The Samsung Galaxy S4 Is Completely Amazing and Utterly Boring - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/?p=133710&u=0 <comment><USER2> It is, just like every other phone will be this year and next. Let's face it, the form factor is basically tapped out - there's only so many ways you can deliver a glass slab and right now Samsung will sell you a glass slab from 3" to 10", with every inch in between covered. The glass slabs get predictable hardware improvements (they all have the same innards too), so software touches are the only exciting thing left. In Samsung's case, you have to wait to Google IO for that.

Personally, I think foldable dual-screen phones will be the next revolution in the glass slab form factor, but it doesn't seem like they'll be shipping this year or next. I have both a 7" tablet and a 4.x" phone and I think it's pretty silly that they're separate devices. Imagine the GS4, with a single screen wrapped around the phone (like a book cover), with the ability fold it out into a near-tablet. _That_ would be completely amazing and utterly exciting.

<comment><USER3> How would you do a foldable book style screen though? Even if you can make a screen that folds and bends how does the phone know how much you've tucked behind the phone. It's going to be awfully floppy unless you use some material that can stiffen on command. Another problem would be the thickness of the screen. If it is uniformly thick then the phone will half in thickness going from phone to tablet and if the guts of the phone are hidden underneath one half of the screen then when you lay it flat the gubbins of the phone will stop the phone/tablet from sitting flush with whatever you put it on. And the weight won't be balanced. Seems like a ton of problems just to stop one from carrying a 300gram tablet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Samsung needs to address the look of the software. They put all this work into making Android ugly for no reason other than differentiation.</comment>


What Angular2 tutorial (book/screencast) should I purchase now? - <AUTHOR> I prefer structured learning. I'm considering ng-book-2 (book + screencast). I'm ready to dive into TypeScript with ng-book-2.  What is your thought?
My goals for learning Angular2 are mainly for (1) personal development: I'm a fan of Angular, and (2) I want to get started with Ionic 2 in the near future. I'm new to Ionic.
Is now the time to invest in Angular2 learning materials? <comment><USER2> As someone writing one of those tutorials, I think it's a little early at this point. The material provided by Google is thin at best at the moment and you frequently find yourself having to dive into the code to get anywhere.

I think it's fun to play with, but not ready for hard-core study yet.

<comment><AUTHOR> You have a point. Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I have just purchase ng-book-2 5 minutes ago. As far as my research shows, it's the most relevant learning material at this point.

I have decided to stop thinking and researching. Decided to give it a go for $39. If it's not suitable for me, it's just that amount.

Definitely better than wasting my effort thinking and researching.</comment>


Web server for Linux written in amd64 assembly - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/nemasu/asmttpd <comment><USER2> Pretty neat! It's awesome how assembly these days is reasonably high level:

[https://github.com/nemasu/asmttpd/blob/master/http.asm](https://github.com/nemasu/asmttpd/blob/master/http.asm)

It dawns on me why we couldn't have shortcuts for several patterns that show up everywhere:

\- mov, mov, mov then call/syscall could just be written as call(arg, arg, arg) since it's not that difficult to figure out which argument needs to go to which register if there was a defined order of arguments.

\- push push push push <function body> pop pop pop pop <ret> could just be a define really. I realize that there are cases where you wouldn't necessarily do that, but that seems to be the minority. The compiler could just figure out what registers you use in the routine and push / pop those. If you want to keep a register, there could be added syntax for that.

It seems in both of these cases the language optimizes for simplicity and flexibility, ignoring the common case. Neither of these strike me as situations where introducing the abstraction would require a lot of compiler "magic" to guess and optimize. It's almost just string replacement.

Then again, you could just write all this in C and let the compiler figure it out. Interesting stuff!

<comment><USER3> > It's awesome how assembly these days is reasonably high level:

There were macro assemblers already available in the 80's!

<comment><USER4> Indeed, I pretty much learned programming on the C64 using Turbo Assembler which had macro functionality.

<comment><USER5> AFAIK the Turbo Assembler was producing x86 bytecode, how would that work?

<comment><USER3> > x86 bytecode

What?!

<comment><USER6> I guess he's talking about Borland's Turbo Assembler that was coming with Turbo Pascal: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Assembler](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Assembler)

<comment><USER3> My remark was because the OP used bytecode to describe assembly opcodes.

<comment><AUTHOR> The usage is nonstandard, but it provides an interesting perspective. What if he was planning to run the X86 code on a virtual CPU, is his usage then correct? Does the nature of compiled code change if it is executing on a "real" machine instead of a virtual one?

<comment><USER3> I would say yes, given that some bytecode instruction sets make a CISC processor look like a RISC one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7>
        xor rax,rax

I used this construct often to zero a register, in the time that memory and CPU cycles were scarce. But nowadays, my time is a more valuable resource, and I tend to write:

        mov rax, 0

It takes a somewhat longer instruction code, and a few CPU cycles more, but it conveys meaning better.

<comment><USER8> Personally I find the xor form easier to follow, it's SUCH a long-standing convention that if I saw a mov rax, 0 I would wonder what was going on.

<comment><USER9> same here. _but_ if you weren't proficient in writing and reading asm the statement would no longer be true.

now, you could argue if that were that the case, wth is that person doing there anyway.

also if you compile something like `return 0;` it used to be compiled down to `xor eax,eax; ret;`, but meh barely anyone i know coding these days even knew this to begin with.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm surprised that asmhttpd doesn't use sendfile(2) anywhere. Isn't that the fastest way to send a file to a socket?

<comment><USER11> Yeah, I'll be switching over to sendfile and getting rid of the large read/write buffers. So much cleaner and simpler ( and faster? ).

<comment><USER12> _and faster?_

You'll get way more bang for your buck by minimizing userspace→kernel round trips and memory copies than by hand-optimizing assembler code. sendfile is one great way to do this.

You'll get even more bang for your buck by _eliminating_ the kernel from the packet processing path by using netmap, PF_RING/DNA, or DPDK, and a user-space TCP/IP stack.

Assembly only really helps alleviate GCC's moronic decisions resulting in excessive stack spills and alignment-unaware loads & stores.

Something about carts and horses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why would you do this, write it in C and let the compiler do the hard work.

<comment><USER14> I agree. There's little justification for this other than 'I can'.

If you need to hit the metal you can inline assembly in both c and c++.

<comment><USER15> > There's little justification for this other than 'I can'.

And why isn't that enough?

<comment><USER16> Security through transparency and readability for a bigger audience.

<comment><USER17> That's a great reason not to _use_ this. Doesn't seem a reason not to _do_ it.

<comment><USER18> That's exactly right.

I wrote a web server in C. I'm not really a web guy, it was a lot of new stuff to me, I'm a pretty amateurish programmer, and it probably doesn't even deserve to be called a "web server". But it was fun, and really cool to know that something that I wrote (with the help/jump-off point of a tutorial or two) can be used to serve web pages to a client. I can run the program, pop open Firefox, and use the browser to click through a set of test pages as though it was being served by a real web server. That's fucking cool, and that was all the reason that I needed to do it.

Don't Reinvent The Wheel - unless you want to!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I wonder how fast is this server. Is handwritten assembly faster than GCC/clang-written assembly?

<comment><USER20> I don't want to be too harsh - this is a fun idea, and I'm prone to silly fantasies about rewriting slow code in assembly myself - but this particular assembly doesn't take advantage of many of the "dirty tricks" that are available in low-level code.

As one example, check out the content-type detection, which is essentially a long chain of repeated strlen + strcmp; assembly language doesn't magically make bad algorithms fast.

<comment><USER21> Not to mention that long chain is ugly to read. I would rather see a macro defined and called multiple times than to see the same block of code copy/pasted over and over.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Runs with about 3% less CPU load than apache on my server. However apache also does ALLOT more stuff.

<comment><USER23> Under heavy load?

<comment><USER22> Yeah downloading a large file. Apache was about 14% CPU Load asmttpd about 11% CPU Load

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> No libraries required? That is awesome!

</comment><comment><USER25> asmttpd - 0.04

Using Document Root: htdocs/ An error has occured, exiting

<comment><USER11> It's a crappy error message, but usually means the port is taken.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> so what is the implication of this? Does this mean that this webserver will be much faster and using less resource because it's written for linux directly?</comment>


Apple's Motion to Vacate - <AUTHOR> http://www.scribd.com/doc/300529248/Apple-s-Motion-to-Vacate <comment><AUTHOR> _> (pp26) like compelling a pharmaceutical company against its will to produce drugs needed to carry out a lethal injection in furtherance of a lawfully issued death warrant..._

A more diabolical example would be asking Pharma to create flu vaccine or drugs for a common disease, but specifically killing certain ethnic group / terrorists / 3rd world leaders of certain genetic markups or medical conditions.</comment>


Gatwick airport trial for valet-parking robots - <AUTHOR> https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/gatwick-airport-trial-for-valetparking-robots-will-cut-hassle-for-travellers-a4046406.html <comment><USER2> > [...]and uses military-grade GPS to ferry it to a secure bay[...]

Something tells me Gatwick isn't actually in possession of the decryption key for the US Air Force's P (precise) signal and this is just some PR person taking it too far.

<comment><USER3> It's a myth that civilian GPS is less precise than military. A modern, dual- frequency or augmented civilian GPS receiver is just as precise as a military GPS.

P may have once stood for precise, but now days the main advantage of the encrypted, military P signal is that it prevents spoofing attacks.

<comment> black-tea It used to be true but in 2000 Selective Availability was disabled which made the civilian signal just as precise. This is basically why GPS took off around that time despite having been in operation for two decades at that point.

<comment><USER4> It's just one of many whys. Differential GPS was widely available and it gave cm-level positioning precision.

Equally if not more important why was your good old hardware minituarization and its cost reduction. In the late 90s a decent GPS reciever was still a size of thick book and cost prohibitively.

<comment> black-tea That would have been no problem in a car. But pre 2000s civilian GPS was useless for street level navigation.

<comment><USER4> No, it wasn't useless.

Again, coupled with differential corrections (available for free over radio) the resulting precision was in centimeter range. The reason it wasn't used was the physical size and cost (for hand-held navigation) and the lack of supporting hardware in cars (no user-facing on-board systems with screens and UI).

SA was _not_ the reason for the lack of consumer-level GPS adoption.

<comment><USER5> In my experience using DGPS around 2000, most of the DGPS sources were near the coasts and operated by the Coast Guard. There were a few scattered transmitters here and there, certainly not enough to provide the kind of coverage we now enjoy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This article desperately needs a video, here's a nearly 2 year old video from the same company:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3hmbYLQedc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3hmbYLQedc)

<comment><USER7> Your video is the only non-animated one i can find, and really, its just of a dolly bumping into a car, then cut to 'car being on dolly' and disappearing out of view. All the pictures in the article seem taken from the animated promotional stuff for stanley-robotics.com which itself seems unrealistic as best. And even the 'already used in France' bit is misleading, as it was a _trial_ at charles de gaulle with no information on the scale or success.

Their site looks like its there to attract investors rather than sell any kind of real product.. i might be wrong but i don't think this is going to amount to anything, shame.

<comment><USER8> Here is a non-rendered video where the lifting happens: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bocfNOjeBm8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bocfNOjeBm8)

I don't see how 2 tons are being lifted from such a low and thin surface. The whole thing looks more like a Kickstarter than a real product.

Edit: Nope this is 100% legit

<comment><USER9> same replies as above. Our robots have been receiving in our opened service (Lyon airport) on a daily basis vehicles up to 3 tons (incl. heavy SUVs with hybrid powertrain). Our mechanical spec. is higher though

<comment><USER7> Can't find anywhere in Lyon airport to book this service;

[https://www.lyonaeroports.com/en/parkings-airport/car- parks-...](https://www.lyonaeroports.com/en/parkings-airport/car-parks-map)

Also they seem to use ectorparking.com at Lyon, are you affiliated with Ector?

<comment><USER8> Also no sign of it on Twitter, seems like people using it would likely talk about it on social media (maybe it's a private beta for airport employees?)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I wonder if the movement triggers car alarms to go off?

</comment><comment><USER11> That's clever. But all it does is rearrange the cars in the parking lot. It doesn't pick them up at the terminal or deliver them back there. Good first step, though.

<comment><USER9> thanks. what you say is a nice vision, level 5 of such AGVs ;) and as you say, the prior levels are already pretty interesting (our customers, the parking lots owners, saying) as first steps

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> London's other major airport has a very cool autonomous rapid transit system.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4yciAxbGTg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4yciAxbGTg)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULTra_(rapid_transit)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULTra_\(rapid_transit\))

</comment><comment><USER13> One benefit I can see from this:

Car owners probably drop off their car and then get valeted into a spot.

This means the car is started and ran for a few minutes before being shut down again, draining some precious battery power that isn't recharged in time.

Repeat when the owner requests the car's return.

This may make the difference between a car that starts when its owner returns vs not.

<comment><USER14> This seems like a non-problem. Your car battery is going to be full when you arrive at the airport. Two extra starts isn't going to cause a problem.

<comment><USER15> Apparently some modern cars with a lot of electronics do actually have a problem keeping their battery alive for just two weeks in an airport garage!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> These robots and electric car chargers could solve the daily game of musical chairs in corporate parking lots. A single human attendant could handle the "last inch" problem.

</comment><comment><USER17> I assume I have to leave my car off, but in neutral with the parking brake off? How else could they drag around an AWD/RWD car by just pushing it around from the front?

<comment><USER18> The vehicle isn't pushed; all four wheels are lifted off the ground.

<comment><USER19> That's hardly obvious from the pictures in the article.

In addition, cars have very precise jacking locations which must be used to lift them without damage. Those bots probably don't know where to jack every particular vehicle. Do they just jam a dolly under the wheels?

I'd give this a hard pass. It is probably just a way to separate some money from some dumb VCs.

<comment><USER20> One picture in the article shows that the sled has lifted the car by the wheels. The video posted above shows this more clearly, all four wheels: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3hmbYLQedc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3hmbYLQedc)

I guess that much tighter parking is the goal, to make this pay, but it's not clear how far they can go here -- it looks like every car can be accessed without moving others, needing clear aisles.

Also, the column spacing in many buildings is designed around parking-bay sizes, which will limit how much you can save in any existing building. And it would be one hell of a 50-year bet to design a new building only for this system.

<comment><USER19> _The video posted above shows this more clearly, all four wheels_

The video shows _nothing_. It only shows "before" and "after", not "during". It's totally fake. The video doesn't answer the question of how the wheels magically get on top of the sled.

Is the body somehow jacked up to lift the car off the ground? If so, how is this done safely? Most unibody cars can only be jacked up by lifting at very specific points. You can't just slide a large piece of metal underneath to lift the car. Well, you can, but you'll probably damage the car.

<comment><USER21> It seems pretty clear. The fingers on the sled go underneath the wheels of the car.

Watch 1:12 in the video. You can see the white-tipped prongs around the wheel

Here's a side view.

       _O_    _O_

<comment><USER19> Come on, guys. It's emphatically NOT CLEAR.

There's a jump between 1:11 and 1:12 in the video. Just before, the sled bumps into the tires in the front of the car. You can actually see the car physically jerk back as the sled hits. Just after, all four wheels of the car have magically appeared on top of the sled.

Phooey.

If this were as simple as everyone thinks, there would not be a jump in the video at the exact point that the magic happens!

<comment><USER20> 30s: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bocfNOjeBm8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bocfNOjeBm8)

40s: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIaxPa2aUDI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIaxPa2aUDI)

<comment><USER19> Thank you. Those videos illustrate the concept much better than any others.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> > He said that passenger feedback was "overwhelmingly good" during a five- > month trial at Charles de Gaulle last year, where the system operated so > seamlessly that some customers were not even aware a robot had been > involved.

</comment><comment><USER23> Only 4 robots? Why so few?

And only for 4 travelers? Why that arbitrary limitation? Why can't they handle 5 travelers?

<comment><USER24> Where does it mention 4?</comment></comment>


AMD GPUOpen Initiative, New Compiler, Drivers and OS SDK's for Linux and HPC - <AUTHOR> http://hothardware.com/news/amd-goes-open-source-announces-gpuopen-initiative-new-compiler-and-drivers-for-lunix-and-hpc <comment><AUTHOR> OS here is open source, this is pretty significant since they plan to offer MIT licensed versions of lots of their internal tools and SDK's. The C++ compiler is an attempt at capturing the HPC market by providing tools to convert 90% of CUDA code to portable C++ that can run on AMD and NVidia cards. Lots of bare metal GPU access stuff too, so lots more control for Game developers. Lots of goodies.</comment>


Fedora to simplify filesystem hierarchy - <AUTHOR> http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/218847/fedora-simplify-filesystem-hierarchy

<comment><USER2> Fedora Project loves to challenge the status quo. First it was interface naming, now it's binary locations. What next?</comment>


Miller is like sed, awk, cut, join, and sort for name-indexed data such as CSV - <AUTHOR> http://johnkerl.org/miller/doc/ <comment><USER2> There is also the (impossible to google) [https://github.com/harelba/q](https://github.com/harelba/q) that lets you SQL over CSV and is unix pipeline friendly.

<comment><USER3> There's also [https://github.com/BurntSushi/xsv](https://github.com/BurntSushi/xsv) which is fairly similar in how it works to Miller, though it can also index a CSV file and then future operation will be sped up by utilizing the index.

<comment><USER4> xsv is awesome, just used it for a mini-project. Thanks for the heads up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I love csvkit[0] for this purpose

[0] [https://github.com/onyxfish/csvkit](https://github.com/onyxfish/csvkit)

<comment><USER6> csvkit is excellent. I like `csvlook` for display csv files in the terminal.

Can anyone recommend an easy way to convert csv to xls on Linux? I know that libreoffice and gnumeric can do it in headless mode, but it seems terrible overkill.

<comment><USER7> It is mega overkill but Pentaho does conversion between a long list of file and database formats. I'm more mentioning it so you can check it out in case you ever see a more complex requirement, or want to learn the tool. Once I learned it the one off stuff is trivial. It takes me 5-10 mins to import an xls, let the tool examine the file for field names and types, hook that to a table load step, generate the ddl, edit the ddl to remove spaces from field names and then execute the ddl followed by the loader job.

Since you're going flat file to flat file it would be faster for you as no field name edits are required. You just create a csv input step, xls output step and that's it, save and run the transformation and you're done.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > And initial experiments with Rust are intriguing. Yet with none of them > could I obtain the throughput I get in C: see the Performance page.

I'd be curious to see how `xsv` (written in Rust) compares performance wise to Miller. (I can't compile Miller---I commented on the issue tracker.)

> Thus the absence of in-process multiprocessing is only a slight penalty in > this particular application domain — parallelism here is more easily > achieved by running multiple single-threaded processes, each handling its > own input files, either on a single host or split across multiple hosts.

I disagree. CSV files can be indexed[1] very simply, providing random access. This makes it trivial to split a large CSV file into chunks which can be operated on in parallel. This lifts the burden off the user to do the splitting and merging manually, which can be become quite tedious when you want to do frequency analysis on the fields.

This type of indexing is not usually seen because it requires support from the underlying CSV parser to produce correct byte offsets. But you've written your own parser here in Miller, so you should be able to do something similar to `xsv`. Moreover, random access gets you slicing proportional to the slice. i.e., extract the last 10 records in a 4M row CSV file is instanteous. This opens up other doors too, like potentially faster joining and fast random sampling.

P.S. I love the name. :-)

[1] - [http://burntsushi.net/rustdoc/csv/index/index.html](http://burntsushi.net/rustdoc/csv/index/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> Not exactly the same thing, but I often use a tiny tool I wrote called shellql[1] that lets you just type in SQL like

        cat foo.csv | shellql "select f1, count(*) from tbl where f2='thingiwant' group by f1 order by count(*) desc limit 5"

It has some limitations on the formats of CSV that it can take, namely that string fields have to be quoted, but you can see from the code that there's not much to it if you wanted to change that. It'd also be easy enough to take in multiple CSV files, join them together, etc.

sqlite's pretty badass.

[1] [https://gist.github.com/ketralnis/8124b3ead9d94e00dcb2](https://gist.github.com/ketralnis/8124b3ead9d94e00dcb2)

</comment><comment><USER10> Or csvtool (written 2005, available in all good Linux distros):

[https://github.com/Chris00/ocaml- csv/blob/master/examples/cs...](https://github.com/Chris00/ocaml- csv/blob/master/examples/csvtool.ml#L510)

</comment><comment><USER11> There's also xsv:

[https://github.com/BurntSushi/xsv](https://github.com/BurntSushi/xsv)

</comment><comment><USER12> Also check out Google's Crush-tools

[https://github.com/google/crush-tools](https://github.com/google/crush-tools)

</comment><comment><USER13> It looks like this tool doesn't support semicolon-separated CSV files, quotes, or numbers using a comma as decimal separator. Too bad.

It's a pity that the CSV file format is so fragmented. It's all too common that a CSV file written by tool A can't be read by tool B.

Only very few tools do it right. For example, I think the ruby CSV module has a heuristic to automatically detect the "style" of CSV files, which is pretty neat.

<comment><USER14> I found the pandas tests to be a great source for implementing robust CSV parsers:

[https://github.com/pydata/pandas/blob/master/pandas/io/tests...](https://github.com/pydata/pandas/blob/master/pandas/io/tests/test_parsers.py)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> You _can_ name fields in awk so that you don't have to refer to them numerically as $8, $13 or whatever. Example:

       BEGIN { first=1; second=2; third=3 }

       $first > 42 { print $third }

Here, $first means $ applied to the variable first. Since first evaluates to 1, it means $1.

Broken CSV handling that doesn't respect quotes is easily done in awk using comma as the field separator.

<comment><USER16> What about non-broken CSV? Is there an easy way to tell awk to skip escaped or quoted delimeters?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I sometimes dumb down CSV to what sqlite understands and then just import it there. Gonna have a look at this, but whether it's SQL or Ruby/Python/Perl structures, I generally prefer to spend the least amount possible within actual CSV. Even more so if it contains hierarchical data.

</comment><comment><USER18> I made a little tool called SQLBong that does something similar by embedding Sqlite3 under the hood: [https://github.com/sordina/SQLBong](https://github.com/sordina/SQLBong)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Several feedbacks incorporated at

[https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/commit/a1d117d3b299bbf273...](https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/commit/a1d117d3b299bbf27309f157b0a8c90fea7ac066)

[https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/commit/7aead02c71a76fb281...](https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/commit/7aead02c71a76fb281273563e7e65d3be018bf52)

Also there is one issue closed (thanks epilanthanomai!) and two open. Remaining feedback items on the miller todo.txt.

Thanks all for the initial feedback -- exactly what I was looking for by posting here!

</comment><comment><USER19> Whenever somebody posts a csv manipulation tool, it's obligatory for everyone else to post their favorite one too: [http://neilb.bitbucket.org/csvfix/](http://neilb.bitbucket.org/csvfix/) is mine; manual at [http://neilb.bitbucket.org/csvfix/manual/csvfix16/csvfix.htm...](http://neilb.bitbucket.org/csvfix/manual/csvfix16/csvfix.html)

</comment><comment><USER20> Does anyone happen to know of similar or generally useful tools for dealing with YAML files? Would ideally like to be able to run SQL-like queries.

</comment><comment><USER21> I have my own little toolkit of csv parsing tools that do most of these (using python's csv module.)

I suspect most people who do deal with bulk CSV files all the time do as well. I'd be curious about how gracefully it handles large CSV files.

The lack of quoting support kills it for my use case however. I wrote my own tools, starting with csv_cut _because_ cut(1) didn't do quoting.

<comment><USER22> Regarding quoting support, check out [https://github.com/dbro/csvquote](https://github.com/dbro/csvquote)

<comment><USER21> Not sufficient, but close. It substitutes the quoted character for another one.

<comment><USER23> Hi- I'm curious to know what your use case is. Can you explain why substitution is not sufficient?

<comment><USER21> (1) I filter on column content using regex and dealing with a sub character adds complexity.

(2) Many of my columns are free-form text containing commas, carriage returns, new lines, tab, vertical tabs and file separator (0x1c). Occasionally, text is in UCS-2/UTF-16 or uses UTF-8 and foreign characters (a non-trivial quantity of the text I process is in French for example.)

(If you read between the lines here, some columns can contain MLLP-encoded HL7 messages, others contain free-form text and I'm in the medical field.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> This is lovely. Portable C, awesome.

<comment><USER25> Not totally portable. They have built some ctags option dependencies that I'm going to have to futz with in order to get the makefile to run.

        12:58 shephard:c shephard$ make all
        ctags -R .
        ctags: illegal option -- R
        usage: ctags [-BFadtuwvx] [-f tagsfile] file ...
        make: *** [tags] Error 1

[Edit - No "-R" option for ctags in OS X 10.8.5, or in OpenBSD Current - [http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD- current/man1/...](http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD- current/man1/ctags.1?query=ctags)

Edit2 - Now, it seems to be breaking on lemon not being explicitly called out in the path during a make:

      lemon filter_dsl_parse.y
      make[1]: lemon: No such file or directory
      make[1]: *** [filter_dsl_parse.c] Error 1
      make: *** [dsls] Error 2
      13:07 shephard:c shephard$

    ]

<comment><AUTHOR> ctags etc I'll split out. effectively there are make targets to make dev nice, and a smaller set just to make the binary. ctags definitely in the former category. thanks for the feedback!

<comment><AUTHOR> fixed in master

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> To build: install flex and ctags, and -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable

</comment><comment><USER27> I see a lot of value on this tool, because I've been in the same situation as you. I can't thank you enough for this, a tool that I've been wanting to implement for so long.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks! i use it regularly. but there are surely many corner cases & bugfixes i haven't encountered yet. i'd be happy to get your feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> the little known csvfix ([https://bitbucket.org/neilb/csvfix](https://bitbucket.org/neilb/csvfix)) is pretty good too.

</comment><comment><USER29> This is nice! It'd be great to download a .deb package for it.

<comment><AUTHOR> good idea. I also have a request for a homebrew formula, which looks simple enough to do.

<comment><USER30> Request seconded, Homebrew would be great.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> RFC4180 CSV support: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10132831](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10132831)

<comment><AUTHOR> [https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/tag/v2.0.0](https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/tag/v2.0.0)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This thing is convenient, but I don't understand why it needs a DSL? Why do I need to use `mrl --csv sort ...`, instead of `mrl --csv ... | sort`?

<comment><USER32> Because otherwise it will sort the header line. It looks like the reason for the --csv is because csv isn't the default format.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I am surprised no ones looking at Apache Drill. [https://drill.apache.org](https://drill.apache.org)

<comment><USER7> I've used it out of curiosity and it works, but honestly I just fell back to my primary weapon of choice: Pentaho. This isn't because I'm not comfortable searching data at the command line, it's more because of momentum in that all my other data is already in a database and I usually need to join datasets, not just search them.

It's trivial to create a two hop transformation in Pentaho. The first step reads your data out of a CSV, the second loads it to a table. Pentaho will generate the DDL needed to create the table based on discovered field names and types found in the import step based on data introspection.

Having said that I've often wished for a tool exactly like this that's lighter weight than drill (and doesn't expose my data on a web page like drill does) so I will definitely bookmark this for the next time it's needed. Hopefully it makes it into the Redhat EPEL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Nothing wrong with this approach I suppose but wouldn't most people be better off to just use a database for this sort of thing?

<comment><USER4> Depends on your familiarity with the unix toolset vs use cases, an amusing (if somewhat contrived) example of this:

[http://aadrake.com/command-line-tools-can-be-235x-faster- tha...](http://aadrake.com/command-line-tools-can-be-235x-faster-than-your- hadoop-cluster.html)

Most CSV analysis is static, not something ongoing with inserts/updates/etc, so using a combination of unix tools to handle the data processing seems like a sufficient solution for many scenarios.

<comment><AUTHOR> +1 and nice link :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Can anyone suggest something similar for Windows?

<comment><USER36> PowerShell can handle CSV files natively.

Here are the equivalent commands from the article:

      Import-Csv example.csv | Select-Object year, price   | Export-Csv -NoTypeInformation example-cut.csv
      Import-Csv example.csv | Sort-Object   year          | Export-Csv -NoTypeInformation example-sorted.csv
      Import-Csv example.csv | Where-Object  year -eq 1999 | Export-Csv -NoTypeInformation example-filtered.csv

PowerShell can also deal with JSON and XML in much the same way.

<comment><USER37> This neatly really illustrates _why objects matter_.

As cool as miller is, _jq_ is also decidedly cool, but for json. Both claim that they are "like" awk, sed, cut, paste etc, but for $Format, where $Format is csv/tsv and json, respectively.

They both deal with much the same tasks, and there is _considerable_ overlap.

What your PowerShell examples do not say, is how - after Import-Csv - you are no longer constrained to tools written for csv's (or json or ...). At that point the records of the csv file have become _objects_ in the PowerShell type system (which is an extension of the .NET type system).

Another point about the corresponding functionality in PowerShell is how you _do not_ need to convert back to csv, json or whatever. Your _Export-Csv_ commands in your examples are only needed if you want to finally save the results as csv. Otherwise you would just keep the objects in a variable or flowing through the pipeline/script.

So TFAs 2nd example could be written

        ipcsv flins.csv | group county -n

If the data had been in json, one would write

        cat flins.json | convertfrom-json | group county -n

Which also means that data can be export through any cmdlet that exports or converts a stream of objects: Export-Csv, ConvertTo-Csv, ConvertTo-Html, ConvertTo-Json, ConvertTo-Xml, ...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> License is unclear.

<comment><AUTHOR> bsd but i'll emphasize

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> If you work with this sort of data a lot, you might want to look at R.

<comment><USER40> Your comment brings up an interesting point. Sed, Awk, etc. are single purpose tools and that's one of the reasons their so long lived according to the common wisdom of *Nix. The other side of that wisdom is that once you build a swiss-army-knife, it gets harder to argue against just using a full blown programming language, like R, TCL, Perl, Python, etc.

<comment><USER41> I use R, and I still use ad-hoc commands from time to time too. I guess _mlr_ and _xsv_ lie somewhere between, which I've personally never really considered.

R is specifically designed for manipulating datasets though, and has a _lot_ more functionality/dependencies. If you're already familiar with the language, and okay with the dependencies, it is vastly more powerful, more succinct, and arguably easier to use. Otherwise, something in between probably still makes sense.</comment></comment></comment>


Facebook Won't Remove This Woman's Butthole as a Business Page - <AUTHOR> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/facebook-butthole-business <comment><USER2> HN discussion of the original Reddit post: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22170749](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22170749)

Note that _hours_ after this article was posted yesterday, Facebook reversed course and removed the page.

<comment><USER3> This is a story about a broken review process. It's great that they reversed course after her butthole got international attention, but it would be even better if facebook made the right call the first time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > Facebook has said it isn't in violation of its community standards (Facebook > removed the Page after this article was published)

I can't image a more eloquent example describing Facebook's standards.

<comment><USER5> Or double standards since it's been taken down..

Maybe bad publicity is in their community standards too.

God I hate Facebook.

<comment><USER6> Reply All just released a Q&A episode that included a story about a woman who tried and failed to regain access to her Facebook profile after a mistake related to the Facebook real name policy.

The upshot was exactly this: Unless something rises to the level of creating bad publicity, trying to get help from Facebook for issues like this is basically screaming into the wind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Update: Facebook has removed the Page for Jespersen's butthole."

Goes to show that Facebook could have moved that fast all along but can't be bothered to respond until it's a news item. I hope Samantha sues for $50MM or more and wins because a precedent needs to be established.

<comment><USER8> Or that the people at Facebook that can move that fast on something like this had no idea about this case. I suspect that most reviews, just like any other even medium-sized company's support, are going through people that don't have quite the same capabilities.

<comment><USER9> You are saying the same thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is unfortunate that she had to escalate it in this manner for the page to be gone. Now a search for her name will point to these articles.

<comment><USER11> Good ol' Streisand effect: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect)

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Re: the use of her real name in the article:

> I talked to her about this exact thing and offered to use her first name > only. She wanted to use her full name and was aware it would show up in > google.

[https://twitter.com/katienotopoulos/status/12229199529040936...](https://twitter.com/katienotopoulos/status/1222919952904093696)

</comment><comment><USER12> How do the community standards defend this page / business?

I mean, it's clearly not useful, valuable, or active. It has no reviews, it's clearly not a real business that sells anything.

How did it pass the "seems legit" sniff test? Even if it didn't break a specific rule, how does it MEET any community standards?

<comment><USER13> The community standard is that it doesn't break a specific rule - that _is_ the sniff test. Context-specific pun intended.

Facebook doesn't have the right to decide what pages are or are not "legitimate", useful, viable or active apart from whether they violate its terms of service - to do so would be exactly the sort of censorship and violation of freedom of expression that people here are usually up in arms about.

Today it's this girl's butthole. Tomorrow it might be a religion or a political party that is arbitrarily determined to be "not legitimate" and banned by the powers that be. And then what? It's the butt of fascism on our heads forever.

<comment><USER14> >Facebook doesn't have the right to decide what pages are or are not "legitimate", useful, viable or active apart from whether they violate its terms of service - to do so would be exactly the sort of censorship and violation of freedom of expression that people here are usually up in arms about.

On Facebook , Facebook has that right.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Surely buzzfeed could have avoided publishing this person's real name.

<comment><AUTHOR> See [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22192847](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22192847).

The subject _asked_ the reporter to include her full name.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> My first reaction was t look at the calendar and the date of the article to make sure neither was April 1st.

I feel like Facebook just needs to create a list of no-go words and add to it as problems arise. Words like common profanity, 'butthole', 'titty', 'titties', etc. This would be a good, common sense, first step.

I've had friends have art flagged and removed when it was non-sexual anthropomorphic nudity (breasts) in their art but then "so and so's butthole" requires news coverage for removal?

<comment><USER17> I was likewise surprised that such a title would pass HN's title standards and figured I'd just gotten someone's early, crude editorialization but... nope, that's the correct the title. That's the news.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In the US, do you guys have : 'the right to be forgotten' or something simular that this could be cleaned up even a little bit from google.

This is a good example of when Facebook just doesn't apply common sense.

<comment><USER18> There is no direct corollary to that law in the US.

The New York State Assembly has come nearest to an American version of a right-to-be-forgotten. The Bill, A05323, titled "An act to amend the civil rights law and the civil practice law and rules, in relation to creating the right to be forgotten act," in large part mimics of the European Court of Justice's decision. But there doesn't seem to be anything outside of that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The only things I've reported that have been taken down are clearly scam ads. I've (also) reported hate speech comments and they always say it doesn't violate their standards.

</comment><comment><USER20> Next up: "Google won't remove results for a Buzzfeed article about how Facebook wouldn't remove a business page about my butthole."

</comment><comment><USER21> Now this article is the first result as well as a thumbnail of the images so you can see her face. This doesn't seem like a good outcome.

</comment><comment><USER22> Of course buzzfeed has to plaster her name over the article. Now the FB page will be replaced by this one.

<comment><AUTHOR> As another comment pointed out[1], the BF reporter offered to anonymize the victim, but she insisted that her full identity be included.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22192847](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22192847).

<comment><USER22> Thanks for the correction.</comment></comment></comment>


Ensure that resources hosted on third-party servers have not been tampered - <AUTHOR> https://www.srihash.org/ <comment><AUTHOR> Looks like Subresource Integrity not yet supported on iOS or Edge but I suppose the users running Chrome/Firefox benefit from better security by proactively picking a browser.</comment>


NSA critics Ilija Trojanov: German writer must not enter the U.S. - <AUTHOR> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fkultur%2Fgesellschaft%2Filija-trojanow-nach-nsa-protest-einreise-in-die-usa-verweigert-a-925467.html <comment><USER3> My attempt at a good translation:

NSA critic Ilija Trojanow: German writer not allowed to enter US

Despite an invitation to a conference, german writer Ilija Trojanow was denied entry to the US - without reasoning. In the past, Trojanow signed a petition of protest against NSA surveillance.

Hamburg - Writer Juli Zeh broke the news: Through Facebook, she passed on a message from her college Ilija Trojanow. According to it, Trojanow was denied entry into the US. "He's marrooned at the airport in Brasil and can't participate in a conference on german studies in the US", said Zeh.

Ilija Trojanows' publisher Hanser confirmed this account upon request from Spiegel Online. Trojanows reported monday evening via SMS from Brasil "I was denied entry into the US today. Will be an arduous journey home".

Juli Zeh linked the denial of entry with a protest against NSA surveillance she initiated. Zeh presented the german chancellery a petition with 65000 signatures on september 18.

Trojanow was not present at the presentation, but he was one of the first signees, the Schöffling publisher coordinators told Spiegel Online. The writers alluded to a "historic attack on our democratic state under the rule of law".

"Let's frame it in a positive light: Our commitment makes an impact. It is being noticed", writes Zeh on Facebook on the entry ban to her "friend and fellow activist". Zeh and Trojanow wrote a non-fiction book on internet surveillance called "attack on freedom" in 2009. Zeh continues: "Let's frame in a negative light: it's a farce. Pure paranoia. People sticking up for civil liberties are treated like public enemies". In the comments on her posting Zeh emphasizes that Trojanows' ESTA application was answered positively, so in her opinion there can't be a problem with his visa or a work permit issue.

Ilija Trojanow, born 1965 in Bulgaria and escaped to Germany in 1971, received the Leipzig Book Fair Prize 2006 for his adventure novel "Der Weltensammler" (The Collector of Worlds). He held a honorific speech for nobel laureate Herta Müller at the Franz-Werfel human rights award. He was in Salvador de Bahia on invitation from the Goethe institute. He was supposed to talk about his latest novel "EisTau" (IceDew) on a conference of the German Studies Association in Denver.

(Edit: congress -> conference)

<comment><USER4> So the congress invites someone, and the NSA branch steps in to block it by censoring the speaker at the border.

I wonder whats next in this hollywood movie. Drone strike in central london to take out an embassy? A firewall blockade directed at news paper articles? Secret kill lists and torture?

Maybe someone should sneak a telepresence robot to congress, give it a dark trench coat and a code name. This is _Truth Teller_ congress members, let the robot speak!

<comment><USER5> > the congress

No, not THE congress. The original article means a convention/conference.

<comment><USER4> Thank you. Still a bit of an movie plot move, but slightly less so than if it had been the congress.

I guess visiting speakers should always have a backup plan, and be able to do a video conference stream from the airport directly to the conference. That is if they are allowed to keep their electronics equipment intact at the border, which I guess is doubtful. Maybe a prerecorded speech?

<comment><USER6> Or maybe organize your convention in a country that doesn't pull such shenanigans, just because they don't like the speaker?

In the long term moves like this can't be good for the US.

<comment><USER7> As a U.S. citizen, this is actually my _biggest_ concern - this is all going to hurt us economically. Of course most people will think it is Snowden's fault for making it known, rather than the government's fault for doing it.

<comment><USER8> > As a U.S. citizen, this is actually my _biggest_ concern - this is all going > to hurt us economically.

Of course it is. Always the effect on you "as a US Citizen". Because that's the only way you can think. What about the rest of the World?

Are you not a "World citizen" too?

Think about this for a moment. Is your economy _really_ your biggest concern? What is the US doing to the rest of the world? Do you disapprove of this behaviour just because of the effect it might have on you, economically? Of course it is _a_ reason, but is it really the first and foremost reason? When you look at it in the light of what the US is actually doing _in your name_?

You do realize that when you write things like this you post them in front of an international audience, right?

I'm not singling you out, I see this attitude everywhere. In particular in regard to the blatant spying and thrashing of our privacy. If it's your privacy it is an outrage, if it's everybody else's privacy it is "expected".

I just can't understand this attitude. If my country would be engaging in such behaviour, in my name, I would strongly denounce it _because it is wrong_ to treat people like this regardless of where they live! Sure I might think "huh this could be bad for trade-relations of the Netherlands, and we're a trade country", but _not for a single moment_ would I consider this a major reason to fault those actions. It is wrong because you should not treat people that way.

Like, what you just said is basically, if this couldn't hurt you economically, it would be much less of a concern to you. Because economically is your _biggest_ concern. So all the other concerns must be so much smaller.

Hm.

How nice.

Say that to my face?

<comment><USER7> First of all, no, saying something is my biggest concern does not imply that barring it this would all be "much less of a concern" because all other things are "so much smaller" concerns. Those conclusions simply don't follow from what I said.

The rest of your points are pretty good and they are well taken. It is possible that U.S. citizens generally view ourselves less as "World citizens" than we should. For me, personally, I feel like this is because we have (largely through our own past mistakes!) made many enemies throughout the world, and I struggle to feel like there is any useful world citizenship that includes both me and those enemies. So yes, it royally pisses me off that you in the Netherlands are being spied on, and that German writers are being mistreated, and that European embassies are being bugged, all in my name, but no, it really doesn't bother me that we are spying on the North Koreans. I'm mad that we don't seem to know our friends from our enemies and are embarrassing ourselves by just drag-netting everything, but from a _legal_ standpoint, within my own government, I think there is a useful line between U.S. citizens, and non-citizens.

For what it's worth, I absolutely think that I belong on the other side of that line for you in the Netherlands, and if I found out your government was spying on me, I would be more upset with my own government for failing to protect me than with your government for the spying.

I'm sure none of that made you like me or other Americans any more, which bums me out, and I wish there were a big happy World family for me to feel a part of, but as far as I can tell, there isn't.

<comment><USER8> Thanks, that was pretty good, thanks for saying that.

And I do like many/most Americans that I've met, it's just that the discourse on this subject on HN had started feeling a little bit one-sided. As I said, I wasn't trying to single you out, it was something that had been bubbling under my skin for a while now (and others too).

For what it's worth, if my government was spying in NK, the way yours is intercepting, recording, cataloguing and datamining the lives of all (Internet/technology-using) humans on this planet, I would in fact _not_ be okay with this. Because it's no way to treat people, anywhere. As we've seen every single time, just because something that is actually wrong seems justifiable, doesn't mean it should be done because it'll just lower the threshold for it to be used again in situations where you wouldn't agree with it. Because you can't close that door, you can't say "I trust your judgement, _this time_ ", because in a few years it'll be somebody else making that call, and the machinery is already there.

Of course irony has it that not even the US gov is spying on NK in that manner, because they can't really get a useful intelligence foothold in that place. So the comparison doesn't actually quite work, because they're doing all this very deep hard-core intercepting/recording/datamining on pretty much all places _except_ NK, and a few others that you might consider "justified". Why is it that the places where they far exceeded the boundaries of what can be reasoned as "justifiable intelligence" are in fact not the places where it might actually matter? _Because they were allies._ The UK hacked Belgium, FFS! It is an abuse of trust. For what, for nothing, well I'm guessing for business intelligence.

So yeah, that's a bit of a conundrum. With "national security" and all. Some tough choices maybe? But really, nobody said it would be easy. If you're dealing in global politics, affecting the lives of billions of people all over the world, all with different attitudes and beliefs, that's what you're signing up for. And there is no easy way out, 100% "Total Information Awareness" isn't a solution, for similar reasons as "let's bomb the ever- loving shit out of everybody" is not (as the US seems to be slowly learning).

See, the Dutch NSA, called AIVD, is doing just as bad. At some point they were tapping more phones than the US. If you buy Bitcoin you're on a list. They are already tracking our locations via the cellphones and "invisible text messages" and "Bob" knows what. It's pretty bad. But they're doing it to just these 17M people and it's our problem. This is why I donate money to Bits of Freedom, which is like the Dutch version of the EFF. One thing they're very good at, is informing politicians what all this new-fangled technology can do, so they can make better choices. So I hope B.o.F. can put some brakes on that. _However,_ if my government were to turn its eyes outward, and decide it can just invade and intercept the personal lives of, well, anybody guilty of the crime of not being a Dutch citizen, I'd _damn well_ be outraged, and expect my gov to cut it the hell out. ("Some of my best friends aren't Dutch citizens!!", Americans, in fact). And I'd demand that even though B.o.F. is a Dutch foundation, they'll work to put a stop to that as well even if it doesn't directly affect Dutch citizens.

Because, really, should allies have to be protecting their citizens from each other? Well they should protect their citizens, that's one thing a government is for, but ostensibly the point of having allies is that you're not trying to screw one another over.

Okay, and sorry this is getting a bit long, but I must point out that it is in fact more complicated than this :) Now it seems like I say just the US is screwing over its allies (and I also said the UK was). But part of the reality of the situation is also that many of these both-heavily-spied-upon-as-well- as-allied countries, are in fact governments screwing over their own citizens, with agreements that say basically "you spy on my back, I'll spy on yours". Which is _another_ reason why you need to look past your own boundaries instead of asking/expecting your gov to better protect just _your_ privacy. Because they don't really want to. And they use the excuse of spying on other countries as a distraction. As has been pointed out many times already, in the US there's some things in your Constitution that says, if anyone was listening, roughly that they shouldn't spy on US citizens for no good reason. That is why they have the deals with other countries, we can't legally spy on our own people, so you spy on ours, we spy on yours, deal? (this has been the case since ECHELON, it's right there on Wikipedia).

And THAT, is why you should not just expect your government to protect you from the other spying eyes, but why you should _demand_ that they stop the type of intrusive surveillance / intercepting / recording / datamining they're doing to others as well. Because you're not alone in this world. Or, if only, to view from an economical perspective again, it removes the bargaining chip, if they don't have the deep intelligence on their "allies" they cannot trade it back for the deep intelligence that they are legally prohibited from gathering on their own citizens.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> So this basically means that if I sign some anti-surveillance petition, or join a anti-surveillance group on Facebook I can forget ever visiting the US for vacation (I'm living in Europe)

Good to know, but I already signed a petition months ago. So no Yellowstone or Grand Canyon for me anytime soon.

I wonder when they will start rejecting US citizens on flights within the US based on petitions signed.

<comment><USER10> A colleague of mine said once that he wouldnt visit countries like Iran, China or Saudi Arabia because he wouldnt feel safe and it wouldnt be good for him to support oppressive regimes with his tourist money. There has to be some rule of law and democracy for him to visit a country.

I told him, I wouldnt feel safe traveling to USA, my possessions are at risk of appropriation and "borrowing" for an extended period of time. They could even send me to Gitmo for no apparent reason, or even if they had a reason, I still wouldnt receive a fair trial, just like in those countries, Saudi Arabia or Iran.

I actually felt and still feel the US could just put me in a black bag in a bathtub and nobody would care. No way my money is going to support such a regime. Never.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> While it's worth giving attention to this, keep in mind that there's absolutely nothing new about the US denying entry to foreigners on political grounds:

For decades people who were members of foreign political parties deemed "too left wing", were often routinely denied all kinds of visas, for example.

What exactly the US government considers thought-crimes worthy of visa refusals have changed over the years, but the use of visa refusals as a tool to restrict access to government critical foreigners has been a constant.

<comment><AUTHOR> I guess that is the point: actions leading to a barring of entry seem to have been becoming less and less severe. Anyone knows how these no-entry lists are being compiled?

<comment><USER12> Criticism of surveillance is not any more or less severe than all kinds of other 'Non-American behaviour' of the past, there just happens to be a larger overlap between this instance of 'Non-American behaviour' and the HN demographic.

How exactly do the parents examples of being a left-wing, gay or anti- apartheid activist seem severe to you?

<comment><USER13> Also the surveillance state makes it much more obvious who is doing what, and how to block whom.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What a horrible pice of writing...

He was denied entry without explanation. That this has anything to do with some petition he signed at some point seems a bit far fetched.

Also: A positive ESTA application doesn't mean anything. For Germans on the visa waiver, ESTA is just a quick online transaction that is good for several years. It doesn't actually mean that there aren't "any problems with the visa or work permit".

If he doesn't have a German passport (came to Germany in 1971 with his parents from Bulgaria), I can see why somebody from Bulgaria coming to the US from Brazil might seem a bit strange.

So far, this is all speculation and really not worth the read.

<comment><USER15> > I can see why somebody from Bulgaria coming to the US from Brazil might seem > a bit strange.

Sorry, I don't. What qualifies as "strange"? Is that an official term? There are loads of people who travel via countries they don't live in. There are also many people who were born in countries that don't exist anymore - <USER2> strange is that?

<comment><USER11> There are certainly degrees of "strange" that triggers various levels of scrutiny. I'm Norwegian. Live in England, and used to travel to California regularly on business. I never had any problems entering, the US thankfully.

But I repeatedly tried to print my boarding pass online in advance and check in using machines at the airport. In London that always went smoothly. At SFO, it almost always caused me to be referred to the ticket counters due to some undefined "problem". The staff were equally baffled every time, and the only thing they could come up with was that the system flagged me because I was travelling to England with no onward ticket and no visa (don't need one, as Norway is in the EEA which gives me the same residency rights in the UK as EU citizens) - they at least claimed that their systems did not give them any reason.

Mine was just a minor hassle, but I would be surprised if the systems "score" people based on tiny little unexpected deviations from the norm like that for various additional levels of attention. (I still printed the boarding passes every time, as whenever I couldn't check in, all I needed to do was look a bit baffled and walk over to the premium checkin and they'd get me processed very quickly)

<comment><USER6>
      and the only thing they could come up with was that the system flagged me because I was travelling to England with no onward ticket

This is quite likely the issue. The UK are an extreme stickler in this regard.

When you fly from Zurich, you need to show your passport to leave the Schengen part of the airport and in addition there are strict controls at the gates for UK bound flights, where your id is checked again.

Contrast this to flights within the Schengen room, where you scan your boarding pass (mobile, home printed, or airline issued) at a couple of automatic gates and you're in the plane. No id at all required.

From what I've read it's more and more the case that countries use airlines as cops to deny entry at the point of origin. If somebody with invalid travel documents, or missing visa gets onto the flight the airline can be heavily fined.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What's worst about this is that this seems way out of proportion. He signed (and co-authored I believe) a petition arguing against NSA surveillance out of concern for its effects on democracy - a move that is absolutely in agreement with democratic values. Is there anyone who could argue that barring his entry to the US is justified? I don't like hyperbole but this is indeed truly worrying; I would expect it from Russia and China, certainly not from the former "shining city upon a hill whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere."

<comment><USER16> There is nothing out of proportion here compared to previous decades. There is nothing out of ordinary in denying visa from someone writes and works against the national interest of US.

Visas have been denied from communists, peace activists, greens, anti- apartheid activists and homosexuals in previous decades. Surveillance critics fit this group just fine.

<comment> grey-area _in denying visa from someone writes and works against the national interest of US._

The national interest of the US is congruent with the interests of the NSA?

An interesting point of view, but not one I think you'd find majority support for in the US or elsewhere.

<comment><USER16> Majority support is not what defines national interest.

You are confusing political opinions to the workings of US government.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Apparently, for the US, the right to free speech only applies to US people, not the world.

Same as with the right not to be spied upon, really. Sad...

<comment><USER17> Right to free speech sadly does not conflict with the right of US to refuse entry to a person without reasons. US Visa does not guarantee entry - it is stated there in the application entry. It gives to the right to beg and immigration officer to grant you entry.

And at the border the majority of your rights are suspended anyway.

<comment><USER18> Ever thought to ask exactly why your rights are suspended?

<comment><USER17> Actually not my rights because I have not traveled to the US yet, but yes. Disclaimer (IANAL)

The answer is has many faces - until you have entered any country you are not subject to the full jurisdiction there - Snowden was not having full rights in Moscow for the months he spent at the terminal. He was also not having full obligations - in Russia you need to register with the police as a foreigner and generally help them keep track of you when you switch your residence. So even as a US citizen while on the border you are not in the US fully.

The second is that the Supreme Court has balanced the rights and obligations of the government (the right to refuse entry and the duty to protect the country) and has determined that it is greater than the rights given by the fourth amendment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism)

</comment><comment><USER20> How do we know it was his political views and not some screw up with his paper work? How do we know this incident is true and not manufactured as part of a publicity stunt? I understand the communication is through his publisher, does he have a book in the works? I just feel it is important to ask questions, that's all.

<comment><USER21> The problem is that he can't just call the embassy and ask why his entry was denied. They have a policy of not giving out information on entry denials.

<comment><USER20> FOIA?

<comment><USER22> He's not a citizen so can't make a FOIA request. No-one else can make one on his behalf as it would be breach rules on data protection and personal information.

Probably.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> It seems that the Apparatchiks of the US regime deal with critics quickly and efficiently these days, the totalitarian laws are already employed as needed. It's only a bit cynical that the barred author had to flee from Eastern Bloc Bulgaria in 1971...

<comment><USER24> The swibbles are already on back-order.

<comment><USER25> Where the fuck is my +1000 upmod wand? This is one of the most appropriately witty comments I've seen in quite some time. Thank you.

[http://sickmyduck.narod.ru/pkd058-0.html](http://sickmyduck.narod.ru/pkd058-0.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Are people still surprised ? The USA is definitely not a state of freedom.

</comment><comment><USER27> Is there any evidence of these two events actually being linked, or is it just the fact they both happened, and therefore must be connected?

</comment><comment><USER28> Trojanow published his own account of the events here: [http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3...](http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.faz.net%2Faktuell%2Ffeuilleton%2Fbuecher%2Fautoren%2Filija- trojanows-einreiseverbot-willkuer-und-freiheit-12599490.html&act=url)

Apparently he had already been denied a work visa without explanation last year by the US consulate in Munich. However, that decision was apparently later reversed after protests from Washington University in St. Louis. Since that must have been before the Snowden leaks and NSA protests, I'd say it doubtful if those are really connected to his more recent refusal of entry.

Edit: To be clear, I am not suggesting that his refusal was not politically motivated. But the original article suggests (or rather quotes author Juli Zeh on suggesting) a direct connection to the NSA protests and their petition against NSA surveillance.

</comment><comment><USER29> This is how you stop people from talking and discussing openly. Very effective.

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm in the uk and get a redirect loop from this page. Changing to .co.uk works [http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=de&tl=en&prev=_t&...](http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=de&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/gesellschaft/ilija- trojanow-nach-nsa-protest-einreise-in-die-usa-verweigert-a-925467.html)

</comment><comment><USER31> Why is it that when any other countries doing the same, it will be heavily criticize and be named and shamed on nearly all sort of Newspaper and media.

Yet US is no difference. And there is countless other examples.

I am going to be very brave and say this. Americans, you cant blame people in other parts of the world hate you.

</comment><comment><USER32> was it an issue with ESTa visa waiver program? I'm looking at the eligibility website and it says that German citizens can use the program, but Bulgaria isn't on the list. Is he a German or Bulgarian citizen or national?

Additionally, it states there are a lot of restrictions for using the visa waiver program that I imagine someone like him might object to, see the list below:

[https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/WebHelp/ESTA_Screen- Level_Onli...](https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/WebHelp/ESTA_Screen- Level_Online_Help_1.htm#vwp3)

It sounds like they need biometrics, and there are all kinds of restrictions on duration, destination, etc. is this program like TSA Pre in that it's seen as a "privilege" program in lue of getting an actual VIsa?

I'm not saying this wasn't done for political reasons, but before we all jump to that conclusion is it possible this program, EStA, is just a mess of requirements that only works for people that fit a narrow definition of excluded? Again, just looking at the requirements it looks pretty stringent and it sounds like this is an alternative to a visa program. Reading the article on FAZ

[http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3...](http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A//www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/autoren/ilija- trojanows-einreiseverbot-willkuer-und-freiheit-12599490.html)

it sounds like American Airlines told him his option was to get a Visa. Is it possible that's what really happened here, and the leap to blaming this on the NSA is unwarranted?

It certainly would be easier if you could just find out what the reason was for all this from a independent source.

</comment><comment><USER33> I don't know why I still get surprised when the US government consistently screws up, either with surveillance or with finances

</comment><comment><USER34> When it happens in the US - it's to protect freedom. If it happens elsewhere - OMG! Human rights violation! Must send the troops to save the world :)

</comment><comment><USER35> In this case would there be a difference entering the US through the Canadian border or by airports?

<comment><USER36> If you're refused by the pre-clearance facility you're still screwed but you might get to pass thru immigration in the host country again. The CBP will just call the CBSA who will dispatch somebody to come and take you and re- scrutinize documents provided by the US officer.

TL;DR: don't get screwed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Immigration laws have stupid consequences? No surprise these.

</comment><comment><USER16> There is nothing out of the ordinary here. Prior criminal convictions, affiliation with unsuitable political parties or organizations or poor character are valid justifications for denying entry according to US law.

It has been used against communists, peace activists, anti-apartheid activists, greens and homosexuals in previous decades. Now it's surveillance critics who don't get in.

<comment><USER38> > There is nothing out of the ordinary here

Sure there is. An (apparently) peaceful person from a friendly country was banned simply because she led an Internet signature campaign against a clandestine and borderline-rogue surveillance agency. How many other HNers would have signed a similar petition?

> Prior criminal convictions, affiliation with unsuitable political parties or > organizations or poor character are valid justifications for denying entry > according to US law

I don't see any of those being applicable in this case, at least as per the article.

When intelligent, well-informed and progressive citizens reach the point that they don't see anything wrong in a government/regime trying to muzzle critics, simply because they can and they have done so in the past, we implicitly grant approval to the continuation of such tactics.

The first step towards solving a problem is acknowledging you have one.

<comment><USER16> No. This is perfectly ordinary for US. If I had signed anti-apartheid petition, I might have been denied entry in the 80's.

>borderline-rogue surveillance agency

That's not the opinion of the government. It's the job of the people to change the policy of the government. NSA surveillance is government run activity and foreigners speaking against it can be denied visa.

As forefinger I find the naivety of US citizens towards their government disturbing. NSA is not borderline-rogue as long as the White House and the Congress are on the same boat.

<comment><USER39> A-hem. "NSA is not borderline-rogue" ?

They are in flagrant, publicized violation of the Fourth Amendment (rogue) with only a subtle, borderling rationalization keeping them from being wiped out by congress "we won't used the mined data/results-of-unreasonable-search until we need it". The amendments being, as you may recall, agreements leveraged by the states to prevent an out-of-control federal government.

Remember, the colonies didn't need the feds as much as the feds needed the states. it has a hard sell, and without protections like the Fourth Amendment, it ain't worth it for states to be part of the nation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Ooooh... _somebody_ is feeling a bit touchy.

<comment><USER24> I meant the NSA, dammit.</comment></comment>


What sweet stuff could foursquare choose to do with its money?? - <AUTHOR>

Now that foursquare received such a nice round of funding, what is the HN community thinking as far as cool things that foursquare could do in the space?  Geo-location is turning into a white-hot market and with Facebook looming, what cool innovative things could foursquare do to cross that chasm into appealing to a mainstream audience?  Looptstar is doing some cool things with getting into the loyalty space with physical rewards...any thoughts??? <comment><USER2> If it's about rewards, isn't blippy in a better position? They see the actual transaction data and not just physical proximity. Foursquare is in a interesting position to extend the value of physical property (similar to augmented reality startups). This challenges the notion, 'god's not making any more land.'</comment>


Ask HN: Individual Contributor or Manager? What Was Your Motivation? - <AUTHOR> I work in software development, which is still a relatively young industry. It is well-known that our industry pushes individual contributors (ICs) into managerial roles. But I also recognize that some of us make that decision more deliberately.
I also realize that there are "technical leadership" roles that may not align perfectly with "line management". And these roles may allow us to keep a hand in technology as a maker, but also give us a taste of what management could be like.
I'd like to ask the HN community about what made them chose one track over the other? What was your motivation? What is it that still keeps you on the same path? Or are you even on the same path (maybe you went back and forth, tried different things)? <comment><USER2> So are you better talking to computers or to humans? If you like talking to humans than in the long run (over 20 years) you will probably end up a mediocre programmer who will lost interest in the tech. So I suggest that you become a manager as early as possible.

I am yet to find a good programmer that like talking to humans.

I do not believe in line managers. You might have the authority over the technical decisions, but you would lack the deep knowledge that is a function of engaging with the technology, I.e. time.</comment>


Barrett Brown Update: New Defense Team, Feds Fish For Activists - <AUTHOR> http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/05/02/barrett-brown-update-new-defense-team-feds-fish-for-activists/

<comment><USER2> This reminded me to look into CloudFlare getting subpoenaed. I guess it's old news (4/5/13) --[http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues- subpoe...](http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoena-for- info-on-barrett-browns-project-pm-site/) but better late than never.

The type of information requested in the subpoena; all subscriber information, type of service, payment and billing records, other domain names served by CF associated with the same customer, DNS configuration, and *account access history including any and all authentication, file transfer, web server logs or other transaction logs containing source Internet Protocol addresses related to the subscriber's use of the CloudFlare services.

Cryptome.org raised some good questions about what are CF's policies for retaining access logs to customer sites; [http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare- logs.htm](http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare-logs.htm).

>> When Brown went to jail, work on ProjectPM ground to a halt. Even worse, the DoJ now took an interest in everyone else who had participated in ProjectPM. On April 2, the DOJ served the domain hosting service CloudFlare with a subpoena for all records on the ProjectPM website, and in particular asked for the IP addresses of everyone who had accessed and contributed to ProjectPM, claiming it was a criminal enterprise. The message was clear: Anyone else who looks into this matter does so at their grave peril. ([https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown- thr...](https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown-threats-to- fbi-raid-by-fbi.105089/page-19))

The good news is CF claims they don't retain this data, and there is no legal requirement for them to do so; [http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare- logs](http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare-logs)

<comment><AUTHOR> I have been reading about this story of late, and the my impressions are that Brown was in the progress of doing some real investigative work on the these security/intelligence companies and their links with the US gov.

And based on the severity of the charges against him, it seems that this is yet another case of DoJ going after people for political reason.

The small amount of detail that was uncovered seems to be the tip of the iceberg. Are any other journalists looking into?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> A great article from a couple of days ago [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber- in...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-intelligence- complex-useful-idiots?CMP=twt_gu)

</comment><comment><USER3> _On April 17, Magistrate Judge Paul Stickney had ordered the seizure of thousands of dollars in defense funds, [...]. Although the funds were apparently listed in a still-sealed financial affidavit provided by Brown's former court-appointed attorney, it remains unclear how the money could be legally seized._

And it doesnt matter. It doesnt matter HOW; what matters is that the judge is doing it and nobody can stop him. The judge is getting nasty by trying to play this game of time and funds that US government has been guaranteed with unlimited resources of both. You cannot win this one. Not unless you buckle up with year or so of time and strong financial backbone to appeal his decision. But how can you appeal and hire attorneys to do so if ... your funds have been "legally" seized??

Ladies and Gentleman: tyranny, dictatorship and despotism at its best! Welcome to the North American Union -- the U.S.A.</comment>


Lost Brother in Yosemite - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/sports/dean-potter-final-yosemite-jump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 <comment><USER2> I think part of the reason base jumping is banned in Yosemite has to do with the spectacle of it. The National Park system was founded with a mission to preserve the serenity of our land, and to give its visitors an opportunity to experience solitude.

But Yosemite Village is a lot like a city today. Unless you get more than a day's hike away from the valley floor, there's no hope of finding solitude or serenity. The Merced, with all its plastic rafts and floaties, looks more like a waterpark than a river. And the campgrounds have more RVs than tents, jammed so close together you can't breathe.

When a guy in a wingsuit is whipping through the valley at 100mph, whooping and hollering, it really is incongruous with the park's mission. As is drone flying, mountain biking, snowmobiling, graffiti-art, and lots of other things that disturb nature.

What would John Muir have thought about BASE jumping?

My feeling is that the restriction should be lifted, probably because it's doing more harm than good, but I think both sides of the argument are convincing, and it's unfair to point the finger at the NPS without trying to honestly understand their motivations. There are a lot of news headlines that read something like, "Rules to Blame in Yosemite Accident", and then leave out the relevant counterpoints.

<comment><USER3> > mountain biking

A heavy, shod horse tromping around and pooping all over the place is going to do far more trail damage than mountain bikes.

<comment><USER4> The damage is to the serenity enjoyed by the people hiking or horseback riding, not the trail itself.

<comment><USER5> As a hiker, I would _much_ rather step aside for an occasional biker than deal with the huge, easily startled, smelly beasts that shit all over the trails.

<comment><USER6> As a hiker I would much rather step aside for a slow moving well trained animal then dive out of the way for a mountain biker going downhill way over the posted speed limit around sharp corners.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Twin Falls, ID is right on the edge of the Snake River Canyon, with the Perrine Bridge connecting it to all things north of the town's location. We frequently have bridge jumpers, as it is allowed.

Last month a 73 year old guy died when his second parachute didn't deploy correctly. He needed the second parachute BECAUSE HE LIT THE FIRST ON FIRE!

[http://magicvalley.com/news/local/video-shows-base-jumper- on...](http://magicvalley.com/news/local/video-shows-base-jumper-on-fire-in- deadly-accident/article_1f8a8349-dc22-5d95-8e96-5222109d37ab.html)

I don't mourn people who die doing crazy things, so long as they are smart enough to know better. For some people, this is how they celebrate life.

<comment><USER8> I just want to point out something that might be relevant, namely that as a combat vet, I learned that adrenaline is a drug like no other, and it's also extremely addictive. A key point that many adventure seekers fail to take into account, and I think it can sometimes adversely affect their analysis of situations at the moment of truth. Always be prepared to call something like this off, up to the very last moment, don't let the excitement or pressure overcome the logical side of things.

<comment><USER9> I really hope more studies are done about how adrenaline addiction adversely affects behavior of people, particularly in jobs where adrenaline inducing events are common, i.e. police, sports/athletes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think HN readers would enjoy 'Valley Uprising', a documentary about the history of Yosemite, particularly around rock climbing with segments about more recent BASE jumping. Dean is a main character, and the film excellently captures the 'true' spirit of the valley, full of adventurers and dreamers.

[http://senderfilms.com/productions/details/809/Valley- Uprisi...](http://senderfilms.com/productions/details/809/Valley-Uprising)

</comment><comment><USER11> Although the stated reason for National parks to restrict it isn't safety, it is a common complaint amongst objectors anywhere. BASE jumping is inherently dangerous. That is no reason to ban it. The highest goal cannot be to make the World a perfectly safe Disney park.

<comment><USER12> National Parks are preserves; they are not playgrounds. You cannot play loud music. You cannot drive off road. You cannot parachute. You cannot hang-glide. You cannot camp anywhere you like. There are many strongly enforced rules to maximize preservation and minimize disturbance.

National Recreation Areas are playgrounds. National Forests are mildly limited playgrounds. National Wildlife Refuges are strongly regulated playgrounds. Using a National Park as a playground is immature self-entitlement.

<comment><USER13> Sure, but there is some hypocrisy going on. They were created "to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wildlife therein, and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

I think the jumpers are not impairing them for future generations, but some others are.

More than 60 people have died on Half Dome and very few of them are BASE jumpers. The cable path up there doesn't seem to "maximise preservation".

[http://www.yosemitehikes.com/yosemite-valley/half- dome/half-...](http://www.yosemitehikes.com/yosemite-valley/half-dome/half- dome.htm#half-dome-deaths)

<comment><USER12> Jumpers interfere with scenery and the enjoyment of the same.

Choosing to allow some things while disallowing others is not hypocrisy. It's thoughtful decision-making.

<comment><USER14> > Jumpers interfere with scenery and the enjoyment of the same.

How is this particular to BASE as opposed to any of the myriad of other things that people are allowed to do in national parks? It seems to me that a horse blocking my view would interfere with scenery, or seeing a line of people walking up the cables, or climbers dotting the peak, or any number of other things would interfere just as much, if not more. A BASE jump is over in minutes. It can take days to climb some of the bigger faces.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Last time I commented on this topic on HN, someone called Dean a "career criminal".

BASE is dangerous. Wingsuit proximity flying is super dangerous, whether from a helicopter or from an object.

However, humans have spirit and some much more than others. These people are generally awesome. I know a few of them. We should celebrate them, and mourn them. Maybe they aren't the Wright brothers or Chuck Yeager, but there are still frontiers out there and these guys are pushing them back.

<comment><USER15> That's fine. Just do it where it's legal.

<comment><USER13> OK, we would all like that, but if you are this personality type, trying to do push the boundaries of human flight, then you don't really consider that. You find the best place to do it and go for it. Sometimes the law is an ass.

If Dean had sat on his couch and ate himself into a 240kg shut-in, it would be legal, no-one would be commenting and objecting to the cost to society. I would like more Deans and less of the shut-ins. I think it's good for humanity. I think it's a shame when we denounce one and accept the other.

<comment><USER16> >If Dean had sat on his couch and ate himself into a 240kg shut-in, it would be legal, no-one would be commenting and objecting to the cost to society.

Except people do object to that cost to society. Indeed, I'd say there's a much large, more organized and effective political movement to end social security and welfare programs for the disabled than there are people who oppose BASE jumping in the national parks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I never thought I would wake up to see base jumping on hacker news.

I actively do wingsuit base jumping in Yosemite National Park. I will clear up several misconceptions.

(1) The amount of work it takes to carry all the appropriate gear up to Half Dome or El Cap will keep away anyone but the most serious jumpers. Removing the reference of parachutes/BASE jumping from the National Parks Aerial delivery law will not lead to a huge increase in jumpers. One of the problems that plagues the BASE jumping death statistics is, that unlike rock climbing, there is no physical barrier to taking on jumps that are beyond your skill level. Thankfully there are no gondolas in yosemite as there are in the alps.

(2) Even then, El Cap and Half Dome are two of the safest jumps in the world. Half Dome has at its best exit points a 16s rock drop; El cap: 22 s. For reference, many of the deaths you read about in Europe are at places like Chamonix where a 2-4s start is mandatory for surviving the jump. You can literally slip/trip and do 3-4 somersaults off half dome or el cap and be out of harms way.

(3) Proximity flying is not dangerous when done with reserve. Nearly all of the youtube footage you see of people flying 10-15ft off the ground is that person in a steep dive, at any moment they can flatten out their wings and they will disconnect from the terrain. The latest versions of every manufacturer's larger suits have all been documented flying up 50-150ft in flares. You are putting yourself in the suicide zone if you are flying terrain that requires you to have near your peak glide ratio for the full duration of the flight.

It sounds like Graham and Dean's logic for talking themselves into flying the line is "there is a point 15s before the terrain, where we can abort flying the line." And that is why quite a few base jumpers will attribute lighting and the fact that BASE is illegal to Dean and Graham's death. Flying in low light will affect your ability to make judgment calls about glide ratio and trajectory.

(4) The other risk I've experienced first hand is flying in cold temperatures. Many jumpers will jump with bare minimum daylight in the early morning and late evening. I've done this several times, and your arm wings are noticeably more rigid as well as your body. I have enough $$ for the fine to not ruin me financially, so I go later in the morning, but not everyone feels they have this luxury.

(5) None of my friends nor myself do this for an adrenaline rush. I dislike the feeling of fear or gambling. I enjoy charting out worst case and best case scenarios and planning jumps that give me the requisite range of error. In some ways it is remarkably similar to test driven software development. Check out this National Geographic feature on the work that goes into planning a Wingsuit base jump [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/05/150526-wingsuit-b...](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/05/150526-wingsuit- base-jump-moab-national-parks-blm-potter/)

(6) Those who are chasing YouTube glory are in the minority. Most of the jumpers I have met so far are highly intelligent individuals somewhere on the autism spectrum (Matt G, Zach T, Adrian W). There are guys like Pat Walker who no one has heard of that are extraordinary pilots. You will never hear of or see some of the best stuff going on in the sport, because most folks are just doing it for themselves. Even if the sport were legal, you wouldn't see or hear of these guys. I have never heard a wingsuit pilot hoot or holler while in a national park. It's uncharacteristic.

(7) We are in the early days of wingsuit base jumping, I'd say it is akin to the early days of Formula One. As the sport becomes more mainstream the death rate will go down. The sorts of risks and stunts are more reflective of the sport's early adopters rather than the inherent danger of the sport. Flying a wingsuit off half dome and pitching in the middle of the valley is safer than skydiving, driving a car, or taking a hike for any qualified individual.

(8) Emergency Services are budgeted ahead of time. The taxpayer is not getting an extra bill from Dean and Graham's accident. Dean volunteered within park as a rescuer for years. Show some respect and gratitude. Also, many individuals are wealthy in the sport and will not be collecting their social security check, so show some gratitude for that too. Most of our major Obamacare+medicare costs come form overweight people and old people. There are no fat wingsuit base jumpers. And when we die, you avoid us soaking up those funds, so again ____off with your government $$ complaints.

(9) The time under canopy for most jumpers I know is less than 30 seconds on average. Wingsuits are so small that it is hard to see or notice them until the parachute opens. There are an approximate 300-400 wingsuit base jumpers in the world. And no more than 2000 base jumpers world wide; you'll hardly notice them in the park.

(10) For those with a regulatory hard-on, there is a licensing system in skydiving that could be used to ensure that the wrong people are not jumping. Requiring any jumper to obtain a permit verifying they have a D-license would keep out the inexperienced.

I could keep going addressing the amount of penis envy present in this thread and the comments of the NYTimes, but I'll just link to the SBA [http://www.swissbaseassociation.ch/](http://www.swissbaseassociation.ch/) It's only in the US that this is not considered a boring mountaineering related mid life crisis sport. Legit everywhere else.

<comment><USER18> Thanks for writing this.

I still rank getting getting buzzed by some dude jumping the Captain while climbing the last few pitches of the East Buttress as one of the more exciting things that's ever happened to me. Maybe it was you, probably not though :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Good documentary on this topic out now: Sunshine Superman

</comment><comment><USER20> > There is a sloping rib of a ridge there, a relatively unremarkable feature > called Lost Brother.

</comment><comment><USER21> I can see both arguments for and against. I think the NPS is also concerned with the spectacle of people thumping the side of a mountain in front of a class field trip, and the liability on their part (because it's not if someone will sue, it's when).

</comment><comment><USER22> I don't know how to feel about this. I feel bad because they died but then again they were both illegally basejumping

<comment><USER23> I guess you don't feel bad when someone gets killed jaywalking either?

For next time, the default when someone dies is sadness--FYI. It's something in humanity that makes it so.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The several references to falling being legal but saving yourself with a parachute being illegal were annoying.

</comment><comment><USER24> Holy shit that last line gave me goosebumps, especially being a climber and extreme sports enthusiast and knowing that Dean's spirit animal was the Raven.</comment>