Krita 3.0: The Animation Release - <AUTHOR> https://krita.org/krita-3-0-release-notes/ <comment><USER2> Krita is having a Kickstarter campaign [0] to fund next year's development.

There is also a blog post [1] describing how Krita is funded and as you can see, the Kickstarter campaign plays a huge role in its development.

So if you are a Krita user, consider funding the campaign.

[0] [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/krita/krita-2016-lets-m...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/krita/krita-2016-lets- make-text-and-vector-art-awesome)

[1] [https://krita.org/item/funding-kritas- development/](https://krita.org/item/funding-kritas-development/)

Edit: The campaign has already reached its goal, but there are stretch goals to achieve.

<comment><USER3> Really happy to see some real contributions! Maybe crowdfunding and Open Source has a bright future together?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Krita has come a _long_ way since I last looked at it. I had no idea it was still so actively developed. Super cool. I don't do a lot of visual stuff, and I've always reached for Gimp or Inkscape when I need to...but, seeing some of the stuff Krita can do makes me wanna give it a try next time I need art.

<comment><USER5> I was one of the few that really was disappointed in the change of Krita from a better Gimp (In my opinion) to a Painting Program. I still funded the project and just trusted the vision of the team. They really have hit a home run and they are a shinning example of what Open Source can do.

Now here is hoping Gimp can learn and blow away the competition in raster image processing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Love Krita. This upgrade to QT5 will provide an important base for future development. The brisk pace of development is encouraging.

Although I still find myself using GIMP and Inkscape for usability reasons. But, given that they are being developed at a snail's pace, I tend to think I will be increasingly using Krita.

<comment><USER7> Do they really compete with each other? I thought they would complement each other, am I wrong?

<comment><USER8> I think they complement each other. Gimp is probably powerful, but I by the time I figure out how to do something, I forget what I was trying to do in the first place. Krita is easy to use, but can't do SVG. And Inkscape is still the best for SVG.

<comment><USER2> One of the major goals of this year for Krita is improved SVG support.

[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/krita/krita-2016-lets-m...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/krita/krita-2016-lets- make-text-and-vector-art-awesome)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Now that Krita has finished the QT5 port I wonder if we'll see a touch version for Android and iOS soon.

<comment><USER10> and Ubuntu Phone

<comment><USER11> Well, we broke the tablet gui we had when we ported to Qt5. It's going to take some time to restore in a sensible way. I do want Krita on my Android Hybrid Cintiq Companion, but I worry that that tablet is not powerful enough...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Krita means crayon in Swedish, fitting.

<comment><USER13> The original author is German.

From the About page:

 _The name KImageShop fell foul of trademark law in Germany, and KImageShop was renamed to Krayon, which also appeared to infringe on an existing trademark, so Krayon was finally renamed to Krita in 2002._

Of course, "Krita" can also be read as K-rita, where "rita" means "draw" in Swedish (but not in German) and the K is the usual Qt/KDE prefix.

However, here[0] is a mailing list message from 2002 that answers:

 _it is the Swedish work [sic] for crayon._

So it seems you're really spot on.

[0] [https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/2002-November/0000...](https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/2002-November/000060.html)

<comment><USER12> I'd hope so, as it is my native tongue.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Yay. I use Krita for all my Photoshop-like needs. Now it just got Even better.

</comment><comment><USER5> > Linux AppImages – Now different Linux users can have the latest version > without waiting on their distribution repository updates.

This sounds REALLY interesting. I am dying to see how the Debian community takes to this idea.

[http://appimage.org/](http://appimage.org/)

> Download an application, make it executable, and run! No need to install. No > system libraries or system preferences are altered.

</comment><comment><USER15> MyPaint still exists and its 1.2 release is a very nice program. It's more focused and has less features than Krita, but it's also very ergonomic to work with. Does anyone know if MyPaint is likely to stick around, when Krita is developing so much?

<comment><USER16> I have since stopped using MyPaint and have even uninstalled it. Krita does the same and more these days.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Artists who use Linux always seemed like a crazy bunch.

Btw, if anyone needs a simple image editor for Linux, I can't recommend Pinta enough. It's basically Paint.NET. Gimp didn't have the one feature I need - drawing lines, squares, circles, etc. and Kolourpaint doesn't have layers.

</comment><comment><USER18> Love Krita. By the way, out of topic here. Does Krita support for note- sketching?

I know the most of use cases using Krita is sketching characters.

</comment><comment><USER19> Seems really buggy on OSX (just drew two rectangles and filled them with colors - some parts of the rectangle don't appear until you zoom in and then back out 2x).

Paint for Windows still seems like the single best drawing program for simple things.

<comment><USER20> Krita is for art, not for simple things - comparing it with paint is kind of disrespectful even if meant as a joke.

It has an amazing selection of preset brushes and my personal experience with it is joyful.

<comment><USER21> > _Krita is for art, not for simple things - comparing it with paint is kind > of disrespectful even if meant as a joke._

That doesn't even make sense.

First of all, it's not "for art" as some abstract ideal, it's for drawing and graphic design. Which includes "simple things" like drawing perfect circles and triangles in the day-to-day requirements.

Second, nothing about "art" (even high art) precludes it being good at the things the parent mentions. If anything, they should be a prerequisite. Artists have used rulers and compasses in real life since forever.

<comment><USER22> >Artists have used rulers and compasses in real life since forever. //

Perhaps you could highlight some well known artists using a geometric drawing style to prove your point? My first thought would be Mondrian but I'd go with an app targeting vector graphics to get that effect.

<comment><USER15> Here's a Krita timelapse of a painting that starts with using a "ruler" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEXnpwIL45Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEXnpwIL45Y)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Rise and fall of Third Normal Form - <AUTHOR> http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2012/11/21/rise-and-fall-of-the-third-normal-form/

<comment><USER2> Normal forms don't just (as the article implies) save previously expensive storage; they help defend against still very expensive inconsistent state.

<comment><USER3> I wished everyone understood this. I can't count the amount of times I've heard arguments like "well, we should store this other bit of data in this table too, so we don't need to perform a join to retrieve it". If you need speed, just use a cache (and proper caching discipline) at the highest level that makes sense, instead of micro-optimizing DB access. It's stupid.</comment></comment>


6 Year Old's Own Composition of NatGeo's Genius Theme Title Music - <AUTHOR> http://indi.com/9996m <comment><USER2> Please visit [http://indi.com/9996m](http://indi.com/9996m) to hear the music. Awesome!!</comment>


Venezuela tries to shut down US website for reporting inflation - <AUTHOR> https://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/venezuela-attacks-us-website-for-telling-the-truth-about-inflation/ <comment><USER2> Complaint: [http://www.alt-m.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/11/GovernmentCo...](http://www.alt-m.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/11/GovernmentComplaint.pdf?a7334c)

"[T]he Republic's efforts to block the DT Site have been largely futile. With funding from unnamed coconspirators, Defendants have been playing "a cyber cat-and-mouse game" – employing "a staff of 18 'well paid' writers and web programmers in Venezuela," and "geniuses" who have found ways to "automatically create a new mirror site every 20 minutes.""

"Defendants conspired to use a form of cyber-terrorism..."

DT basically just called currency traders and asked for rates, it wasn't rocket science. The complaint apparently knows this, but keeps insisting this published rate was false and slanderous.</comment>


Town residents pooled together their money to provide scholarships for everyone - <AUTHOR> http://www.citylab.com/politics/2015/08/the-town-that-decided-to-send-all-its-kids-to-college/401618/ <comment><USER2> When I graduated high school I made a list of things I wanted to do in my life. One of them was to start a scholarship for students at the high school I graduated from.

A few years ago I first offered the scholarship. It's only a one time $1000 scholarship and my alma mater definitely didn't have the higher ed access issues it sounds like this town did, but one of the criteria is the student CAN'T be in the top 10 of the graduating class.

This mostly bore out of the fact that during my awards ceremony the top 10 absolutely cleaned up, some getting full ride scholarships they weren't even going to use. I get you want to reward hard working students but I worked very hard in high school but I just don't think the system I was in was perfect for me and, several years later, I'm contributing just as much to society on average as the top 10 students from my class. My point being, high school isn't a great predictor of future success on a few different levels.

If anyone out there has experience starting scholarships for high school students and expanding them, please reach out to me. I definitely have big plans but I could use someone that's done this before.

<comment><USER3> I want to start scholarships for students from my high school that are from humble backgrounds and want to attend community college for the beginning of their college careers. Eventually I would like to start a scholarship fund. I haven't really found a lot of good resources for starting a scholarship. How did you go about setting up your scholarship?

<comment><USER2> What I did was contact the school guidance department for help. What they offered made things super easy. I have total control over who gets the scholarship, they send me candidates that fit my criteria and once I make a decision I cut a check to the towns scholarship fund and they cut a check to the student. I present the scholarship at an end of year awards night. In fact I just today received a very nice thank you note from this years recipient.

In the future I expect this to change and create my own 501c/trust if I want to raise additional funds outside of my own, which I fully intend to do but the system works for me for now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "In America, a quality education cannot be a privilege that is reserved for a few."

A few being 65.9 percent.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/26/business/fewer-us-high- sch...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/26/business/fewer-us-high-school- graduates-opt-for-college.html)

Then we have that other problem:

"Grad-School Loan Binge Fans Debt Worries Graduate students account for 40% of borrowing; many seek federal forgiveness"

[http://www.wsj.com/articles/loan-binge-by-graduate- students-...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/loan-binge-by-graduate-students- fans-debt-worries-1439951900)

<comment><USER5> How many of those 65.9 percent can reasonably afford the loans they take out in order to go attend college?

Seems to me the issue is loans in general, and that free public university is a proven way to provide education without extraordinarily inflating the costs.

<comment><USER6> Public universities are super cheap - in my state (Massachusetts), UMass Amherst is less than 10k a year if you graduate with above a certain (easy to attain) GPA. I think one of the largest issues is with people deciding to forgo cheap, good public schools like UMass, UVM, etc and going instead for more expensive private schools that offer the same or worse quality education, such as Elon, Holy Cross etc.

On the other hand, schools like MIT, Harvard, Yale etc all offer generous scholarships - regardless of your income, you will be able to afford one of these schools. Not to mention that after college, higher paying jobs are easier to get if you go to one of these schools.

If you want to just go to a decent college for cheap, it's not too expensive if you work it out right - either you can get accepted to a top school, or you can go to your state's flagship program (UC Berkeley, UMass Amherst, UNC Chapel Hill, GATech, UT Austin, and others come to mind).

<comment><USER7> I'm trying to find a polite way of expressing this, but your sense of affordability and ease of access is… not based in a lot of people's reality.

<comment><USER8> What is not-affordable about this? If a college costs $10k + $10k cost of living each year that's $20k a year in spending.

Working 20 hour weeks (not uncommon) covers $8-10k of that - so the total debt load is around $40-50k after 4 years. This can be paid off on a $40k a year salary given a desire to spend money wisely.

<comment><USER9> Working 20 hours a week with full (4 year grad) class load in STEM? No way, no way at all.

<comment><USER10> Really? I did it. And yes, it was a STEM degree.

Hell, you can work 16 hours just on the weekend which still leaves your week free. And you can work all summer. I graduated with zero loans.

<comment><USER11> For most people, it won't be possible. Even if it is possible, it shouldn't be. If you can work that much (and take all your weekends off schoolwork), then you aren't taking challenging enough courses, and aren't getting your money's worth out of your education. School is a full-time job (and more).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> In New Zealand, the Southern Institute of Technology [1], one of the universities runs a zero-fees program [2]. This, I believe, is funded from local businesses who see substantial benefits from having students around with money to spend.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Institute_of_Technolo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Institute_of_Technology)

[2] [https://www.sit.ac.nz/Fees-Enrolments/Zero- Fees](https://www.sit.ac.nz/Fees-Enrolments/Zero-Fees)

<comment><USER13> SIT is not a university</pedanticnitpicking>. It is a good scheme nonetheless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's almost like American's are crying out for a nation-wide system where college is funded for everyone.

In Australia, everyone that wants it gets a tax-free, interest-free loan for university, which is something around $5k/year for tuition (My 5-year engineering degree was $22k). You only have to pay it back if you earn over $45k/year, and you just pay a few extra percent tax until it's paid off. If you're short on money for food/rent, you will be paid that too.

<comment><USER10> The US ain't all that different. It's more complex, but it's possible to get deferred interest loans, interest paid by the gov't and income-based payments.

That said, the free flowing money is a big reason why private school cost $200K/yr for a 4-year degree.

<comment><USER15> I'm not familiar with AUS loan mechanics, however, "deferred interest" <> "interest free". There aren't federal 'interest free' education loans in the US that I'm aware of. All the federal programs I see have interest rates of >4%. Granted, it seems like that's a relatively low rate for borrowing money.

US federal un-subsidized college loans can accrue interest even if paying interest or principle is deferred. Not at all the same as interest-free.

Additionally, with some federal student loans, there are fees of 1 percent and up that are actually removed from the loan amount prior to disbursement that you're on the hook for repaying in entirety.

Also your $200k number isn't accurate; unless you're counting room & board which is different matter not directly tied to education. I don't disagree that the availability of funds seems to contribute to the cost of education, but that number is a bit high.

From teh google:

According to the College Board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2014–2015 school year was $31,231 at private colleges, $9,139 for state residents at public colleges, and $22,958 for out-of-state residents attending public universities.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> so much human in one story, great job Baldwin!</comment>


Poptip Joins Palantir - <AUTHOR> http://blog.poptip.com/post/93241017288/poptip-joins-palantir <comment><USER2> Yay! Now you can use your expertise to continue to help Palantir undermine the privacy rights of people all over the globe.

<comment><USER3> Exactly what is it that you think Palantir's products do?

<comment><USER2> Palantir is a private company whose product's development was incubated and developed at taxpayer expense following 9/11 (they essentially researched all of their technologies on the taxpayer dime on govt contracts, then took those technologies and created their product). It's an asshole company that doesn't give a shit about the constitution or human rights.

They also use Congressman Hunter as a paid shill to push their product all over the government as if its a panacea to every data integration issue. Its not.

<comment><USER3> The set of companies that benefit from taxpayer-funded research is enormous, and it does not follow from membership in that set that a company "doesn't give a shit about the Constitution or human rights".

You didn't answer my question.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Congrats on the acquisition but I'm still a little confused/surprised by this. The two (seemingly)disparate markets that Poptip and Palantir operate in have little cross-over. Is there a longer-term vision that I'm not seeing?

<comment><USER5> The USG will use PopTip technology to parse the online conversations of the billions they are spying on better.

Yet another reason to loathe palantir.

<comment><USER6> Hardly. Even if you are worried about personal privacy, why on earth would less accurate spying ever be preferable to more accurate spying?

<comment><USER7> If the more accurate spying is used in the same manner as the less accurate type, then obviously more accurate is preferable. More often, the 'more accurate' version is accompanied by significant improvements in breadth and usability making the 'spying tool' responsible for much more spying behavior.

A good example is the history of tracking cars. Privacy concerns with police tracking were originally non-existent since the first versions were police literally following cars, so the number of potential targets was limited by the number of officers. Then came tracking beacons that were physically attached to the car, enabling a single officer / command center to track hundreds or thousands of vehicles. Undoubtedly more accurate and detailed, but mildly more invasive. The latest iteration of this is to simply track every car on the road via cameras with OCR or through RFID on toll passes. After you've collected a history of every vehicle in an area, you can pick-and- choose which ones are interesting. This is astronomically more detailed since you now have a history of where every baddie was at various points in time, but I think most would agree that it's much more invasive than ever before.

<comment><USER6> Still sounds like a net positive to me. Arguments against widespread surveillance are pretty much always founded on the assumption that the surveillance will be inaccurate. If it's only being expanded because it's accurate, the only problem is ideological, not practical.

<comment><USER8> > Arguments against widespread surveillance are pretty much always founded on > the assumption that the surveillance will be inaccurate.

That assumes that there exists some objective, mutually agreed-upon measure of "accuracy".

For example, Glenn Greenwald has said that there is no definition of what constitutes "terrorism" that is not inherently based on race[0]. This isn't saying that the measures we take to prevent "terrorism" are racist; it's saying that the actual _pursuit_ \- the goal itself - is inherently racist, albeit implicitly.

The argument in support of that claim is too long to go into here[1], but suffice to say that, if you believe that the word "terrorism" is simply a euphemism for rationalizing racist behaviour or suppressing legitimate political dissent, then no, you're not going to be happy when people find _more_ accurate ways to target those individuals.

[0] You may or may not agree with this premise personally, but that's not the point.

[1] though easy to find online

<comment><USER6> I really can't take seriously the idea that the goal of the NSA or any other part of the US government is any kind of racial cleansing or suppression. It seems far more plausible that using race as a judge of threatfulness is a result of not having anything more accurate to go on. In which case, better targeting would actually make the program less racist.

<comment><USER9> Re: "suppression"

I generally fall into the same anti-paranoia camp as you seem to, as in "how bad can they really be?" But then I read articles like one posted here a while back, which I'm having trouble finding (anyone?), that described massive, tens-of-millions-of-dollars government research contracts ostensibly to "study the Arab Spring." The article talked about the discomfort of researchers, who were surprised to be pressured by the Pentagon into focusing their efforts on "potentially disruptive" American groups like the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street.

Again, I can't find the article, but I remember my takeaway from it was that the Pentagon is actively pursuing research into how to identify, control, and suppress grass roots movements and protests in the US.

So, maybe we haven't seen evidence of suppression yet, but I suspect that's because there has yet to be an adequate trigger event in the US, or an "American spring" of sorts. When that happens, which I'm sure it will at some point, we will see the NSA putting their data to use against American citizens.

<comment><USER6> And that's a great thing. Look at the mess Egypt's government has become over the past two years. Keep that shit out of the US please.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Congratulations. I wish I'd visited Palantir in NYC; I've spent some time in Palo Alto and know people in DC (and downrange), but never met any of their NYC people. It's pretty amazing how I'd had the company pigeonholed as "government contractor" (which is a huge business in its own right), but the commercial stuff seems to be growing even faster.

</comment><comment><USER11> Having worked at a startup that failed to find a customer base in the consumer world for the NLP software that analyzed social media, I'm not surprised the only application turns out to be defense industry.

There doesn't seem to be many uses for that type of NLP other than surveillance and brand monitoring.

<comment><USER12> what startup?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Let's talk business here, because I find the numbers behind Palantir both astonishing and fascinating.

Their burn rate looks to be around $275m/yr based on employee head count and they've received ~$900m in funding:

       - Seed - In-Q-Tel (~$2m)
       - Debt Financing - $8.3m
       - Series C - $35m
       - Series D - $90m
       - Secondary Market (unk amount, 137 investors)
       - Series E - $50m
       - Series F - $70m
       - Series G - $56m
       - Secondary Market (unk amount, 137 investors)
       - Private Equity - $196.5m (Founders Fund)
       - Private Equity - $390.4m (Feb 2014)

Their last round was almost $400m in Feb of 2014. That's almost as big as all other rounds combined. Their "valuation" (for whatever that's worth) based on the last investment round is ~$9billion.

As of August 2013 they were not yet profitable but estimates for 2013 revenue were around $450m and <$300m in 2012.

Other revenue estimates (they're all over the place honestly it seems like every time they give an interview it's a different number)

       - 2010 - $50m - >$80m
       - 2011 - $250m
       - 2012 - <$300m
       - 2013 - $450m

They've publicly announced several time they have no interest in being acquired or go public. Yet one of their investors claims on Quora that they'll probably go public in 2015 or 2016.

Some questions for people who understand this mess better than I.

\- What's their exit strategy honestly look like? At $9b valuation, I can't imagine too many companies who might be interested in buying them.

\- All the private equity investment tells me they're burning money faster than they can find investors, keeping it private keeps their financials private, which smells like trouble to me if they were to go public. Am I right in this analysis or wrong?

\- Does dilution basically make everybody who has shares or options through _11_ (eleven!) rounds of investment basically holding onto worthless paper? Even if they go public? A review of glassdoor on the company says that people are underpaid and salary capped, they must be holding on for a big payday somewhere. Are they going to end up disappointed?

Anything else that might be interesting to discuss? Their fundraising seems really crazy and unusual from anything I've seen before.

Here's a longform history [1] of the company which shows they spend over $1m/yr on lobbying (IBM spent $6m, Raytheon $7.5m, Lockheed Martin, $14.5m, Boeing, $15m). To put that in percentage terms, if Palantir is worth $9b

       Palantir spends .012% of their value on lobbying
       IBM spends .003%
       Raytheon .026%
       Lockheed Martin .027%
       Boeing .017%

This article also lists 16 distinct financing events, bringing dilution of early investor shares even more to mind.

1 - [http://www.mausstrategicconsulting.com/topical-analysis- blog...](http://www.mausstrategicconsulting.com/topical-analysis- blog/a-pretty-complete-history-of-palantir)

<comment><USER14> Palantir is a govt contractor. They need to be big to be heard and be in charge. They want to be Lockheed, Raytheon and Boeing. They can't be big without hiring tons of employees so they are hiring tons of employees.

<comment><USER2> Exactly. Government contracts don't require the number of people to get the job done. They require the number of people they SPECIFY are required (whether or not that number is correct) to get the job done. Translation: Government contracts are by their very nature overstaffed as fuck.

Butts in seats baby, butts in seats.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Palantir is pretty mysterious to me. Frankly, I don't see the demand for their software being high enough to warrant their size and number of employees.

I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens.</comment>


Groupon Propped Up With Lowest Internet Float in a Decade - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-28/groupon-value-propped-up-with-lowest-internet-float-in-decade.html

<comment><USER2> These articles about the Groupon IPO all seem to have the same feel, reporting some chicanery that doesn't definitively suggest that the stock is a turd, but do suggest that the financeers behind this business are treating the entire thing as an exercise in cashing out quickly.

I strongly suspect that investment bankers are playing Pump'n'Dump Bingo with Groupon, which is a little like Buzzword Bingo: Each player throws $10,000 in the pot and gets a bingo card. The squares have random stock promotion events on them, like "restates earnings," "cancels road show" or "Cxx resigns." The first person who gets five in a row collects the pot.

Right now, the players are checking their cards for "Low float."

</comment><comment><USER3> Just when you thought it couldn't get worse...

Groupon is just a slow-motion train wreck (which everyone still seems to want to get a ride on, oddly).

<comment><USER4> Actually I read the press as Groupon is having a hard time selling seats on the train. Not that I know anything of course. The analysis that the small float is an attempt to keep the per-share price high(er) and the valuation somewhere up from their last round, is spot on.

If I were a betting person I'd give them 50/50 odds that they can't get the offering fully subscribed even with Goldman's using its deep pockets to cover unsold shares.</comment></comment>


Flickr is Dead - <AUTHOR> http://www.lanceramoth.com/blog/2011/12/how-startups-use-propaganda

<comment><USER2> While I agree that including Flickr in the title of those posts is an intended tactic, this whole post comes off as a whiny competitor mad about their competition getting more press than they are.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair enough. However no one said they were mad. And Fotoblur does get its fair share of press. [http://ohgoodshot.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/1000-images- fotob...](http://ohgoodshot.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/1000-images-fotoblur-a- personal-photographic-journey/)</comment></comment>


Sochat lets you text anyone nearby, even strangers - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/sochat-bluetooth-messaging-app-raises-2-million-2015-10 <comment><USER2> These guys used to be called Lynk. Here's their product hunt post from awhile back:[https://www.producthunt.com/tech/lynk- messenger](https://www.producthunt.com/tech/lynk-messenger). Awesome to see them doing so well!

</comment><comment><USER3> This is cool but I don't see why I would want to text/chat someone in the same room as me. The feature I'm most interested in is the fact that it'll tell you the names of everyone in the room. That's a feature I'd pay big bucks for.</comment>


Inside China's Vast New Experiment in Social Ranking - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/ <comment><USER2> Obligatory reference to Black Mirror's Nosedive episode: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive)

<comment><USER3> Whilst real world events have caused many people to focus on the social ranking aspect of the story, when I watched it, I thought it was more concerned with _privilege_ (and the loss thereof).

The main character actually worsens her fate by acting entitled and being self-centered. Had she maintained her higher status, she both wouldn't have been in situations of pain in the first place, nor found it necessary to make a (here, social) effort to get out of them. In real life, being considerate to people serving you pays off in the short term, and in aggregate makes for a better society to live in (it is generally accepted in Western society that insulting your waiter is really rude and antisocial, for example).

Interestingly, both people with low rankings (brother, truck driver) _appear_ to have bad manners (because they are direct) but are nice people deep down; the point being the rating system is imperfectly implemented or optimising for the wrong thing.

The parallel with the Chinese rating breaks down precisely because the show rating is focused on this shallow idea of visible manners whilst the Chinese system appears to correct fundamentally inconsiderate, widespread behaviour (like stealing a shared bike), just as credit scoring in the West was originally a means of increasing general welfare (by lowering rates for most at the expense of the few who game the system).

The real parallel between the article and Black Mirror is this: the author, who is privileged (he already lives in a considerate society where everybody cooperates and the rule of law is a given) cannot understand the need for Sesame; upon losing that privilege (by moving to China with a blank score) and having to earn it back, he is upset just as the heroine of the episode was ("but I'm an honest guy, why should I pay a deposit to rent a bike?").

<comment><USER4> You're claiming the Chinese system optimises the right things, which might even be true for now. But my experience is that any system optimising some metrics eventually drifts from it's intended real goal as people and systems learn to game those metrics.

In the Black Mirror episode, there just isn't room for being genuine and maintaining a nice lifestyle because of social pressure. But it probably worked a lot better when the system just started.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As alarming as this is (and it is alarming) at least it's explicit.

Another worrisome case is of blacklists/rankings that you can't see. No-fly lists that no one knows why you are on. Secret watch lists. Conspiracies against people with opposing political views with no clear way to know what views may have triggered this and no path to straighten a misunderstanding up.

I oppose oppression in all forms but if we are going to have it, explicit is better than implicit. (And flat is better than nested:).

<comment><USER6> Note that if you are on the bad credit list, you aren't allowed to fly or take the train. I guess this is so you can't flee from your debts.

<comment><USER7> The article discusses two things:

> Sesame Credit, controlled by a private organization (Alipay)

> The government's List of Dishonest People, a blacklist of people who haven't > paid fines.

(The article conflates them because the Sesame Credit scores are downgraded based on whether the person has unpaid fines. However, Sesame Credit doesn't affect the government list)

The "credit" list has no impact on trains/flying; nonpaying of government fines does. This isn't too dissimilar from other countries, where failing to pay government-issued fines results in disciplinary measures.

<comment><USER6> [https://www.techinasia.com/china-citizens-scores-barred- from...](https://www.techinasia.com/china-citizens-scores-barred-from-flights)

They call it a "social credit system" in china (the one that can get you barred from flights), besides not paying your fines you can get on the list if you happen to be a unharmonious dissident. It's no wonder it is confused with the sesame credit system, since they are both credit systems that run in china. Here is a state-owned press link if you doubt tech Asia:

[http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1015549.shtml](http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1015549.shtml)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Extra Credits made a video about Sesame Credit a couple of years ago. It's 7.5 minutes long, and well worth the watch:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI)

Being a game design channel, they discuss Sesame Credit as obedience to the party, gamified.

</comment><comment><USER9> Couple of questions come to find:

a. How is this data accessed? Can anyone in my network access this? Because even if we draw a parallel to credit scores, not everyone can access my credit scores.

b. What kind of behavior is this encouraging? Most credit scores track bigger picture items - credit card payment, loan payments etc. But, suppose I can see my credit score go up and down then I might end up trying to avoid a specific behavior.

c. How does the scoring work? If I buy say from a company known to sell VPN services, do I lose points?

</comment><comment><USER10> This smells like the Cultural Revolution. Scary.

<comment> castle-bravo I don't see any similarity.

<comment><USER11> The article points this out specifically:

>"To understand the allure that social engineering holds for Chinese leaders, you have to go back decades, to long before apps and big data. In the years after the 1949 Communist Revolution, the government assigned everyone to local work units, which became the locus of surveillance and control. Individuals spied on their neighbors while also doing everything they could to avoid black marks on their own dang'an, or government files. But maintaining the system required massive state effort and oversight. As economic reforms in the 1980s led millions of people to leave their villages and migrate to cities, the work unit system fell apart. Migration also had a secondary effect: Cities filled up with strangers and pianzi."

<comment><USER12> I don't see any references to Cultural Revolution in that quote?

<comment><USER10> I don't know your background, so I'm not sure if you're being coy or genuinely don't know. But the gist is: mass persecution, made possible by citizens spying on each other. OK fair, nobody has been singled out or publicly humiliated (yet), but it's the same setup. Forgive me if the Cultural Revolution means something different to you; I'm going based on the description given to me by one of my close friends, whose parents are from China and experienced it.

<comment><USER12> Appreciate the benefit of doubt, I honestly didn't see a connection and thought you might have conflated Cultural Revolution with Communist Revolution.

I think that I can understand where your interpretation came from, but wouldn't really draw that connection here

Neighbors and friends and family "whistleblowing" each other to the government certainly was an aspect of Cultural Revolution, but it never really struck me as a distinctive/defining feature. The same things happened before Cultural Revolution as well (note that the time period pointed out in the article is 1949, which is the year Communist China was established and revolutionary zeal was high, but 17 years before the Cultural Revolution began), and the same tattling can also be found during McCarthy-era America, and briefly in post-9-11 America ("If You See Something, Say Something")

The more defining features of the Cultural Revolution (at least to Chinese) is the persecution specifically of educated people (professors being harassed and shamed into committing suicide. "the more educated, the more reactionary"), the shunning of education (My grandpa had to shut the doors and teach his kids in secret at home, quite a risky move if anyone found out), the scheduled public demonstrations of loyalty to the party via everyone getting together to dance the loyalty dance every morning, and a dogmatic adherence to party lines, no rational or logic debate allowed (you will be shunned and reported). Don't really see those features in this policy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> How much of this is happening in the US already, but without our knowledge -- unless of course someone steals it and we read about it here. It all sounds so convenient, yet at the same time I see where it will eventually wind up, as a new kind of slavery.

<comment><USER14> >How much of this is happening in the US already, but without our knowledge

Probably a lot. My cousin (Nth generation rich white dude) took a class (at an ivy league school) on the more technical side of terrorism where the professor outright told them that the research they would need to do to get a good grade they would result in them getting a lot more "random" searches at airports and the like. He said other students confirmed that statement (I don't think he had had occasion to travel via air between taking the class and our conversation).

<comment><USER15> Interesting price to pay for taking a class, is it part of any particular degree? On the other hand I guess you really get to learn how your government watches you.

<comment><USER14> Definitely not part of his degree. I think they had a professor who's specialty was that sort of thing so it was a "sought after" elective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I hope what China does give people a hint on how they were suffering for so many years already, and can start doing something to prevent their own government one day make those suffering mandatory...

</comment><comment><USER17> There's a strong implication that Sesame Credit and the Social Credit System idea follow the example of FICO scores. Has anybody in the Chinese government explicitly stated this?

<comment><USER18> Why would the Chinese government need to explicitly state this? The parallels are clear. The inventors of Sesame Credit and the Social Credit System have access to the same history we do about the FICO system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The fact that they're doing this and the fact they're actively trying to export their political ideology via their Confucius institutes, etc. terrifies me. As China's influence grows, I worry they may make implementing similar systems of condition of doing business with them and that developing countries (in Africa especially) who are becoming increasingly reliant upon China for development funding, will lack the power to push back against this dystopian bullshit.

<comment><USER20> That political ideology is not particular to China. Suppression of political consent and overall increasing control are natural tendencies of government. People can be put on a list in the US for example and exempted from flying anywhere.

<comment><USER21> Did you mean 'dissent'?

<comment><USER20> Right. Stupid autocorrect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> We have private market ranking systems like your credit score.

Quantifying karma is a good idea, if implemented correctly and within limitations of accuracy.

<comment><USER23> > _Quantifying karma is a good idea_

Why? Many people hold many opinions about me, almost all of which are wrong. I don't see the value in a global database of opinions about me which I can't control and which will affect me in ways I can't predict.

<comment><USER24> I'd find that helpful. If a lot of people have negative opinion about you, you have no place in my life, sorry. I don't want to deal with some society outsider

<comment><USER25> I believe that is called prejudice. Prejudiced people frighten me, their moral considerations so unthorough, and this makes me think I wouldn't want to deal with someone like you.

But I'd give you a chance first.

<comment><USER24> It's not prejudice. And big surprise, you're exactly like me, just unwilling to vocalize it.

The fact that people are rushing to downvote me for voicing a contrary opinion (and emboldening others to disagree and downvoting me too) is the exact embodiment of what I just described. Like it or not, human beings don't like outsiders and people that others dislike

<comment><USER26> Yes. We already have a silent score we give to people in our minds based on how much conformity is shared. It's instinctually hardwired in to us.

<comment><USER27> Sure, and it is that generally harmful impulse that probably inspired the creation of this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rwsuXHA7RA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rwsuXHA7RA)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> In case people aren't making the connection, this ties in with the net neutrality issue in the US.

The core thing that they are attempting to do is to declare that the internet is no longer a river of information that they just pass along. Making this change is really important if you want more control over what people say and do on the internet.

Without net neutrality, it is easier to start funnelling more and more people through monopolies that cooperate with the government. The Chinese apps are a good example of that.

Make no mistake, the United States is no longer the bastion of freedom you believe it to be. And many in government would _love_ to be able to more effectively stifle political dissent and move to a one party system.

<comment><USER28> This hyperbole about lack of Title II classification being the end of democracy, capitalism, the intetnet, or the United States is getting really tiresome.

<comment><USER20> I was quite aware that some people would be tired and consider it hyperbole when I wrote that. Unfortunately these trends have been ongoing for quite some time. This apathy and dismissal of the net neutrality incident as being an isolated independent problem worries me. If some people become tired from reading my comments, that's too bad. But if you are going to dismiss them anyway, maybe you should not even bother reading them.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Soon-To-Be CS Graduate. Best resources for finding decent job. - <AUTHOR>

I'm currently positioned to graduate from my CS Major this December. It's from a State school and is ABET certified. I really love to program and enjoy learning as much as possible about different coding techniques as well as getting really in-depth with the details around programming.
That being said, I'm currently on the lookout to try and find a job once I graduate. I'd like to have something lined up by the end of summer. I'm for sure planning to relocate (preferably to the sf bay area). I've been an entrepreneur my entire life, but am ready to trade that in so that I can focus on learning as much about programming as possibly without the extra headaches of running your own business. I've spent a lot of effort to learn and effectively use most of the web based technologies, as well as the standard desktop programming languages (C++, C#, Java, etc.)
So far, I've been searching for jobs on Dice and Monster, searched through some on Craigslist, and have been networking with anyone I know, and whom those people know, to find people in companies that would allow to get my foot in the door.
I've applied directly on some of the bigger companies web sites (Google, Apple, etc.), but am still waiting to hear something back. I'm married and have a young child, so some amount of stability within the company at the moment would be nice, but not absolutely necessary as I've survived this long without much financial stability.
Any help / advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks.<AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> First, don't write off startups just because you've got stability on the mind. Demand for programmers and startup funding is high enough at the moment so that you don't need to forfeit stability or high wages to be at a startup - especially late stage, growth stage, or well funded companies. If you have an entrepreneurial background, you'll probably feel more at home at this type of company. You'll definitely have a lot more opportunities to advance yourself too. There won't be quite as much stability as a Google/Apple-type position, but you probably don't have to worry about these types of companies making payroll or low-balling your salary.

If you're willing to work for a startup, here's a successful tactic that's worked for several friends and I here in Boston. Go through VC portfolios, incubator alumni lists, CrunchBase, etc. Find companies that interest you. Do your homework on them, and then contact them directly, even if they're not actively recruiting on their website. It's easier to be noticed by a startup or small company than by Google, and they'll likely be impressed that you specifically sought them out.

Last, have some projects on the side that you can point to during the application process. It doesn't just prove that you have tech skills, but that you can execute, build, and deliver.

</comment><comment><USER3> Have a couple of projects that you've created that you're really passionate about. Be able to explain why you made the design and programming choices you've made and be able to honestly explain them with enthusiasm.

That's really the best advice you're going to get.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! I've actually already created a personal web site with my resume and projects I've done while having my own business while in school that showcases the number of projects I started / worked on.

Your advice on why I made the design and programming choices for certain projects is something I didn't put much thought into. Thank you for that insight as I'll use that to be better prepared for my interviews.</comment></comment>


JK Rowling revealed as author of The Cuckoo's Calling - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23304181

<comment><USER2> Harry Potter and J.K. Rowling's book collector here. Ask me anything :-P</comment>


Study Links Holocaust to Low GDP - <AUTHOR> http://themoscowtimes.com/business/article/study-links-holocaust-to-low-gdp/408350.html <comment><USER2> In _The Wages of Destruction_ , the first economic history of Nazi Germany in a long time, I stopped reading (at least for a long while) when it got to the part where the Nazi economic plan for the Soviet Union was to starve the residents of the cities and use that food to supply their food constrained Greater Western European Co-prosperity Sphere.

(I.e. the French could in theory make airplanes for the Luftwaffe if they had aluminum. They could use their ore and smelters to do that if they had enough electricity. They would have enough electricity if they had enough coal, but they couldn't feed coal miners enough to keep the sufficiently productive (losing coal imports from the U.K. really hurt them).)

Anyway, to the extent they were able to carry out their planned starvation (haven't read that far yet), you'd expect things to be more grim in the less prosperous cities and it could have gotten into a zero sum game, a Jew betrayed to the Nazis was one less mouth competing for very scarce food.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wonder to what extent the mortality is a proxy for length and early onset of the occupation.

As for tendency to vote Communist, in areas once occupied people might tend to remember the Red Army fondly.</comment>


The greatest food in human history - <AUTHOR> http://nypost.com/2013/07/28/the-greatest-food-in-human-history/

<comment><USER2> Another terrible part of the story:

>Junk food costs as little as $1.76 per 1,000 calories, whereas fresh veggies and the like cost more than 10 times as much, found a 2007 University of Washington survey for the Journal of the American Dietetic Association. A 2,000-calorie day of meals would, if you stuck strictly to the good-for-you stuff, cost $36.32, said the study's lead author, Adam Drewnowski. <

This is rediculous. You can buy fruits, veggies and other good-for-you thinks for much, much less. You just need to learn how to cook half-decent.

Lentils, Chickpeas, rice, flour, and other human diet staples (for the last 6000 years) are dirt cheap. Onions, garlic, carrots, cabbage, potatoes, squash, some greens, beets, and other staple veggies are also very cheap. Fruits can be equally cheap in season (around here peaches get down to a dollar per pound in season), though in winter imported fruits are expensive. Yogurt is a great staple source for dairy and protein, and can be cheap. Meats and fish are more expensive, but again, if you buy less desirable cuts of meat and sustainable fish in season, can be had for a decent price.

But people's eating habits have become silly. We eat too much meat, too many poor-quality carbs (white bread, white flour pasta), and too little fibre. And people spend stupid amounts of money on trendy nonsense (at a local farmers market I saw a lady selling tiny bags of 'gluten-free' rice for $10 dollars).

Want to eat healthy? Grab a few cookbooks about traditional cuisines... Traditional grains, pulses, with lots of veggies and a little meat/fish and you're good to go.

<comment><USER3> Want to be rich? Make healthy food as easy to eat and as tasty as junk food. It seems no one is working on that.

<comment><USER2> My first career was in the food industry, as a chef (and later a pastry chef). I was fairly successful (relative to expectations within the industry), however there are some major issues with the industry.

First of all, food related businesses have high startup costs, high maintenance costs, low margins, and don't scale well. There's many incumbants, tastes are localized, sourcing produce can be a nightmare (if you want good produce), and every market is different. And because of the low margins, wages are low, the workforce is uneducated, and then you have to deal with things like high turnover and theft. Which is why most people in the food industry are sociopaths.

Anyhow, there is already fairly healthy, tasty fast food out there already, things like shawarma, falafel, some tacos, and most 'traditional' ethnic snacks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > _" Fuel prices, like food prices, disproportionately hit the poor, so do- > gooders do everything they can to raise energy costs..."_

Way to put words in peoples' mouths.

Political activists on all sides of all debates are doing what they can to _help_ people (in the odd case of anti-immigration politics, to help _" our"_ people) - Specifically for food and energy, this is to make people healthier (which makes them more likely to be happier) and to prevent climate change (which makes all our grandchildren happier.)

While the political ideas they come up with may be naive, and not do the intended thing, this _does not make your political opponents malicious._

Sadly, people will never stop making these kinds of straw man arguments - people fall for them because of confirmation bias. I weep for political truth.

<comment><USER5> There is no straw man here, as the article says the "do-gooders do everything they can to raise energy costs"; the article does NOT say 'do-gooders try to raise energy costs' or 'do-gooders want to raise energy costs', which would indeed be a straw man. The article is arguing that the "do-gooders" raise the price of energy, which has a disproportionately negative impact on the poor; it does not say anything about their motives. If you disagree with the argument, you should refute it with evidence.

<comment><USER4> the idiom "do everything [one] can to..." clearly means both "try to" and "want to".

Indeed, even if you get rid of the hyperbolic "everything [one] can to", you're left with just "do", which is a superset of "try to" (although not "want to").

<comment><USER5> 'do' is not a superset of 'try', unless every outcome was desired from the outset. e.g. I 'do' create software bugs, but I to neither 'try to' nor 'want to' create software bugs.

<comment><USER4> True, apologies, but my main point about the idiom still stands - it means to strive for, which means both wanting and trying.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> FWIW I flagged this.

The notion of the McDouble as the "greatest food in history" is interesting and worth discussing. The cost of food for the poor, as well as the enormous price gap between healthy and unhealthy foods, is worth discussing - and is frequently discussed on HN.

This screed by the NYPost on the other hand, is not. The NYPost is a joke of a publication here in NYC and is regarded as more tabloid than newspaper, even by staunch WSJ conservatives.

</comment><comment><USER7> I tend to agree with much of what is said, at least when I'm in a harshly utilitarian, Malthusian mood: if you want to know what locavorism really means, try buying fresh fruit and vegetables in Japan, where foreign farm produce is taxed of the shelves. But the fact remains that the Anglo-Saxon food culture sucks, and those cheap cheeseburgers are indirectly subsidised by food-stamps and Medicaid for the workforce.

</comment><comment><USER8> crap article from a crappy source, such a vomit inducing propaganda, I feel so angry I clicked it and read that, I want my lost time back.

</comment><comment><USER9> MCDs actually killed the dollar menu recently [http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and- economy/2013/10/wh...](http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and- economy/2013/10/why-mcdonalds-killed-dollar-menu-1-chart/7323/)

</comment><comment><USER10> Ridiculous. Written no doubt, for shock value rather than even the pretense of serious discourse.

</comment><comment><USER11> the best comment in there is that fruits and vegetables are becoming luxury items.

awesome.

</comment><comment><USER12> >For the average poor person, it isn't a great option to take a trip to the farmers market to puzzle over esoteric lefty-foodie codes.

lol</comment>


How Wall Street is making its billions - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2009/10/17/how-wall-street-is-making-its-billions/ <comment><USER2> So, to summarize:

1\. The US government loans money to the banks at 0% interest

2\. The banks buy treasuries at 2% interest

Why is the US government selling treasuries in the first place? In order to have money to bail out the banks' earlier losses.

Net-net: the banks are stealing money from US taxpayers.

Do I have this right?

<comment><USER3> > Do I have this right?

You're missing an important detail - this is nothing new.

Banks have always borrowed money from the US govt (and others) at X% and loaned it at Y%, where X < Y. (There's no point in that arrangement if X >= Y.)

<comment><USER4> With _risk_. What is the risk in buying US bonds?

<comment><USER5> That the USD is increasingly worthless in the world economy.

<comment><USER6> That has nothing to do with the security of a US government bond.

<comment><USER7> Why not?

US bonds are redeemed for US dollars. If the dollar becomes increasingly worthless, why would you want to hold the bond?

Granted, I think saying the dollar is "becoming increasingly worthless" is being hyperbolic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> You know between this and the link posted the other day ([http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_grea...](http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine/print)) about Goldman Sachs I start to wonder if we that strive to create wealth with technology, with odds of failure stacked squarely against us, are really the smart ones. Sheesh. Too bad I have morals.

<comment><USER9> I've gone through that line of thought more than once and I've come to the conclusion that what we do or attempt to do is far more beneficial to human advancement than these bullshit 3 card monty games. That has to count for something, at least in terms of self-respect.

<comment><USER10> This is very true on the technical end of things. Where we (and by we, I mean the human race) are lacking is on the political end. I have come to the sad conclusion that there are not enough hackers in the political system. By a political hacker I mean people who are willing to experiment, to tinker, to say "I don't know if this will work, but let's try to find out", people who are empirically-minded and data- rather than poll-driven. I don't know how to solve this problem, either, as those of us of this mind-set tend to be more technically oriented than politically oriented.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> So if you are part of the "False Economy" you get to make billions thanks to the suckers... err tax payers... who will bail you out, whilst everyone in the Real Economy gets to suffer the effects of the Financial Crisis.

Maybe it's time to go back to contracting work at financial institutions...

</comment><comment><USER12> This sounds like what Enron was doing to cook it's books, just moving money around, except in this case the banks and the government aren't technically the same entity but heck they might as well be after the bail out.

<comment><USER3> The banks and govt aren't technically the same entity, but the govt may well be a controlling entity.

What are the odds that the controlling entity won't use the banks for political advantage, say lower loan rates in "red states"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wonder what fraction of the Treasuries sold at auction are purchased by the banks engaging in this behavior?

If it's a decent but not overwhelming amount, it could be causing the auctions to be priced hire and thus overall increase the government's take.

So it's not necessarily clear what's happening here...

<comment><USER13> Actually, to get $3b in return, consider how many billions of dollars they'd have to buy of Treasuries. (1yr are paying .37% through 4% on 30yrs, which they probably aren't buying.)

Anyone know offhand how much the banks did borrow?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This article is complete crap! At 3.6 Billion per quarter. Let say JP Morgain makes 10.8B a year. To make that with 2% yielding T-Bills the govt would of need to lend JP Morgan well more than 5.4 trillion.

<comment><USER6> Firstly, you're a factor 10 off: 10.8B is 2% of 540 billion. Secondly, 3% already reduces that to 360 billion. Thirdly, you missed the important word 'leverage' in the article.

<comment><USER14> Yea I did get the factor off. Leverage means using borrowed money to make more money. Other than the government where are you going to borrow at less than 2% interest rate? The financial institution does a lot more than buying t-bills.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hum but isn't that in essence how the government is able to make deficits? I mean, without this process the gov wouldn't be able to fund itself other than by taxes.

So the federal reserve creates money by loaning at ridiculously low rates (currently it's not a bad idea if there really is a threat of deflation), banks then use that money to fund the government by buying treasuries and in such we just inflate the money supply? So banks are like facilitators for this to happen and get 2% back for it?

I dunno, I mean yes they make awe full amounts of money but can you really go about cutting out the middle men completely here?

<comment><USER6> _without this process the gov wouldn't be able to fund itself_

How exactly does one fund itself by lending money that is then used to buy bonds? The net result is 0 for the government. If they have money to lend, they would be better off just using that money in the first place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fed#Goals></comment>


"Talking rubber", a forgotten audio format - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/a-really-obscure-forgotten-audio-format-talking-rubber/ <comment><USER2> "in 1954 the only way to record sound was to press a phonograph or record sound on film for a movie."

There was wire recording:

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

<comment><USER3> AMPEX demonstrated magnetic tape recording in 1947, based on the German magnetophone technology used during WWII. Shipments to radio stations began in 1948.

[http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/company.histories/ampex/leslie...](http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/company.histories/ampex/leslie_snyder_early- days-of-ampex.pdf)

<comment><USER4> The Dictabelt also became available in 1947, according to Wikipedia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictabelt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictabelt)

An interesting article about archiving of Dictabelt and other audio format recordings: [http://thequietus.com/articles/18004-sound-library- british-l...](http://thequietus.com/articles/18004-sound-library-british- library)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Speaking of forgotten audio formats: Tefifon, old german analog loop of elastic, non-magnetic, tape.

More or less ``8-track meet vinyl''.

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

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tTURrAWVYE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tTURrAWVYE)

</comment><comment><USER6> I find it odd that the corporate research lab is popularly acknowledged to be dead when so many large companies maintain corporate research labs:

[http://www.geglobalresearch.com/](http://www.geglobalresearch.com/)

[http://research.ibm.com/](http://research.ibm.com/)

[https://research.google.com/](https://research.google.com/)

[https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/](https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/research/)

[https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/corporate-innovation- labs/](https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/corporate-innovation-labs/) <\- a giant list of more labs

...

Now, I will admit that corporate research has tapered off significantly since then, but 'tapered off' and 'dead' are two entirely different things.

You might think 'But wait! the kind of basic physics research that used to be done by Bell _is_ dead'. I counter with two arguments:

\- Basic computer science research is an equally valid, equally fundamental thing, and many of the labs listed above conduct it as their primary business

\- Basic physics research _does_ still happen. I included GE Global Research at the top of my list because they in particular do a lot of research into materials, chemistry, etc (which will eventually be applied to things like turbine blades, batteries, LEDs, etc.).

<comment><USER7> CS research, for the most part, is a fractional cost compared to basic physics research, materials research, chemistry, etc... mostly due to the capital costs associated with setting up proper labs.

The majority of science research, especially the risky exploratory kind vs. the incremental efficiency/process improvement kind, is mostly in universities and to a lesser extent, national labs.

<comment><USER8> IBM's research projects ( [http://research.ibm.com/#featured- projects](http://research.ibm.com/#featured-projects) ) seem to include areas such as polymer research ( [http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/industrialpolymers.shtm...](http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/industrialpolymers.shtml#fbid=7xlcoAUWFhM) ), semiconductors ( [http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/chipchallenge.shtml#fbi...](http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/chipchallenge.shtml#fbid=7xlcoAUWFhM) ) amongst other domains.

While there is certainly CSesque research in the list of areas, it is not the only area.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think I once actually saw this. When I first started at the local telephone company back in the day I was shown the corporate PBX system which was interesting because it was a small step by step system in an era where such things were considered obsolete. There was a rubber belt running on pulleys in a transparent box. There were several magnetic recording/playback heads in contact with the belt. The bottom of the belt passed through a pool of lubricant. It picked up so much that the heads left a wake and had a kind of a bow wave. lubrication was apparently very important.

<comment><USER10> Likely that the heads rode on a film of oil. Thus was no actual contact between the rubber belt and the heads and so no wear. And also probably the oil film meant that belt moved smoothly under the heads. One could imagine if there was any friction the belt would tend to move unevenly (skips and jerks) leading to crummy voice quality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> thetechmoan on youtube often brings old audio formats into light:

[https://www.youtube.com/user/Techmoan](https://www.youtube.com/user/Techmoan)

not as old as talking rubber usually though

</comment><comment><USER12> [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_clock](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_clock)

I believe some of these used the same tech</comment>


How Shaq spends $1000 a week on apps - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/3039949/most-creative-people/how-shaq-spends-1000-a-week-on-apps

<comment><USER2> Sounds like somebody has a lot of free time.</comment>


Code Documentation - <AUTHOR> http://www.spinellis.gr/blog/20100711/

<comment><USER2> Business owners seldom see:

(1) The business requirements met by the code.

(2) The extent of the source code documentation.

(3) The quality of the comments (i.e., direction for future maintainers versus profanity, song lyrics, or obscure references).

(4) The time it takes to document code and its added business value.

I would like to see an editor that links, rather than embeds, source code comments with documentation, while allowing the documentation to be extracted independently. Such as:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3QqjhzhnAw#t=1m41s>

</comment><comment><USER3> I'd be interested to know what a lot of these projects are. That graph suggests that there are a good number of projects that have > 90 comment lines per 100 lines, which just seems absurd.

Do they count perl one-liners where there is a huge amount of functionality packed into a single line, with a big comment above it explaining what it does?</comment>


Wouldn't it be wonderful to get YC feedback on your app? - <AUTHOR>

They have already scrutinized your application, maybe found holes or gaps in it. I know they are looking for smart people first and foremost, but wouldn't it be awesome if you could get some feedback from them based on what they thought - I am sure they wrote notes on your app, it would be great if they could share them - kind of like Simon on American Idol. It might help when you reapply too. <comment><USER2> This would be wonderful in an ideal world, but providing feedback on thousands of applications would be an insane time suck for them.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm guessing that they write notes on your application as they review it.</comment></comment>


The subtle art of code golf in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://www.lesscake.com/code-golf-javascript <comment><AUTHOR> Hi! This is my brand new blog where I write tutorials on Javascript. Let me know if you have any questions or feedback :-)

</comment><comment><USER2> I didn't know that javascript automatically created variables for every html element with an ID.</comment>


Lithp - A interpreter for John McCarthy's original Lisp. - <AUTHOR> http://fogus.me/fun/lithp/

<comment><USER2> I wrote a similar piece of code way back in high school, based on Paul Graham's "The Roots of Lisp" essay. I didn't know any better, so I used C/C++. Don't think I've ever learned more in a single programming project.

<comment><USER3> Would you choose a different language now that you know better?

<comment><USER2> If someone told me to hack together a mini-Lisp? Sure, I'd use something different. But at the time I'm happy I used what I did. I learned just as much about C as I did about Lisp.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nice use of Pycco! <http://github.com/fitzgen/pycco>

</comment><comment><USER5> Promoted for putting the lisp back in Lisp. =D

</comment><comment><USER3> In Python.</comment>


LnkHub: Easy access to the best resources on the web. Consistent and free. - <AUTHOR> http://lnkhub.com

<comment><AUTHOR> What other topics would you like to see there? Any awesome resource we are missing? Let us know.</comment>


OSX Chrome 55 Blocking non-store extensions without dev mode - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam/issues/703 <comment><USER3> Do I understand correctly that Google Chrome is uninstalling software that the user has deliberately chosen to (not tricked into) install?

This feels worse than simply pulling the extension from the Chrome Web Store. Google certainly isn't obligated to host this thing, but outright uninstalling it against my will seems like crossing a line.

There was a lot of hand-wringing when Chrome was released with automatic updates enabled by default, because it seemed reckless to grant Google the power to install (or uninstall) new software on our computers at their whim. Chickens might be roosting.

<comment><USER4> I see the idealism in your post and I agree with you 100%. 100%!

But every time I got to my grandmother's she has a thousand "default search ad engine this" and "ad injection improvement that" extensions that I need to remove. Those search engines have exactly the same homepage as google, to the colours, except the logo is square, not round. There is _no way_ she can know.

It might just be they ran the numbers and my grandmother's not the only one.

I think maybe, just this once, reality should trump idealism. Let's keep a very close eye on them. But for now, "I'll allow it."

Ps: I know that "if there are unsigned extensions on your computer, you have bigger problems", but it's my grandmother. Security is a moving target, this is the step we take in Jan 2017. If it keeps her safe for a month, that's fine with me. We'll see how the malware adapts in Feb, and react accordingly.

<comment><USER5> Totally with you. With my grandparents and even my smart, successful sister they simply live in a different world then we do. They are being tricked (or are too lazy to care or notice) and these moves do help them. We see more and more technology companies doing things to help these users. (Like Apple with the new MBP by girlfriend says it's her favorite computer she has ever owned all of 15 seconds after turning it on).

But here if you have developer mode on they should never be allowed to do this. It's one thing to do it to a normal user (though if they really cared they would check to see if the extension was a normal non-spam extensions like this) but when a user as clicked that they are capable of understanding what extensions they have on then Google is in the wrong.

Sadly we are on HN are not the majority user of the products we love to discuss.

<comment><USER6> The argument I've read before regarding this is that configuration switch _the user_ can set to permanently suppress this behaviour, malware _can also_ set.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Let's cut the bullshit. Dropping AdNauseam from the store is a clear sign from Google that their ad-supported revenue model is more important than user experience and choice, _even in non-ad-focused products_ (do no evil indeed).

Given this fact, why would I want to use _any_ Google product in the future or recommend Google to anyone? How can anyone trust Google Home or the Google self-driving car to not make similar compromises to usability and choice in the name of propping up Google's other business?

<comment><USER8> I'm a bit out of the loop here. Why did AdNauseam get banned and not uBlock Origin, ABP, etc?

Edit: Nevermind, figured it out:

> As online advertising becomes ever more ubiquitous and unsanctioned, > AdNauseam works to complete the cycle by automating Ad clicks universally > and blindly on behalf of its users.

It doesn't just block ads, it also pretends to click them.

This is obviously very problematic for advertising networks which use a pay- per-click model, where sites are paid based on how many users click the ads. In fact, this behavior is very similar to a common type of fraud in the advertising world known as click fraud, which exploits the pay-per-click model to extract money from advertisers with "fake clicks" from bots.

Even though in this case it's being done not to defraud advertisers but to instead prevent ad networks from tracking what ads a user did click, I can see why Google might object.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Being realistic, of course they'd block it. Why would they allow an extension that costs them money by faking ad clicks (edit: harms their business model by making advertisers mad that they're getting fake ad clicks)? I'm happy simply blocking ads; I don't want to directly cost anyone money that way. Whatever you think about ads, isn't automated random faking of ad clicks arguably fraud?

Being optimistic, the conflict of interest over ad clicks may not be the only reason for this decision. Blindly and randomly following ad links seems like it would assist exploitation of browser vulnerabilities.

<comment><USER10> I'm not going to downvote you. But it's in no way shape or form fraud.

It's just like sending back business reply mail if you're not interested in the product. It's not fraud.

I can see a case for it being a bit like a DDOS attack. But I can't see a case for it being fraud.

<comment><USER9> I'm not so sure.

1\. The authors of the extension clearly intend to harm the ad industry. There's no expectation that anyone will look at any one fake ad click and say, "oh, that person's sick of ads... maybe we should change our strategy." There's no business-side interaction with fake clicks like there is with empty returned prepaid envelopes. The only impact anyone intends or expects from this extension is financial. The intent is to get advertisers to pay more for fewer sales.

2\. This is automated, and by distributing an extension, automated on a (potentially) mass scale.

I hate ads and I'm the kind of person who would use that extension if I weren't already happy with ublock origin, regardless of whether it might be considered fraud. However, I think there's at least a passable argument that it could be. If the main reason for this removal is that Google views the extension as fraud, then banning the extension from the Chrome web store is fairly decent of Google compared to suing the developers.

<comment><USER11> > The only impact anyone intends or expects from this extension is financial.

Financial disruption is the tool used by most forms of _direct action_ [1]. The power imbalance between large businesses and the people affected by those businesses usually leads to problems being ignored for the sake of profit. When money is the metric that influences decisions, the only way to effect change is to disrupt the source of revenue.

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Chrome has been going this route for a while now as it was getting so much flak for poor performance, security issues, etc. that was actually because of maliciously installed extensions. Their only option was to only allow extensions installed from their store which allows them to review the code and sign it before allowing it to be installed in the browser. All the other browsers (Firefox, Edge, etc.) are going the same/similar routes too (Firefox allows you to install from outside the store, but it has to be signed by going through a review process).

And they've been progressively making the developer mode harder to use as a backdoor for malicious extensions to install themselves, by only allowing them to run for the duration of the session. Firefox was actually the first to do this. And this is why the Extension is being 'removed' between sessions.

What is more interesting is why this particular extension was removed from the Chrome Web Store - It looks to be a fork of uBlock and lots of other Ad Blockers are still available in the store. So why is this particular one not allowed?

The only reason I know of that extensions have been removed from the store is if they violate the Single Purpose policy ([https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose](https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose)) and normally only if they are doing something malicious (e.g. Claiming to be an extension that blocks ads, but actually also scraping data, injecting ads, or something like that). I know this extension is open source, but has anyone actually reviewed the code to make sure it isn't doing something malicious under the hood?

Edit: I looked at what AdNauseam does differently to normal Ad Blockers and I think where it is running afoul of the Single Purpose Policy is that it both blocks Ads AND clicks all the Ads. Now Google could be banning it from the store because it does 2 things and they should split those out into 2 separate extensions, or they are banning it because it is basically a means to commit Ad Fraud (fake clicks is a massive problem in the Ad industry). And blindly clicking every ad on a page doesn't seem like a safe thing to do personally...

<comment><USER13> Other ad blockers "block ads" and "block annoying eu cookie notices". Should they be removed?

I just visited the Chrome store and chose the first extension: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office- online/ndjp...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office- online/ndjpnladcallmjemlbaebfadecfhkepb) It makes word documents AND spreadsheets?!

Hopefully you can see where I'm going... whatever's written in the policy is difficult to enforce literally. Someone has to make the distinction based upon the intent of that policy. A person has to draw the line. If Google have made the decision based on that policy, well that's their decision.

Reading [https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose](https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose) (part 4) makes me thinking "disrupting ad networks" could be that single purpose. Then it'd cover blocking & clicking. Just like "Office Online"'s "edit office documents" covering both "word processing" and "spreadsheets".

<comment><USER12> Yeah, I'm just speculating on the reason it was removed from the store - <USER2> that's the more interesting question. Why was this particular extension removed?

There are loads of other Ad Blockers that do what this extension claims to do and they are all still available in the store - so all the conspiracy theories in this thread about google blocking it because it hurts their ad revenue seem bogus.

As I said, I've only seen extensions removed from the store that were doing something malicious - Something the person who installed the extension wouldn't reasonably expect it to be doing.

<comment><USER13> Thanks, good points to think about!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Good. This will give AdNauseam visibility. And remind everyone what Google's game is.

<comment><USER15> I think everyone know's what's google's game is.

Google hurriedly announced Chrome when back in the days Microsoft was thinking of blocking ads.

Then they gave the user a never seen before simple to use User Experience/User Interface. Started marketing aggressively. Recently on iOS when using Gmail app and opening a link, it suggests me to install Google Chrome.

Google's game has always been user data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> As one of the developers (dhowe) commented:

> we are aware and preparing a statement and some workaround info to be > released in a few hours (though, as you probably know, there is not much the > average user can do in this case)

I guess, they are going to post it on HN too.

Anyway, thanks for the heads-up. AdNauseam is definitely an interesting extension.

<comment><USER17> Why is it not in plugin store?

<comment><USER16> Google removed it. Their main source of income is ads and they don't want something that disrupts their main source of revenue in their store. AdNauseam is much more disruptive for ad networks than your average ad blocker.

There's still a (broken) link on the project's GitHub page: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adnauseam/hgfaciee...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adnauseam/hgfacieeomogkcchookiodlpppbcolha).

<comment><USER18> So why are these still listed? uBlock, uBlock Origin, TruBlock, AdBlock Plus, etc

<comment><USER17> Those just block ads, do not cause mess in Googles data. Lack of data is better than unpredictable and fake data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Ever wanted to quickly hack together your own homebrewed extension for Chrome? You've now lost the ability to do so unless you publish to the wretched Chrome Web Store, which allows only for a princely maximum of 20 extensions by default [1] and has a nebulous review process [2].

Hopefully, this restriction doesn't exist in Chromium.

[1] [https://developer.chrome.com/webstore/faq#faq- gen-29](https://developer.chrome.com/webstore/faq#faq-gen-29)

[2] [https://developer.chrome.com/webstore/faq#faq- listing-08](https://developer.chrome.com/webstore/faq#faq-listing-08)

<comment><USER20> I do use my own extensions, that I don't distribute, for many everyday conveniences during browsing. I've reluctantly, given lack of good alternatives, stuck with Chrome for a long time; but this is the change that finally forced me to switch to Firefox. It's not perfect, but it definitely is the least evil.

<comment><USER19> I did the same today. If you're converting extensions from Chrome to Firefox, you might like this.

[https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add- ons/WebExtensions/Po...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add- ons/WebExtensions/Porting_a_Google_Chrome_extension)

<comment><USER21> Whoa, looks like it'll take way less effort than I imagined to port my extension to Firefox. I think I'll do that next week.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Didn't know about it. Just installed on firefox, it seems only fair.

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm already using uBlock Origin. Why should I use this instead?

<comment><USER24> For political rather than technical reasons

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Thanks, Google: Now I use Firefox where the add-on is still available :)

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/)

</comment><comment><USER26> Another reason not to use Chrome

</comment><comment><USER19> Here's a guide to porting your Chrome extensions to Firefox, if you're considering making the switch to Firefox.

[https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add- ons/WebExtensions/Po...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add- ons/WebExtensions/Porting_a_Google_Chrome_extension)

</comment><comment><USER27> When Firefox did this I eventually stopped using it altogether and switched to Pale Moon. That's been a good experience, FYI.

</comment><comment><USER28> Unrelated, but I find it funny how people used the name macOS instead of OS X for like 2 weeks after Apple changed the name, then just reverted back. I guess you can't make people stop using a name that's been around so long.

</comment><comment><USER29> How ironic that Windows is the only major platform that doesn't try to force its way between you and your computer. Still, I bet someone inside MS is dreaming up plans to install a toll booth on Windows eventually.

<comment><USER30> Does OSX? All the mobile operating systems certainly do, but nothing makes you use the OSX app store, and you have root access

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I like the anarchy of AdNauseam.

But it doesn't make sense, why try and reduce the revenue of websites further than the personal non contribution of using an adblocker (which improves personal experience)

Do people really think websites will be able to run off donations, are people that naive?

<comment><USER32> Why not subscriptions ?

<comment><USER33> The "issue" is that for subscriptions to work, you'd have to provide a worse service, because you'd have to require people to login. I honestly don't mind pay for some sites, but I do mind that I have to login.

Currently I believe that the people who don't mind dealing with ads are getting a better service, than the people paying for subscriptions directly.

<comment><USER32> "you'd have to require people to login"

I can't imagine it being that much of a problem in days of password managers and cookies...

"Currently I believe that the people who don't mind dealing with ads are getting a better service, than the people paying for subscriptions directly."

I subscribe to a bunch of newspapers (and I'm a 20-something tech guy), I don't really mind logging once when I'm on a new computer/phone/whatever, it's the same issue as google / facebook / twitter / ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I understand the point of AdNauseam, but is it really a great idea to install an extension that clicks every ad? Seems like a good way to waste bandwidth/CPU resources, expose your browser to malware, end up on lists of various sorts, etc.

</comment><comment><USER35> First advertisers try to guilt people with the content blocking is stealing mantra, now they want to call this click fraud, instead of taking a look in the mirror. It is a great way to destroy user trust, I can only see this going one way.

</comment><comment><USER36> Title is misleading, it's not just this extension being blocked, it's all non- store extensions

<comment><USER37> The title wasn't misleading, because Google just removed their extension from the store on 1/1\. It's unfortunate that the title was changed, because the fact that google blocks non-store extensions is not news, leading people to misunderstand the relevance of the submission.

FTA:

"Earlier this week, on Jan 1st 2017, we were informed by our users that Google had banned AdNauseam from its Chrome Web Store."

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Keep in mind that to Google's ad fraud department, this would be considered ad fraud by creating a bot that clicks on it's own ads. If you were in Google's ad fraud department, what would you do? Would you say "yes, this extension is ok to be distributed by us"?

<comment><USER39> Google isn't distributing the extension.

Chrome is uninstalling a manually-installed extension.

This situation is somewhat akin to OS X uninstalling Spotify.

<comment><USER40> It would be more akin to uninstalling an itunes app that just requests hundreds of random streams from itunes servers even though the user isn't listening to them.</comment></comment></comment>


Discovery of the Huffman Code - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Data_Coding_Theory/Huffman_Coding#History <comment><AUTHOR> There's a little more detail in [https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/images/upload_librar...](https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/images/upload_library/46/Pengelley_projects/Project-14/Huffman.pdf)</comment>


IPhone Developers Go From Rags to Riches - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/09/indie-developer.html

<comment><USER2> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=308975></comment>