

<comment><USER6> The policies enforced by particular offices (often based on an excess of caution, and often based on mythology of law rather than actual legal advice) are a different thing than the law. It absolutely is _not_ illegal to provide answers to that question more directly when selling real estate (and, in fact, most agents I've dealt with or encountered will, though rather than providing their opinion they will rather directly provide statistical data which answers that question -- and others -- with comparative information; the package I got from the agent for the last house I considered buying included not only school performance information for the neighborhood compared to other areas in the region, but also income information, family size information, and other demographics.)

Providing a bare and unsupported simple subjective "good" or "bad" answer is probably more legally dangerous than providing factual information, _not_ because "good schools" is dog whistle for "white neighborhood" (in fact, its neither illegal nor uncommon to provide factual information which fairly directly gives information about ethnic/racial demographics), but because someone else might convince a court that your description was slanted because you were trying to steer the buyer based on _your_ perception of _their_ racial fit, rather than trying to provide them factual information about the existing character of the neighborhood which might be relevant to their decision.

<comment><USER7> "It absolutely is not illegal to provide answers to that question more directly when selling real estate"

As applied in the US (not the original article, but I suspect where nsxwolf is talking about), the Federal Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) would prohibit certain questions from being answered.

[http://www.jmls.edu/clinics/fairhousing/pdf/fair-housing- pri...](http://www.jmls.edu/clinics/fairhousing/pdf/fair-housing-primer.pdf)

<comment><USER6> > As applied in the US (not the original article, but I suspect where nsxwolf > is talking about), the Federal Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil > Rights Act of 1968) would prohibit certain questions from being answered.

I can't find anything in your source to support that claim that answering questions would be prohibited, in fact, it seems to directly contradict the claim about merely providing an opinion on school quality being prohibited as steering (p. 12, "Racial steering is where a real estate agent steers white persons to one community or area and minorities to another community or area. [...] The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has held the proof of a discriminatory motive is required in a steering case.")

<comment><USER7> It comes under the racial steering section

<comment><USER6> > It comes under the racial steering section

The racial steering section does not support the claim that answering questions is prohibited (in fact, it specifically _as I quoted_ identifies that courts have held that proof of discriminatory motive is required in steering cases.)

<comment><USER7> "9\. Many of my clients ask me questions about the neighborhood, such as: "Who lives here? Are there any [fill in ethnic/racial group]?" How should I respond to questions like these?

Let your clients know that you cannot provide information on racial, ethnic or other protected class demographics under the fair housing laws, which prohibit discrimination based on such factors. Consider giving all of your clients a written statement about your commitment to fair housing when you first start working with them. This statement also can let clients know what services you can provide them and what information they'll need to find out on their own. When you discuss your commitment to fair housing early on, your clients may be less likely to express their possible biases. Many agents give a resource packet to all clients at the first meeting. The packet provides a broad range of information, including online resources to locate up-to-date neighborhood census information, community resources, local media, etc. By providing general information to all of your clients, you make it easier for them to find the perfect home. See Appendix B for some area resources for home buyers to include in your own packet. For your own protection, make sure you document any specific requests from your prospects and clients that you feel may have fair housing implications. Keep a record in your files of both the request and your response."

[http://www.kingcounty.gov/~/media/exec/civilrights/documents...](http://www.kingcounty.gov/~/media/exec/civilrights/documents/100QsRE.ashx?la=en)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There's no justification for the assumption of a high coffee-to-chicken ratio implying up-and-coming. It's not an unreasonable assumption, but it's definitely anecdotal.

<comment><USER9> It's anecdotal, but enough reliable anecdotes do actually turn into "data".

My personal marker has always been, when visiting a city for the first time, to pay attention to the roadside advertisements I see on the ride from the airport to the city center.

Aside from obvious things like payday/title loan shops, the most reliable indicator I've seen of a neighborhood being badly off is ads for cheap dentures and dental implants.

<comment><USER10> For me, check cashing shops are a _huge_ sign I'm in a poor neighborhood.

Businesses with signs in Spanish is another, though that's probably specific to Texas and the southwest, since we have a _lot_ of poor Hispanic neighborhoods here. Unfortunately, the Hispanic neighborhoods here are almost universally poor. You go farther north, there probably won't be many Hispanic neighborhoods at all.

Put them together, and seeing "Cambiamos Cheques" is a huge red flag.

<comment><USER11> Your experience here is a bit anecdotal and might say a bit about what your frame of reference for what it means to be "hispanic".

But of course, I don't know you, so feel free to ignore my point :D

However, if you walk around the (objectively affluent) La Cantera mall in San Antonio, you'll hear maybe 1/3 of the conversations in Spanish.

About 30% of the folks in Texas speak Spanish, so if you're in Texas you're in a hispanic area by definition....what you're describing are areas where people are or aren't willing to pander to folks who aren't bilingual.

I don't know if that describes a line between affluence and poverty though. It's possible, though I'm not sure if I believe it.

<comment><USER12> As someone who lived in florida, those affluent hispanic areas don't have billboards in spanish. Billboards in spanish signal a large amount of single- language homes, and when that single language isn't the native tongue it doesn't bode well for socio-economic prospects

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We made this (Dutch) dataviz a couple of months ago about the gentrification of Amsterdam, and indeed, the number of yoga studios and coffee bars closely resembled the gentrificated areas:

[http://www.volkskrant.nl/amsterdam](http://www.volkskrant.nl/amsterdam)

</comment><comment><USER14> This analysis is simplistic and flawed.

It asserts a correlation between the fried chicken/coffee shop ratio index and home price, which is reasonable enough. It then assumes that homes that are undervalued vis-a-vis their implied value by the FC/CS index are up and coming. This likely makes sense in an environment of overall rising house prices. However if house prices are falling or stagnant overall it may be the coffee shops which are lagging the market.

<comment><USER15> The Fritsch-Waugh-Lovell theorem: if

y = a _x + b_ y + c _z + (zero-mean nuisance),

I can estimate a least-squares model of the form

y' = a_x + b*y + (zero-mean nuisance)

and get a correct estimate of b, as long as y and z are uncorrelated.

(Where this breaks down: for example, a regression of IQ on age and arm length; omit age and you'll get longer arms (older kids) producing higher IQ scores, because age and arm length are correlated.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> My "rule-of-thumb" indicator: whether or not there are a lot of check-cashing, bail-bond and furniture rental establishments.

<comment><USER17> Same principle applies to 'big chain' type retailers and such. If the local grocery stores aren't large regional chain stores... likely not a good area.

<comment><USER18> What does "likely not a good area" mean? In NYC there are plenty of "nice areas" that don't have major chain stores. In many cities this is the case.

I grow tired of the underlying racism people exhibit (such as yours) without even being aware of it. You're probably not a blatant racist but I think a lot of people from mainstream white culture need to start inspecting and criticizing their view of the world a bit more.

There are a lot of good people living in what you call "not a good area".

<comment><USER19> > What does "likely not a good area" mean

Street crime (muggings / random unprovoked assaults); petty vandalism; burglary; schools where your kid will get beat up for exhibiting the slightest amount of intellectual curiosity or non-standard behaviors / appearance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "Not many outlets selling fried chicken"... in Peckham?? I'm not sure the authors data is all that accurate.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, looking at the Google maps location of chicken shops in Peckham brings up only about half the shops that are actually there.

<comment><USER22> Not sure where the data for the article came from, but I'd guess that there is some interesting socioeconomic skewing around the type of business and whether it can be readily found on Google maps or Yelp, since much of the data is crowdsourced.

<comment><USER23> True... the data came from Google Maps API and so maybe be a little incomplete compared to what's actually on the street at this moment

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Well, China is definitely not an "up and coming" country. I've been here like a week and I already don't want to ever look at chicken in my life again.

<comment><USER25> Be gentle but firm if the locals keep trying to feed you pizza and fried chicken. Food in China is awesome. Ask to go where the people you are visiting eat lunch normally.

<comment><USER26> (Restaurant) Food in China is terrible! The bigger the city you are in, the more so. You probably like it because you're not used to the taste of MSG which is used freely and generously in China to cover up stale ingredients. Having eaten out daily in Shanghai and Guangzhou for a few years, I got pretty sick of it.

<comment><USER27> I just started using MSG at home are you saying it will eventually stop making everything taste better?

<comment><USER24> Could any of you please tell what's MSG?

<comment><USER27> Monosodium glutamate you can get it in a powder like salt. It is a seasoning that provides "the essence of flavor" or umami flavoring which makes lots of bland stuff taste way better without necessarily having lots of salt. Some claim it is bad for the health or causes MSG symptom complex with an array of common conditions like headaches but there's little to no scientific evidence that this isn't psychosomatic.

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

<comment><USER24> Oh so that's the powder that guy on the street is adding when preparing my meal... Thanks. I didn't know about it before.

<comment><USER25> Street food can be good but it's pretty much the digestive equivalent of hitting the double black diamonds at a new ski area on the first day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Wouldn't you want an area with both? I may be missing the context of London's culture - but if 'up and coming' means 'being gentrified' wouldn't you want to pick an area that has a barbell distribution of upper class and lower class establishments?

<comment><USER29> Worst: some areas are very coffee-dense only because they're close to large transportation hubs, which usually don't make for great areas. Chicken shops gravitate towards entertainment areas, which may or may not be "up and coming".

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Peckham might be considered up and coming, but it doesn't look like much :-S

[https://email@example.com,-0.067718,3a,75y,268...](https://email@example.com,-0.067718,3a,75y,268.12h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCHT_LXgTtm5UYhcUDCg_uA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DCHT_LXgTtm5UYhcUDCg_uA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D194.82999%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

<comment><USER31> How can you say that when there's an Armani shop right in there on the streetview!

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> This was kind of interesting, I like the idea of using data like this, you could probably get the same results with yoga studios and cash4gold's.

That being said I want coffee and fried chicken now.

</comment><comment><USER33> I would say that "coffee" = daytime activity and "chicken" = night time activity.

What a data scientist would have done is find the list of shops and property prices and see which correlate.

Of course, you also need to do it over time because "up and coming" implies the future state, not the current.

1\. Buy cheap housing in area that attracts new grads / creatives / artists

2\. Those people attract certain business types

3\. Hot area attracts richer people + people in 1 get more money

4\. Property prices rise

5\. Sell

</comment><comment><USER34> So besides "chicken shops" which must be a regional indicator for poor or undesirable what other establishments are also present? There should be an obvious transition type of business that precedes the coffee shop. Combined with chicken shops perhaps the availability of different businesses could give entrepreneurs an indicator where to set up similar or buy up space?

<comment><USER35> Pawnshops, payday loan services, barber shops... And pubs closed down, because it is too dangerous for them to operate. Also signs on restaurants "Customer only toilets"

<comment><USER36> Why barber shops? Don't well-to-do people also go to the barber to get their hair cut?

<comment><USER37> Most have the barber come to them or have a private barber in the building. My office has a separate room and a barber comes in every other week to cut hair.

<comment><USER38> Seriously? That is certainly not anything approaching the norm in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> As a lover of fried chicken, i'm not sure this is the right metric to use for my housing search.

</comment><comment><USER40> You put a fried chicken shop in a place where lots of people go while you put a coffee shop in places where there are few coffee shops. I'm sure that correlates with 'up and coming', but it's not necessarily a signature. Some up and coming places will have neither.

<comment><USER41> > _You put a fried chicken shop in a place where lots of people go_

I think the idea of the article is that you put one in a place where lots of the "wrong people" go.

E.g. that "up and coming" urban professionals et al, don't go much for "fried chicken" \-- as I understand in the US it's associated with rednecks, blacks, and the poor? (as opposed to Starbucks or Whole Foods).

<comment><USER9> Yes, fried chicken is stereotypically a southern-US (poor part of the country, for a variety of historical reasons) and even more stereotypically African- American (poor segment of the population, similarly due to all sorts of historical issues from slavery to overt discrimination to more recent covert discrimination). Which means that fast-food restaurants specializing in fried chicken are a pretty strong economic marker.

On the flip side, coffeeshops have a connotation of being more a middle-class thing. So tracking coffeeshops vs. fried chicken would be a very obvious way to map affluence in the US.

<comment><USER41> In fact it sounds like a good premise for a Key and Peele sketch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> He seems to be measuring current housing prices, but if his goal is to measure "up and coming" areas, shouldn't he try to correlate between ratio of fried chicken vs coffee shops in PREVIOUS years, and change of prices in the following years?

<comment><USER43> I'm thinking that coffee shops are not a leading indicator, which is what he should be looking for. I have no idea what would be leading indicator for up and coming neighborhoods though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Another "up and coming"-ness indicator is the abundance of white guys walking around the neighborhood wearing small shorts.

</comment><comment><USER45> This would not be an effective method for the Southern USA. Nashville, which is most certainly up and coming, is also springing up "Hot Chicken" shacks left and right in the hippest areas.

</comment><comment><USER46> Where did you get the data on coffee shops and chicken shops from?

<comment><USER46> I've just realised that this wasn't a `Show HN` so the submitter and the author may well be different people. I've left a comment on the medium article.

The reason I ask is that I recently purchased a house in Manchester and as part of that collected as much data as possible on things like crime stats, walking time to nearest reailway station, cycling time to work, etc. I didn't get data on coffee or chicken shops. I did consider it, and would have pulled it from OSM but that data is very incomplete with regards to this sort of data.

<comment><USER47> Couldn't you use like, Google Maps?

<comment><USER46> I don't know. Is there a way in the API of requesting all coffee shops?

<comment><USER48> yup. [https://developers.google.com/places/web- service/](https://developers.google.com/places/web-service/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> I would love to build/use an app that generates RE investment market suggestions based on some of the datapoints you're mentioning. Maybe see if there's some way to automate the analysis of socioeconomic status of the neighborhood with the distribution of various types of businesses and then map price/price delta over time. Might be some cool data in there. Re racism comments...kinda.

</comment><comment><USER50> the theory is worth very little. you could identify two other random density factors (like cigarette butts and chelsea fans) and come up with some heatmap to identify the best value houses. only time-series data could give some indication and then you would still have to test it (and then the market would price in your findings shortly after they are published. this kind of arbitrage rarely lasts long).

<comment><USER51> I don't think those are random density factors. I don't believe that darts were thrown at a wall with words written on them and they landed on "Coffee Shops" and "Fried Chicken". I think the analysis started with the assumption that Coffee shops would be found in nicer areas and Fried Chicken would be found in rougher areas. Then the analysis was started to evaluate that hypothesis. It's OK that areas of with different economic conditions may have different types of businesses. Buying a house next to a check cashing shop or a pay day lender will nearly 100% guarantee you aren't living in the best neighborhood.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> In Istanbul, this also holds true. But you would need to switch "friend chicken" to "tavuk döner" (chicken döner) or to kebab places.

Looking for places that's gonna be "elite"? Switch coffee shops with third wave coffee shops. At least in Istanbul.

</comment><comment><USER53> I don't necessarily agree with the premise of this article, as many other commenters point out.

To offer an alternative, my own theory is that the 'up and coming' areas are cropping up down the _Shoreditch fringe_ , i.e. Borough (which is seeing a lot of commercial and residential development, and Elephant & Castle (same as Borough, albeit more behind in completion). Such a 'fringe' also spills off into the East, too.

You could extrapolate this trend to Peckham, one of the primary areas the author has highlighted, however I doubt we're going to get anywhere near same level of 'pop-up' commerce/entertainment in these much more southernly areas for some time to come indeed.

<comment><USER54> Property in Borough would be insanely expensive compared to Peckham...

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I was thinking about yoga studios as a proxy for this type of analysis the other day.

</comment><comment><USER56> Clearly this analysis would be a flawed approach to take for the American South. Especially given that right now "hot chicken" places are a hipster fad for the "up and coming" neighborhoods.

</comment><comment><USER57> In the U.S., a leading indicator of future development in suburban or rural areas is often the self-storage business. They are often built out in the middle of nowhere when land is cheap, and continue operating as other businesses are built nearby.

Many of them are owned by large REITs that are speculating on land values. The business pays the property taxes as the value of the land rises.

Chicken shops flipping to coffee shops may predict urban gentrification, but the self-storage business predicts cornfields turning into Wal*Marts.

</comment><comment><USER58> This analysis is too broad-brush. Although London has richer and poorer neighborhoods, it is common for luxury property to be right across the street from much cheaper property.

<comment><USER59> Much cheaper in London terms is course < 1 million for a 2 bed flat.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> If the assumption is that fried chicken places are a relic of a poorer past, then this metric does not work for New York City. Fried chicken is _the_ food of the moment:

[http://www.villagevoice.com/restaurants/the-ten-best- fried-c...](http://www.villagevoice.com/restaurants/the-ten-best-fried- chicken-sandwiches-in-new-york-7406101)

<comment><USER61> Yeah, confusingly, I live in a currently gentrifying hipster neighborhood of Minneapolis, of all places, and there is a hot new fried chicken restaurant that is always so full you have to wait 2 hours to get a table.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> 1\. This is not even wrong. 2\. Fried chicken and coffee shops seem like a proxy for class and race in London and were deliberately chosen by the author.

Yuppies...

<comment><USER63> 1\. I'm not sure what your #1 is supposed to mean.

2\. Of course they are and were.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> 1\. buy cheap houses

2\. buy fried chicken places and convert them to coffee shops

3\. ???

4\. profit!

</comment><comment><USER65> My office computer is blocking Medium for some reason, but, certainly the choice of a fried chicken joint must be localized?

There's a few regions of the US I've lived where fried chicken isn't really a thing, in general. I'm not sure that'd it would make sense to extend the model to those locations at least.

<comment><USER66> In the US, fried chicken has very specific associations - it's a classic marker of African-American ethnic food. So it might signify "up-and-coming", but for a very different reason, reflecting racial and ethnic displacement that comes with gentrification in historically-black neighborhoods.

<comment><USER67> I think you're probably right, the inverse is seen in the US.

In the South fast-food fried chicken is sometimes a marker for not-yet- gentrified areas of a city, but often it isn't. Fried chicken is an ingrained cultural tradition of the south, for both whites and blacks, and if you count any place selling fried chicken in your analysis you're actually likely to see _more_ fried chicken in richer areas. At least that's my anecdotal observation. I live in a section of town that's becoming gentrified and while chains like Zaxby's and Krystal are slowly disappearing, but pretty much every "fine dining" and even casual dining (i.e. one step over Olive garden) place that has some southern-cuisine related riff serves fried chicken

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> If you want to dig deeper into this, I suggest reading "The Clustering of America", by Michael J. Weiss.

I think some of the key indicators it used were number of bowling alleys, liquor stores, and payphones (keep in mind, it was published in 1989).

</comment><comment><USER69> Inspiring assumption... I don't think Peckham is exactly your dream area :)

<comment><USER48> Not today. But quite possible in 5-10 years, which is kind of the point the article was trying to make.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> Poor community: bail bonds, pawn shop, payday loans, dollar store, cash checking

Affluent community: party planning, wine shop, dessert specialty shop, boutique clothing, european car dealership

</comment><comment><USER71> Would be interesting to see this done for Brooklyn, which has a lot of "up- and-coming" areas and a plethora of fried chicken and coffee shops.

<comment><USER72> Problem with Brooklyn is that high-end hipster friend chicken sandwiches is the latest trendy food.

<comment><USER73> The problem with resilient neighborhoods in Brooklyn is high numbers of black home ownership.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> You might also look at where the city plans to create new pedestrian areas and bicycle lanes. Absence of car traffic makes real-estate prices soar.

</comment><comment><USER75> In the US it's school testing scores

</comment><comment><USER76> Wow. Our 'up and coming' excuse for living in South London is actually turning out to be true.

</comment><comment><USER77> I would also look at the open dates for those businesses as well if available for better trending.

</comment><comment><USER78> back in the early 90's nyc , it was when you started seeing French bars.

</comment><comment><USER79> So who exactly eats fried chicken in the UK?

<comment><USER80> People who don't drink a lot of coffee.

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> ironically Peckham ranks the Most Dangerous Places in London [http://www.thetoptens.com/most-dangerous-places- london/](http://www.thetoptens.com/most-dangerous-places-london/)

</comment><comment><USER82> > Poor on average take worse care of their health and fitness

Not intended to be snarky, as I grok the intent of your comment, but poor also don't typically have time to come home and go for an hour jog with frequency during the week.

<comment><USER83> Is this true? The general stereotype when I lived in the UK is that the poor were mostly non-workers who subsisted based on public assistance. If true, then they have plenty of time.

In the US this is certainly true. The lowest earning category has 30 minutes/day more leisure time than the highest.

[http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t11.htm](http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t11.htm)

Anyone know where to find the UK equivalent of the ATUS?

<comment><USER84> In addition to the people working multiple part time minimum wage jobs to get by, there are other time costs associated with being poor.

Poor often don't have a personal vehicle, so many hours per week can be spent on a bus, bike, or walking, especially in places with less public transport.

Now the following probably doesn't apply to poor in cities, where you often have amenities in easy walking distance, but in the area I live they are quite applicable. Every time you need to go pick up groceries, you have to take public transit to the grocery store, and you can only buy what you can carry back, so you'll have to go more often than someone who can load up a trunk. Add on the fact that many low end housing rentals don't have washer/dryer units, the nearest may be miles away, so you get to take public transit with your laundry and spend a couple hours at the laundromat.

Where I'm at, those two things alone could easily eat 10-20 hours of your week.

<comment><USER83> If your theory were true, the poor should have less leisure time than the non- poor. Yet according to the ATUS, they don't.

I'll break down why your theories are wrong. Most poor people don't work at all, and many of those who do are only part time. So this idea of "multiple part time minimum wage jobs" applies only to a very small number of people.

[http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/a-profile-of-the- working...](http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/a-profile-of-the-working- poor-2013.pdf)

74% of poor households actually do have a vehicle (compared to 92% of the country), so that doesn't look like it's a big factor. 65% of the poor have a washing machine (compared to 82% of the country), so again that's probably not driving this gap.

[http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/h150-07.pdf](http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/h150-07.pdf)

Even if the premises of your theory were true, there would have to be some countervailing factor since the conclusion (that the poor have less leisure time) is wrong.

But maybe the UK is wildly different. Can you present any data sets to demonstrate this?

<comment><USER84> Your first link is talking about a more specific group of people than I was referring to. It references about 7% of the population, people working at least half of the year who are below the poverty line. The 2013 poverty line was $11,490 for individuals, $23,550 for a family of four. I'd consider twice that to still be poor by any reasonable definition. In my area (around Atlantic City, New Jersey) you'd be lucky to find a two bedroom apartment for $1000/mo. So if a family of four crams into a two bedroom apartment, or an individual splits one with a roommate, that's half the 'poverty level' in rent. Without covering utilities, transportation, food, etc.

As to your second point, I'm sorry, but I simply don't have the time to do the proper research on that one. You may be correct. I was primarily basing on anecdotal evidence from what I've seen and experienced in my local area. The statistics may also not be as clear as one would think. As I said, in my area, someone at twice the poverty level would still struggle to get by, and in many cities, I expect it is significantly more. At the same time, in many rural or semi-rural areas, housing costs become a much smaller factor, which leaves more room for things like a vehicle. Looking at the poor based on the amount of income, without looking at circumstances at an almost individual level is a difficult prospect.

I will also say that it is easy to overlook things that go from a non-issue to a time and effort consuming problem when lack of resources is involved. Lack of transportation or a washer were just two examples that came to mind. Also note that if 74% of poor households have a vehicle, that means 26% do not. That is a fairly significant number, in my eyes.

<comment><USER83> _I 'd consider twice that to still be poor by any reasonable definition._

$47,100 is poor? If so, then basically the entire world is poor. The only nations in the world with a _median_ family income (adjusted for cost of living) higher than $47,100 are Luxemborg, Norway and Sweden.

I don't find this definition remotely reasonable.

Anyway, your anecdotal evidence seems to be leading you astray. The actual stats show a) the poor have more free time for exercise or TV watching, b) they prefer TV watching to exercise, c) they don't have a job and d) when they do have a job they don't have a long commute (see table 4-24 in my AHS link).

What evidence, if any, would convince you that your theories about the lifestyle of the poor are wrong?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER85> This analysis would be tremendously racist in America.

<comment><USER86> I don't think it would be.

Yes, the basis for the hypothesis is fried chicken -> black people and craft coffee -> white hipsters. But that's actually what happens with gentrification. Diverse neighbourhoods get plowed over with rich white people.

Using race in an analysis doesn't make it racist. OP saying they wouldn't want to live in the places with fried chicken, in the context above (KFC->black people) would be.

I'd say the piece itself rides the line. It has a sarcastic tone throughout the piece, more of a "let's find out where the gentrification is" than "let's go live there".

<comment><USER73> Ask a black person if that sounds racist to them. Or does that not matter?

<comment><USER87> Doesn't matter. A particular group doesn't get to define racism for the rest of the population.

<comment><USER88> That's empirically false. "Racism" is whatever speech will convince enough people to call you "racist", and one person in twenty is more than enough to do it.

<comment><USER87> Whats empirically false changes person to person and culture to culture as demonstrated by your arbitrary definition of racism. I do not define Racism as actions other find racist.

<comment><USER88> I'm not interested in a debate about the meaning of truth - replace empirical correctness with everyday practicality and my point stands. You're free to define the term "racism" however you want to. However, you might regret ignoring your personal and cultural context if you care about not getting called racist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER89> hmm, this is local.

for cities in central europe like berlin, munich, vienna the indicators for poor neighborhoods are mobile-phone repairshops, internet cafés and kebab/döner/falafel places. immigrants from the south-east, from turkey to afghanistan shaping these areas.

as nicely illustrated in the current episodes of Homeland.

</comment><comment><USER90> Knew this would be the UK before I even clicked on it from the phrase.

Choose carefully as your housing "investment" will mean as much as your ability to program to your life outcome.

</comment><comment><USER91> in greater LA, fried chicken is actually a new trend in higher-end casual dining, because of the east asian influence on local cuisine (korean, japanese, taiwanese).

oftentimes it's served out of coffee shops. or tea houses. go figure.</comment>


China Fakes 488M Social Media Posts a Year: Study - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-19/china-seen-faking-488-million-internet-posts-to-divert-criticism <comment><USER4> Just to give you a bit of local perspective: talking to the locals here in China (and actually a Chinese Malaysian guy I met too .. so it's not just confined to the people agrarian paradise), they _ofcourse_ know that this is happening, but they don't envy our free for all either.

The article says "a massive effort to distract its citizens from bad news and sensitive political debates" but of course that's just one angle. The local perspective is seeing it mostly as an effort by the government to try to moderate sensationalism, things getting spun out of proportion and down right fabrications (ie. US-TV news, Buzzfeed et al)

They see our CNN having some 24hr coverage of a kitten stuck in a tree - <USER2> they will not stop till either half the nation is foaming at the mouth with rage at the government's incompetence or it just becomes too absurd to keep up - and they are understandably horrified

<comment><USER5> I have also travelled China and speak Mandarin. I have seen this view, and have discussed and pondered it a fair bit, but I've concluded it's wrong, and dangerously so. Take what I say with a grain of salt, I'm no doubt wrong about many things. Every society gets indoctrinated with it's own mix bag of beliefs and taboos. I went to a talk in Bejing discussing all the reasons why China's economy was fantastic and stable. It did not seem they could even consider the possibility things might not. They were even optimistic about climate change. I had to ask someone if it was the moon or the sun I was looking at in the sky one day.

One of my opinions is that when the world breaks out into a global slaugtherfest like WW2, it becomes essential for the survivors to research the causes of such an event with the explicit goal of of ensuring that it won't happen again. As far as I have seen, not a single society anywhere has done this, rather, we have minutes of silence to remember those who took part in the heroic massacre. I would not kid myself that I wouldn't also torture and kill if I was placed in a horrible enough environment, so I have put explicit effort into reading the works of Khaneman and others. Milgram's Experiment, Stanford prison experiment, etc. I was watching a fire start in a bin outside our library the other day, counting all the people walking by as smoke came out, some of them throwing rubbish in and walking off. Fortunately I'd read about bystander apathy so I just went and told someone and they put it out.

The "moderating sensationalism" view is clearly wrong when one looks at the list of search items blocked. Let's see... Top result for Tiananmen massacre in Mandarin produces no results (六四), in English, the top result is "Tiananmen massacre a myth". How can China become a better place when it's people are forbidden from even researching such events?

Another fascinating delusion in China is the distinction between "Chinese" and "foreigner", and then perhaps "Japanese" will be refereed to separately, because fuck Japan. It's quite difficult to explain. In their minds (this is all "statistically speaking" of course", everyone takes on the "Chinese" or "foreigner" label and thus they take on distinct beliefs and behaviours associated with them. It's not trivial racism or anything, actually, they are typically more polite to "foreigners", which they call me even in my home country. One of the scary things that comes from this is the hard wired belief that "Taiwan is China", despite being and separated and independent for 70 years. I have tried explaining this very carefully to many Chinese, and they will understand each point individually, but at the end of the discussion they say "but Taiwan is China!" and continue on with their insanity. Meanwhile Taiwan has the day to day trouble of trying not to be massacred by China wanting to "save" them and "bring them back" (actually things I've heard from Chinese). It is as if one had a ex that still believed they were together and the only thing stopping them from rape was the lingering threat of getting beating up by the slightly less deranged partner (the USA). Of course, Chinese people happily assure me that China would never use force in resolving this. Actually, the official stance says they would only use force if Taiwan officially claimed independence, and the idea of Taiwan actually being independent is unpalatable, so everything is fine. So in summary, I have zero confidence when Chinese people assure me this censorship is all for the greater good.

Orwell's essay on freedom of the press (which was edited out of the first edition): [http://home.iprimus.com.au/korob/Orwell.html](http://home.iprimus.com.au/korob/Orwell.html)

<comment><USER4> Hey, sorry, I think a lot of people got the impression I was condoning their censorship. I didn't really mean to do that.

It's more that in the west we just see it as this horrible evil thing and it seems completely bizarre that anyone would be okay with it. I guess we just assume they must put up with it when in fact they have their own rational for supporting it (which ultimately is flawed, but it's still very interesting)

Have you traveled to Taiwan? I went there a few weeks ago and I found it a fascinating place. While it's definitely got it's own identity it also is definitely very "Chinese". Like more "Chinese" than probably some provinces in the mainland. And on the mainland they get TV shows and stuff from Taiwan and people know where Taipei and Kunming are on a map. People look forward to visiting Kenting some day. Families are split between mainland and Taiwan etc. So I can sorta see why they look at it all and think it's all part of the same country. (kinda how we think Canadians are basically Americans) And you're right, they definitely have no idea about how it'd actually work haha and they definitely have a complete disregard for what the Taiwanese want (needs of the many > needs of the few I guess??). One thing I heard is them wanting to have a Hong Kong type of deal with Taiwan ... to which I said: "yeah right, over all their collective dead bodies"

<comment><USER6> Yup, and there is a difference between "Chinese nationality" and "Chinese culture/civilization."

The Taiwanese still consider themselves a part of Chinese culture, in fact, they actually feel that they are the true "practitioners" of Chinese culture because the Mainland Chinese went through the Cultural Revolution.

> kinda how we think Canadians are basically Americans

I think an even closer analogy would be between American Northerners vs. Southerners.

As in, after the Civil War each side considers themselves to be "more American."

The best way to explain it is this: If you ask a Taiwanese person to know the greatest works of art "his people" have created "in their history," then he will name works of art created in Mainland China, but authors and artists that lived and died in Mainland China.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Bad reviews on Amazon lead to faked good ones.

Bad reviews on Glassdoor lead to faked good ones.

Bad reviews on Yelp lead to faked good ones.

Sometimes bad reviews are not fair or heavily exaggerated, sometimes bad reviews are from competitors. Bad reviews cannot be removed. Sometimes, faked good reviews is the only way to bring back a balanced view.

So, this seems to happen everywhere and to be the natural response of a self- regulating market. Means that we should be careful with user generated content in general, _also users_ might have an hidden agenda.

Edit: Why the downvote? I am not saying that I like this, I just tried to find an explanation for a market behavior.

<comment><USER8> Another study also states that Chinese people don't trust what they read; they trust their friends', relatives', etc. opinion. This is why you don't see wandering Asian tourists - they tend to visit what they know it's going to worth is, based on, well, gossip.

And sadly, I'm leaning towards this myself, finding the amazon 5* reviews more and more useless - although the same goes for most 1* reviews as well, those are mostly angry costumers with a bad luck.

<comment><USER9> I find 3* and 4* reviews most useful generally, especially when comparing two products, if the review describes the pros/cons that go into their rating. These reviews tend to come after a little consideration instead of being a gushing "honeymoon period" reaction or a "maybe if I trash them they'll give me a full refund to try get me to take the review down" thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Political scientist Danie Stockmann, who studies the role of media in authoritarian regimes, has this to say about the Chinese situation:

> New and market-based media require a certain degree of liberalization, > because market-based media need to cater towards audiences in order to make > a profit and new communication technologies are faster than propaganda > officials in spreading information. But this expanded social space places > pressure on the authoritarian state. As a result, China is also constantly > building up its capacity to control media, mostly through institutional > infrastructures, in order to maintain a roughly uniform flow of political > information. Therefore, China responds to the challenges posed by market- > based and new media by both opening up social spaces in media while > maintaining control through institutional mechanisms.

More: [http://www.politicalcommunication.org/newsletter_25_1_stockm...](http://www.politicalcommunication.org/newsletter_25_1_stockmann.html)

</comment><comment><USER11> While it might sounds bad and it sure is, how is it that different than the 100's of millions of "sponsored content" add's, "news articles" and blog spam that 1000's of companies spread through the internet each year?

<comment><USER12> Yes, an authoritarian state that murders and disappears people and then undermines resistance by subtly adjusting the dialogue of its citizens is just like a marketing agency.

Exactly the same, now I consider it more.

Forgive the hyperbole, but I think it does the suffering caused by their regime a great disservice to compare it to sponsored ads.

<comment><USER11> Because the same marketing agencies also publish content for politicians and political parties, lobbyists and interest groups? It's not like it's only used to sell you car insurance and diet pills.

<comment><USER13> Yes but we don't kill anyone :-)

<comment><USER14> Are you sure about that? It is just marketed a little differently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > The researchers said they found no evidence that people were paid for the > posts, adding the work was probably part of the employees' job > responsibilities.

Probably? How on earth do they reach this conclusion? Is this science?

> Although those who post comments are often rumored to be ordinary citizens, > the researchers were surprised to find that nearly all the posts were > written by workers at government agencies including tax and human resource > departments, and at courts.

I'm surprised that the article paints a picture of factories where masses of chinese slave workers are producing cheap comments.

It's also very unlikely that they will have these kinds of sweatshops located at tax departments and courts.

Another simple explanation: As of 2009, 10 million people were civil servants within the Chinese government, and maybe, just maybe they are also sometimes bored at work and post cat pictures on the internet.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_of_the_People%27...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China)

</comment><comment><USER16> I wonder how many of those are in this thread. There are quite a few posts in here written in good but not quite natural english, espousing various degrees of conciliatory attitudes towards the propaganda state.

<comment><USER17> They may or may not be in this thread, but pg mentioned years back that there are often a lot of suspect new accounts pushing official lines on stories involving China.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Turns out it's a Brave New World instead of 1984. And I am not surprised. A semi-totalitarian government based around ideology. If China's idealistic goal is set to be achieving communism through socialism, then what's better than vox populi?

<comment><USER19> I'm not even sure if they still have any communist goal, it looks just like any other authoritarian government now, it's probably only communist by name.

<comment><USER20> It's a totalitarian government with massive state ownership of businesses. That's pretty much the definition of communism. The fact that they got less extreme on their economic policies whilst remaining extreme on their social/control policies doesn't make it not communism.

<comment><USER21> The definition of communism is a classless society where workers have direct control over the means of production.

<comment><USER22> No, that's the fake claim that nobody believes these days. Which is why no nations are rushing out to become Communistic: as an ideology it didn't just lose, it got completely demolished. The ideology espoused was never actually sincere in any regard, it was merely a fraudulent cover for a power grab by the party elite, which is why the claims of Communism have always contradicted the reality perfectly.

There has never been a single implementation of Socialism - <USER3> Communism and Fascism - that has delegated any power to the workers. It has always and will always be held by the party dictatorship. No property, including the means of production, is ever held by the workers, it is always controlled by the elite of the party dictatorship for the purpose of plundering profit and enslaving the workers. Which simultaneously explains the _extreme_ poverty Socialism has produced every time it has been attempted.

<comment><USER21> You're conflating Marxist-Leninism (and Stalinism, Maoism, etc. they tend to get named after their dictator) with communism. You've just demonstrated that most of the countries that call themselves communist or socialist... weren't. That doesn't change the word or its definition.

The Free Territory and Catalonia were libertarian socialist communities. They were betrayed by Bolsheviks and Stalinists respectively.

> Which simultaneously explains the extreme poverty Socialism has produced > every time it has been attempted.

Britain forcibly deindustrialized India, reducing it from the most productive region of the world to one of the poorest. This, somehow, is not an indictment of capitalism, but all the dictatorships that call themselves communist are an indictment of communism. I don't care at all to defend the likes of the USSR or their satellite puppet governments, but you're drunk on propaganda if you think any of these criticisms you've leveled cannot be made against the so- called "free world".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Interesting. This makes me wonder about how many blog/forum posts in the Western world that are written by PR agencies. Not working for governments, of course, but for corporations and NGOs.

<comment><USER24> _> Not working for governments, of course,_

Why not for governments?

<comment><USER23> In the Western world, there seem to be this prevalent ideal that the people should control the government and not the other way around. If a Western government hired people to influence politics like this, wouldn't there be a backlash?

<comment><USER24> Where's the backlash against this: [https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig- manipulation/](https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/)

Or this: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasbara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasbara)

<comment><USER20> There was a huge backlash caused by the Snowden revelations and JTRIG certainly got massive attention at the time.

Unfortunately there's no obvious way to stop it because politicians appear to believe spy agencies should be unaccountable and above the law.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Why don't we study our own social media habits with as much scrutiny? I mean, if our version of the Chinese state is free market capitalism, how much of our own social media ecosystem is clogged with "fake" posts, otherwise known as content marketing? I bet we produce way more than 488M of that kind of crap each year.

<comment><USER26> I think the key difference is the government not cooperations are behind it. I think if the American government were mass employing graduates to make fake posts, then it would be scrutinised massively. (graduates, because social control is an academic discipline)

Comparatively, between the two nations, I don't think the role of the Chinese state in controlling the thoughts of its citizens can be easily compared with American free market capitalism. In reality, China also has similar model of capitalism which operates in a similar way.

The government creating fake posts, the Chinese fire wall.. Tiananmen Square.. people with anti-goverment views at local level - regularly going missing.. official and unofficial snithches on nearly every street.. I could go on.

The unique role of the Chinese government (unlike America) make their social media habits interesting.

Now of course American social media habits are interesting, but not for the same reasons, and I would argue: American social media habits aren't as important in areas like human rights.

To put it in another context: if I was making this post from china or was Chinese - I would be looking over my shoulder and perhaps writing more ambiguously.

<comment><USER27> [http://www.computerworld.com/article/2470594/endpoint- securi...](http://www.computerworld.com/article/2470594/endpoint- security/army-of-fake-social-media-friends-to-promote-propaganda.html)

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy- op...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation- social-networks)

[http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/fe...](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/feb/23/need- to-protect-internet-from-astroturfing)

This is old news. It was first revealed in 2004.

<comment><USER28> The existence of the US government's looking into such a program or even having a small version of it isn't surprising.

What would be interesting in a bad way would be if the US government was using it at anywhere near the scale of the Chinese government.

<comment><USER26> Agreed, with both of you. I like this hackernews forum, as false arguments tend to be articulately called out and discussed.

The irony of the thread is that the fundamental debate is about if such a forum should be allowed to exist without government mediation and control.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> honest question that seems more pointed than it is: how many anti-CCP/China posts did the CIA sponsor last year?

<comment><USER30> If you mean the Chinese Intelligence Agency, they aren't anti-CCP. If you mean the Central Intelligence Agency, then we have no evidence that they are, and it is highly likely that they wouldn't bother. What is in it for the USA to destabilize China and/or overthrow the CPP? A failed state with 1.3 billion people would be a huge headache.

<comment><USER31> > A failed state with 1.3 billion people would be a huge headache.

Here's one of the most interesting deceptive phenomenon that almost all the modern human failed to detect. That's why the states have so many headaches and will continue to have more headaches.

A rational politician should control his/her own strong desire from ideology(i.e. eager to spread the value of democracy/universal human rights all over the world) to avoid the "huge headache". But the reality is irrational politicians driven by their strong belief pretend to be rational so others think their decision is based on reasoning.

A famous example as I mentioned in another post is Mr.Obama blamed G.W.Bush, who created headache of Iraq with a naive view that he was doing good thing to Iraqis, but Obama created Libya headache by himself. What he criticized Bush in words is just a way of showing he had a better judgement and more reasonable than Bush so he can win in election. His behavior shows there's little difference.

Another example is Politicians like to talk "US interests". Most people might not think of the WORD is just a way to show other people they are rational. Their behavior not always really align with US interest.

Next time when you hear a politician saying "A failed state with 1.3 billion people would be a huge headache and against US interest", don't be so confident they are the same as you. Politicians are special specie extremely good at creating wrong impression to other people.

<comment><USER30> I don't think Obama created the Lybia headache, they were already breaking up (failing) with the Arab Spring way before the USA intervened. The USA also didn't kill Gaddafi, there was no oil to procure, and it was a NATO action anyways. Contrast to Iraq, that was all on the USA. The people weren't revolting, no civil war, there was just no reason for us to go there.

Obama is very different from GW Bush.

<comment><USER32> The push to do something in Libya was from Europe, it does have plenty of oil though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> > _Although those who post comments are often rumored to be ordinary citizens, > the researchers were surprised to find that nearly all the posts were > written by workers at government agencies including tax and human resource > departments, and at courts. The researchers said they found no evidence that > people were paid for the posts, adding the work was probably part of the > employees' job responsibilities._

<comment><USER34> No I think this is more like someone working for some new startup talking it up, or talking up the product. It may not be in the job description, but one might be inclined to say good things.

Do recall these jobs are ones one gets by studying hard for a rote test/civil service exam. So one might feel obliged when working for the state (where it's prestigious to work, as seen by fam) to defend the state.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Spamming 400M posts is just casual business for any for-profit astroturfing companies.

I am not surprised if you can find another 800M posts is for soft advertising.

</comment><comment><USER36> About time they learned from Western governments.

</comment><comment><USER37> "Media does not spread free opinion; it generates opinion." \--Oswald Spengler, 1918

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West#Democr...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West#Democracy.2C_media.2C_and_money)

</comment><comment><USER38> How silly I was, thinking that there will be no jobs in the future due to automation. :-)

</comment><comment><USER22> This entire thread seems to be overflowing with pro-authoritarian, emotionally reactive posts that are attempting to defend via diversion the actions in question. I count a couple dozen variations of intentionally trying to divert away from the actual topic. I'm surprised this thread isn't killed yet given the quality of the postings occurring here.

</comment><comment><USER39> So it´s like content ads in the western world? buy this, buy that? nice.

</comment><comment><USER40> Well too bad nobody in China will ever get to read this post.

<comment><USER41> Common wisdom says whoever is interested in reading this kind of stuff, will end up reading it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Do we have any data for USA, something I care more about?

ex: [http://tinyurl.com/hbsanfr](http://tinyurl.com/hbsanfr)

<comment><USER24> The US government doesn't need to do this. It has press conferences and gullible journalists: [https://theintercept.com/2016/05/20/pentagon-official- once-t...](https://theintercept.com/2016/05/20/pentagon-official-once-told- morley-safer-that-reporters-who-believe-the-government-are-stupid/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I wonder if it's actually effective, or just makes the people calling for it to be done, feel better.

<comment><USER44> All of the above? Totalitarian regimes _always_ try to control the public narrative. It matters.

<comment><USER24> _All_ regimes try to control the public narrative.

<comment><USER34> Yes but the difference is in totalitarian regimes, theirs is the only narrative. No one or nothing else's story is permitted, while theirs is made to flourish.

On the positive side, when you have an undivided narrative like that you can get a lot done (sometimes bad, sometimes good) without impeding distractions.

<comment><USER29> You can get books in the Shanghai library with a lot of narratives of world history different than the CCP's.

Totalitarian is probably not the most fitting word to describe the current state of Chinese society, insofar as it connotates an environment of constant fear of unwarranted state intrustion into everyday life. The only environment I've been in that could be said to be "totalitarian" in that sense would be the south side of Chicago.

<comment><USER30> DPRK and Eritrea are pretty darn close to totalitarian. Even at its worst in the 60s/70s, China was just barely there, it is just too big to control likes that.

It is difficulty it to describe China's political system using existing terms. Maybe authoritarian, but that doesn't feel right either. It isn't transparent in how the power flows, could even be an oligarchy or aristocracy.

<comment><USER45> In practice, and in name, China is a republic. The leadership of the CCP are elected by it's 80+ million members. [1] Power resides in elected individuals representing the party members. Party membership is not easy, but not too difficult either. [2] One could make the analogy, joining the party is the PRC's version of enrolling to vote, which happens to be a much more complicated process than in the U.S. Not everyone is allowed to become a party member, but that is also true in the U.S and other countries, where some or all prisoners have no right to vote.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_People%27s_Re...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China)

[2] [https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-join-the-Chinese-Communist- Pa...](https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-join-the-Chinese-Communist-Party)

<comment><USER30> We get to vote for local representatives in our trade union. I mean, the trade union organizes the voting, but us non-citizen members aren't allowed to participate. They give you one name to vote for, BUT IT IS STILL DEMOCRATIC because you can write someone else's name in if you want. You get one name to vote for, but you can vote for anyone - so wise!

Likewise, when party members vote for congress party members, the decisions are often pre-determined. Ironically enough, Xi Jinping actually lost a vote once:

> Xi held posts in the Fuzhou Municipal Party Committee and became the > president of the Party School in Fuzhou in 1990. In 1997, Xi was named an > alternate member of the 15th Central Committee of the Communist Party of > China. However, out of the 151 alternate members of the Central Committee > elected at the 15th Party Congress, Xi received the lowest number of votes > in favour, placing him in last place in the rankings of members, ostensibly > due to his status as a Princeling.[a][20]

Of course, it didn't matter much, because votes are..well..even under the perverted Chinese system where outcomes are almost always predetermined, if they are not what is wanted, they are just fudged anyways.

And everyone knew Xi Jinping would get elected even before the first vote was cast by the party. There wasn't like any suspense, there were no odds in London. This year in the US, it is not certain that Clinton or Trump will will the POTUS election...we have hunches, but there is no certainty.

Calling China a republic is like calling North Korea a republic. Technically true, but ultimately meaningless.

<comment><USER45> Does Xi have full control of China? Does he have the power to do things like, give cities away to foreign nations? Is his term unlimited? Is it inherited?

In the U.S., you've had Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, and strong chance of Clinton and Bush again next term. It's a Republic in name, but it is also where a political system where political power is often inherited, arguable even more so than in China. If U.S. qualifies as a republic, I'd say China does too. We might know Xi was going to be president before the election was going to happen, but that happens in Westminster parliaments too - we are only electing our local representative, but everyone knows there are only two candidates. Same is true for China, where it was Xi and Bo Xilai. The latter lost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> As I know, Japan government also pays for posts in China. Maybe US does so.

</comment><comment><USER47> Look over there at China! Nothing to see _here_ , right?

</comment><comment><USER48> This isn't any different than Facebook (or government programs) "curating"/filtering news/media.

</comment><comment><USER49> 488M? Is that all?

</comment><comment><USER50> Interesting - how many social media posts a year are faked by US?

</comment><comment><USER51> How many have been in Weibo hmmm

</comment><comment><USER52> What about all the Flash games out there?

</comment><comment><USER53> Wait. Trump will soon pull the plug on China. Let's see how they can survive this.

(gives them three years to balance trade with the US)

<comment><USER54> The first, and probably only important result of this will be a massive increase in the cost of most products in the USA.

Let's see how they can survive this...

<comment><USER53> Hm. Maybe.

But

1\. Lets see how much robots can replace of the labour

2\. China one accumulated most of the world silver reserves. Buying nothing and selling silk and porcelain. This was one of the reasons for the Opium war. Today China produces nothing that not somebody else could produce. Shoes, Clothes, toys, electronics. They tried to get a monopoly with rare earth metals but this seem to have failed.

I challenge your statement. I doubt the outcome.</comment></comment></comment>


Building an Ember app with RailsAPI – Part 2 - <AUTHOR> http://reefpoints.dockyard.com/ember/2013/01/09/building-an-ember-app-with-rails-api-part-2.html

<comment><USER2> Watch out, Ember is coming!

Seriously, if you are using Backbone for somewhat big apps, stop it and start learning Ember. The API will stabilize soon as the 1.0.0 version gets released, and the show will begin.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Check out the source code <https://github.com/bcardarella/ember-railsapi>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> And check out Part 1</comment>


[pdf] Google Confidential - Interest Based Advertising in The GCN - <AUTHOR> http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/GoogleJuly09.pdf

<comment><USER2> Confidential? All I saw was Privacy privacy privacy power to the users.

This looks like a PR "leak".

<comment><USER3> Yeah, you could learn everything that presentation was about just by caring enough to click there button on the ads.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Who wants to learn JavaScript? - <AUTHOR>

After helping my cofounder get started with programming, I've been thinking it might be fun to help other startup-minded folks learn too. Are there any designers/entrepreneurs reading HN who want to learn JavaScript from scratch?
Next Saturday, February 23, starting at 9am PST, I'll be giving a free 4+ hour JavaScript workshop online. We'll start from the absolute beginning and build up to the hard stuff. You can use what you learn anywhere JavaScript runs, from web browsers, to servers, mobile devices and even some databases.
Why not just make screencasts? Because I want to experience those "ah-ha!" moments with you, when you first grasp each difficult concept. That's at least half the fun.
This will be limited to 5 people, to keep it conversational. If you're interested, send me an email (see profile) describing why you want to learn JavaScript and your current level of experience. This workshop is absolutely free. All I ask in return is that you give me honest feedback about the course material, the medium, and my delivery.
Thanks HN! <comment><AUTHOR> Thanks everyone for your interest! The class is filled and overflowing at the moment, but there will be a next time.

If you're still interested, send me an email (see profile) describing why you want to learn JavaScript and your current level of experience. You'll be the first to know about the next event.

</comment><comment><USER2> Oh this is pretty nice of you. Unfortunately I have that timeframe booked for me, but I do wish you best of luck. Any chance you can make a recording and put it up and share the link with us when you are done?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll give it some thought. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I know basics of Javascript, but really want to take it to another level now. So thanks for offering this training, I'm interested, please send me the joining link.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'd really love to but already have plans :( I'm definitely interested in a different time though!

<comment><AUTHOR> Send me an email. If I do this again I'll let you know.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is one of those times where I hate my job. I work every single Saturday. :(

<comment><AUTHOR> If there's enough interest in a different time, I'd think about doing it again on a weekday evening.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hopefully I've replied to everyone who emailed. So sorry if I missed anyone.

</comment><comment> alok-g I would. My email is there in my profile. Thanks so much.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great! I'll be in touch soon with the details!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I can make it next sat. Send me the link for webinar.

</comment><comment><USER7> Yes. Me please. Simon

</comment><comment><USER8> Oh,I'm late</comment>


A Story of Surveillance (2007) - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/07/AR2007110700006.html <comment><USER2> When it comes to damage-reduction, I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, _especially_ profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. For those of us who aren't doing so ourselves, we can pressure companies not to do so, either those we work for, or those we interact with as customers. This can either mean not collecting profiles at all, collecting limited ones only as needed, and/or collecting them tied to pseudonyms rather than making use of real-names mandatory or default.

I realize it can be commercially valuable to have such profiles when it comes to things like targeting ads or financial instruments, but on the whole I think the damage such data can do, if it exists, outweighs that justification. To take a concrete example, the side of the internal Google+ "nymwars" who were against the real-name requirement were right.

Of course, we should also work to keep corporate and government data collection separate. But I fear that will be a longer-term struggle, in which case an avenue to pursue simultaneously is to minimize corporate data- collection.

<comment><USER3> >I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity.

So Google and Facebook should commit Seppuku?

<comment><USER2> Google has been making large profits since long before Google+ even existed. There's probably some incremental value in having real-name profiles tied to data, but there's very large incremental harm as well, such that adding such functionality is net-negative for society. A large number of Googlers have made a similar argument, which is why the real-name policy was so controversial; the argument was already pretty strong before the NSA revelations, and is only stronger now.

Facebook is a trickier case. Their business model may simply be incompatible with a non-surveillance society.

<comment><USER4> I think the original idea of elimination of the collection of all private or personal information by all companies is a bit extreme.

From what we have learned, these programs are quite broad involving everyone from banking institutions to ISPs and telecoms.

Should banks do their business without knowing anything a about you, same for credit reporting agencies?

Maybe, but that would be quite a shift from the way things are done today.

Also, I thought it was common knowledge that some type of digital surveillance has been going on for some time.

My recollection is that the FBI was able to gain access to ISPs and use [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_(software)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_\(software\)) to track emails.

If an individual is concerned with privacy they should probably take matters into their own hands and use encryption, cash, bitcoin and other tools to protect their identity and leave as little private information online as possible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Relevant, started in 2002: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Awareness_Office](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Awareness_Office)

</comment><comment><USER6> I would be interested to see if Mr. Klein achieved something in his fight against NSA's surveillance program. It was back in 2007 and now we have 2013. Five years gone.

<comment><USER7> I'd say it's more likely his life is destroyed, I would love to know how he's making a living today.

Either way, he's not the one who was supposed to have "achieved something" in that battle, we were, the people should have reacted. They didn't, and they won't this time either. Sorry but we're just too complacent with all our luxuries and comforts.

<comment><USER8> For most individuals things like these don't matter afterall. It's a small minority which even cares, so I don't really even wonder anymore.

Just mind your own business and avoid problems, that works the best for an individual person. Sad but true.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I am still pretty confused about how this community seems to not have known these programs existed. It has been widely reported almost since inception. Not to mention the broad record of previous land line recording programs.

<comment><USER10> I'm getting tired of seeing comments like this everywhere, which serve little use. Yes, it's been going on for a long time. Yes, many people have been aware of such programs as small bits have been leaked over the years. Yes, many of us have been angry about it for a long time.

The difference this time is not specifically the new information but the fact that it hasn't successfully been buried in the news after a day or two so far and people are in fact getting more upset about it. This is a good thing. If people aren't talking about it, the chance of doing anything about it and expressing mass disapproval is significantly reduced.

Maybe nothing will happen this time either, but a lot of people are angry about it at the same time, and finally talking about it en masse, and I don't see that as anything but a great thing.

<comment><USER11> Same here. Not only do such comments serve no useful purpose, but they are actually negatively impacting the "cause" to change things, because such comments are basically saying "relax people, this is old news...".

NO! Now is not the time to relax, and it really doesn't matter if it's 1 week old news or 10 year old news. If it's that old, it's much more important to finally have the debate about privacy, which Congress and the nation as a whole mostly skipped over it because of the fear or terrorists.

It's about time that discussion started again, to see if things like the Patriot Act and FISA are first of all, constitutional, and second of all, if all the privacy breaching is worth it to Americans, and only if there is real proof that it works not based on feeling and security theatre.

<comment><USER9> Having a "public" discussion about security is an almost fruitless endeavor.

It is nearly impossible to have a public discussion about threat assessment and mitigation. If a person has never truly experienced threat, which the vast(99%+) majority of the US public has not, then a persons ability to even identify threat is exponentially reduced. The perceived safety of a persons daily life directly effects the perception of overall threats, which in the context of the US severely jades any discussion towards inherently safe.

I am not an advocate of public surveillance and I am a strongly opinionated in regards to privacy, but my experiences abroad have lead me to resolve this conviction into the reality that is our world, and that world is not the lives we have in the US. The threats to this country are real, are large scale, are extreme, and are discovered every single day.

I know the argument is that we need to talk about this and we need to have review, but this has happened already. It happens all the time. It happens every time a warrant is issued. It was not one person or 5 people or 100 people, but thousands of people that have seen the threat and that have fought the threat with their own hands. These are the people that have time and time again decided that to much information is better than not enough.

I know that people will not agree with this, but I long ago discovered that principles and good intentions do not stop bullets and bombs.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


I hate almost all software. (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://tinyclouds.org/rant.html <comment><USER2> Great rant, but I always thought it was pretty ironic because I'm not aware of a development environment that requires you to track more shit in your head than Node.js and JavaScript.

Maintaining other people's JavaScript is easily the most frustrating and inefficient development that I ever have to trudge through due to the ceaselessly shifting landscape of Node packages and best practices (Grunt, Gulp, Webpack, Backbone, Angular, React, callbacks, promises, await, etc...) and the utter incapability of development tooling to assist due to JavaScript's dynamic typing.

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3055154](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3055154)</comment>


Hollywood Must Pull Out of Georgia - <AUTHOR> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-pull-georgia-1216555 <comment><USER2> So instead of making a point about the problem, mybe even publicising it, you want to just pull out of the south and give up because the culture is different? If so, good riddance.</comment>


25 Microchips That Shook the World - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/may09/8747

<comment><USER2> The print version has everything on one page: <http://spectrum.ieee.org/print/8747>

</comment><comment><USER3> Another two workhorse candidates:

\- The 7400 TTL quad 2-input NAND gate (pre-1970, TI and others?). And family ... many other pages in the catalog.

\- The 2408 1kB UV-erasable EPROM (~1980, Intel), and siblings: 2416 2kB, etc.

Perhaps also the 2900 4-bit slice ALU from AMD, possibly more often admired than actually used ;-)

<comment><USER4> You may be right about the 2900, but I think that one of the 2900 books ("Bit- slice Microprocessor Design" by Mick and Brick) could be considered very influential to a certain generation of older digital designer.

Thanks for bringing this up--I'll need to add a copy to my library now!</comment></comment>


IPad 2 Wi-Fi Teardown - <AUTHOR> http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-2-Wi-Fi-Teardown/5071/1 <comment><USER2> So, the only thing preventing the iPhone 4 or either iPad from being an FM radio receiver is software? a suitable antenna?

I doubt it's Apple policy, as the iPod Nano has FM and basic radio timeshifting capabilities

<comment><AUTHOR> Of note, the Nano uses the earbud cable as the antenna.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'd love to know the weight of the battery and the glass display.

<comment><USER4> Imagine how thin and light it could be if batteries were not required.

<comment><USER5> Atomic isotope? Would be even worse for tech waste, but imagine the 'battery' life. 25 years...

<comment><USER6> Ideally you'd have a removable power module which you can take from device to device... a "zap drive". Brought to you by the US Nucleics Corporation.

<comment><USER4> They can be shaped as coins and become a new currency, it glows green when fully charged. Devices(including cars) have coin slots to take in power.

<comment><USER7> Spoken like a true geek. Normal people don't want to know that such things even exist. Let machines with radiation detectors track them down in the dumpsters.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Anyone know what kind of drop tests these devices are subjected to? For our industrial handheld devices we need to survive 6ft on concrete multiple times and end up potting connectors and stuff like that. I don't see anything like that in the iPad.

<comment><USER9> We also don't see the iPad marketed as an industrial device.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> and the point of this is?

<comment><USER11> I work for the company, so color me a little bias, but the point of these teardowns has always been threefold. First, learn about hardware design. See how a company was able to make the latest cool new device. Second, some people are interested in only buying devices that they can repair. This teardown showed that it would be damn hard to repair most parts in this. Third, people want to know about how green the device is, and what other companies Apple is using for chips, etc.

Hope that explains. If it doesn't just chalk it up to to the fact that the same people who like reading engadget tend to like iFixit's teardowns. Gadget lust if you will.

<comment><USER6> Fourfold: advertising impressions. Presumably that's why the article went up tonight rather than spending time doing more research into availability of parts and so on which would be required if people were truly interested in a device they can repair. :)

<comment><USER5> Availability of parts will probably be in line with the previous iPad, and will most likely come from iFixit themselves.

iFixit is known for providing teardowns soon after product releases--I don't see anything wrong with that.

<comment><USER12> Except for the fact that they force us college students at Cal Poly to do their tech write-ups for our Technical Writing class. iFixit is filled with a bunch of losers. Sorry for being blunt, but half their "how to"s are written by college students forced to make them for our grade.

<comment><USER13> You are being very cryptic (and angry). Care to explain and be a little bit clearer?

How can they force you? Why does the university allow that?

<comment><USER11> iFixit runs a program with a few universities, including Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, where students are given recycled devices (such as an old cell phone or laptop) to write repair guides on iFixit.com. iFixit also provides all of the tools required to take the device apart and take pictures of it (including cameras and tripods).

The class was originally created because some of the Cal Poly's teachers were tired of the project that students were given at the time for the Technical Writing for Engineers class (Engl 149), which required students to make a fictional product and then write a user manual from it.

Most of the responses from teachers and students has been positive now that we have been running the program for two years. There are still some teachers that teach the class the old way, so if students dislike the project and want to write a twenty page paper instead, they are welcome to take the class with those teachers instead. Also we have excepted requests from students who want their work taken off of the website after the quarter is done.

As for being losers, well, sorry?

<comment><USER12> >"The class was originally created because some of the Cal Poly's teachers were tired of the project that students were given at the time for the Technical Writing for Engineers class"

That is not true, iFixIt CAME to the english department to ask for free content for their website but covered it as a "great technical writing experience."

>"Most of the responses from teachers and students has been positive now that we have been running the program for two years."

Uhhhh where are you getting your responses? Most people will give good reviews since YOU MAKE OUR GRADE. If you report to our teachers that we did a bad job, WE FAIL. Of course we will say we enjoyed it since you control our fate. I think its crazy that iFixIt has control over students grades.

>"and want to write a twenty page paper instead"

That is not standard practice in ANY 149 class. There is a final project but 20 pages? Thats extremely class-dependent!

Edit: and their standards are EXTREMELY high. We have to go way out of our way to meet them. Perfect cameras, perfect room lighting, perfect hands to hold the devices, perfect backgrounds... Many times we were forced to redo our guides and go well over the bounds of a 100 level class....all so iFixit could benefit financially.

<comment><USER11> I really don't want to get in flame war with you here, so I'll just say that as an employee, the thirty some odd students I talk to every quarter seem happy once the class is over.

Also, I was there when we were initially approached and took 149 back when students had to write a long paper in all of the classes.

If you have more complaints or would like some of your facts verified, feel free to email me at firstname.lastname@example.com</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to Have an Idea - <AUTHOR> http://www.frankchimero.com/idea/ <comment><USER2> wow, i can't believe this hasn't gotten a single comment. It's both funny and refreshing and it's also awesome!</comment>


Apple Watch: Ne ve rg on na gi ve yu up - <AUTHOR> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204833 <comment><USER2> I always thought apple designers don't have a sense of humor. I Like it.

</comment><comment><USER3> I dont get it

<comment><USER3> Last picture of the watch on the page, the "App a friend" paragraph.</comment></comment>


"We're here to put a dent in the universe. Otherwise, why else even be here?" - <AUTHOR> http://www.erickarjaluoto.com/blog/an-undented-universe/ <comment><USER2> We may be here to appreciate it, live harmoniously, grow, experience and tell the story too.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, but I also suspect you didn't read the post. ;-)

<comment><USER2> Guilty Cheers!</comment></comment></comment>