A Case That Has Microsoft, Apple and Amazon Agreeing - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-02/as-microsoft-takes-on-the-feds-apple-and-amazon-watch-nervously <comment><USER2> _" There's irony in any tech company confronting the government on privacy matters, considering how much heat many take for mining their own customer information and using it for advertising and other profitable purposes."_

See, I don't find this very ironic. In fact, my only real issue with data mining and analysis by these sorts of companies is the way governments can demand this info without my approval.

If Microsoft or Google or Apple or Amazon offer me a service and state that "hey, we'll provide this service for no cash outlay but data you submit to our servers will be analyzed to tailor search results, advertising, and other behavior to your usage" I can opt into that knowing that I'm trading targeted ads for free email or hosting or whatever. If I don't think that's a good deal, I don't use the service. If I think "OK, ads are a fair price for this stuff" then again, I'm cool with that.

But just because I agree to let Google read my location to send me traffic warnings before heading out to work doesn't mean I want the FBI to grab that data without my knowledge so they can determine if I might be a troublemaker. Just because I agree to let Amazon use my Amazon searches to suggest other products I might want doesn't mean I want the DEA demanding that info to decide if the gardening gear I purchased was for tomatoes or growing cannabis.

I'm perfectly aware that you pay for the things you get, whether it's directly with cash or indirectly from advertisers who pay for access to your eyeballs. Those are things I can consent to or decline. But when people with guns and the ability to throw me in jail can demand access to that info without my knowledge, I'm no longer agreeing to the same thing.

It's like signing a contract where someone else has the ability to change the fine print after I've signed it.

<comment><USER3> > But just because I agree to let Google read my location to send me traffic > warnings before heading out to work doesn't mean I want the FBI to grab that > data without my knowledge so they can determine if I might be a troublemaker

Constitutionally, privacy is a pretty cut-and-dry concept. Information is either private or not. Private information isn't "information I don't want the government to have" it's "information I don't want anyone else to have."

I'm not saying we couldn't restructure the law to express what you're talking about. But it's not just a matter of extending our existing principles to this new situation. You're throwing the concept of "privacy" on its head by saying that you have this information that's "private" but that at the same time some third-party entity (and its employees) actively sifts through to target advertising to you.

<comment><USER4> _Constitutionally, privacy is a pretty cut-and-dry concept. Private information isn 't "information I don't want the government to have" it's "information I don't want anyone else to have."_

You are incorrect. Your line of thinking runs in direct opposition to Roe V. Wade.

You can share information with your doctor that you specifically do not want the government to have. There's nothing special about doctors, in a constitutional sense. They are a third party providing a service and it is most certainly possible to have shared information with a third party that is still private.

<comment><USER3> I'm talking about "privacy" in the 4th amendment sense.

The _Griswold_ "privacy" line of cases is pretty much totally inapplicable outside the reproduction/sexual activity/family planning context, largely because they conjure up a "right to privacy" that doesn't really exist in the Constitution.

<comment><USER5> I'm still not sure about your claim that private information consists _only_ of "information I don't want anyone else to have."

You can share information with another trusted party and still have an expectation of privacy (such that the government needs a warrant to compel access to that information). Conversely, you can have information that you don't share with another living soul, and the government can _also_ compel access to that information - e.g. a warrant to search your private belongings. The standard for how the government can access your information doesn't automatically change depending on whether you've shared it with 0 or > 0 people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If companies stored customer data encrypted by keys that are held by the customer, they wouldn't have this problem.

Furthermore, they wouldn't have to worry about deleting customer data either. The customer would have the power to simply deny access to the keys.

<comment><USER7> If the data is opaque to the provider, then there are many services they won't be able to provide on it (without some major advances in homomorphic encryption). For example, spam detection or search. Sharing is also made much more difficult.

<comment><USER3> There is no reason that stuff can't be done on the client side.

Outlook works just peachy searching my GB's of emails and attachments from its local replica, using the internet only to sync.

<comment><USER7> Not true - there are reasons not to do it on the client instead. Consider a web email client instead. It's not feasible to login to the site, download a full archive of your email, decrypt it, and index it before being able to do a search.

<comment><USER8> IndexedDB[1] sort of makes that a non-issue, doesn't it?

[1]: [https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_A...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_API)

<comment><USER7> No, it doesn't. This issue is not technology to store and search data from the client. The point is not wanting to download everything to every client in the first place.

<comment><USER8> Personally, I am a fan of p2p applications and doing things locally. Unfortunately, there are a lot of unsolved issues, especially when it comes to data storage, like you mentioned.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Agreeing "for once"?

Hardly. Apple and Microsoft are already on record as agreeing to fix wages, creating a cartel affecting a million tech workers.

[https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles- wage...](https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing- cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/)

<comment><USER10> You mean Apple and Google.

<comment><USER9> I mean Apple, Microsoft, Google, et al.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Microsoft has shown that they are quite willing to access induviduals private data if they have a financial stake in it [0]. Yes, they eventually backtracked under public pressure (after trying very hard to justify how it's totally okay because they were going to pay a lawyer to rubber-stamp things in the future), but it's rather hard to listen to their general council talking about how they value privacy on principle given their history. It's quite obvious they only care about privacy insofar as it affects their bottom line.

The article also conflates (intentionally?) this issue with the mass- surveillance issue, bringing Snowden into it and insinuating that this ruling would have an effect on that, which is just silly [1].

The whole "Company F" section is interesting (hadn't heard before that microsoft is challenging the statement that they were willingly providing user data to the NSA), but it's a bit hard to square with the leaked documents which list microsoft as the first participating partner in the PRISM program [2]

[0] [http://www.geekwire.com/2014/microsoft-defends-hotmail- snoop...](http://www.geekwire.com/2014/microsoft-defends-hotmail-snooping- windows-leak-investigation/) [1] [http://www.cbsnews.com/news/patriot-act-can- obtain-data-in-e...](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/patriot-act-can-obtain-data- in-europe-researchers-say/) [2] [http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/nsa-timeline- sur...](http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/nsa-timeline-surveillance)

<comment><USER12> Is there any evidence that any companies were _willingly_ going along with PRISM? Seems like they were under gag orders and potential fines (Yahoo said $250K a day). Not sure what choice they had.

Though MS accessing user's data via Hotmail for internal review really does scuttle their credibility.

<comment><USER11> > Is there any evidence that any companies were willingly going along with > PRISM? Seems like they were under gag orders and potential fines (Yahoo said > $250K a day). Not sure what choice they had.

I'm not aware of any evidence of their intent, no, just that they assisted in collection. I believe Glenn Greenwald has stated that they were a willing and proactive participant, but that that information came from NSA internal forums and not official documentation so it would not be released.

I don't think it really matters though. Whether they were willing or not, the end result is the same. If you don't trust the USG, you cannot trust US corporations (yes, of course this applies not just to the US but others as well; it's just that we currently have more information about the fiveeyes programs, and the US is a big player geopolitically so they have interests to protect in a lot of areas).

On an more personal level, I would say that even if they collaborated with this under legal threats, they are still morally responsible for their decisions to support the surveillance state. I cannot accept that we give people or companies a clean slate for evil just because they had financial interests to protect. Everyone has financial interests to protect, and it's usually more convenient to ignore evil than to put oneself at risk.

<comment><USER13> _I would say that even if they collaborated with this under legal threats, they are still morally responsible for their decisions to support the surveillance state_

Perhaps, but at some point they have to be excused if they were complying with the law. It's our jobs as citizens to ensure we have the right laws. In a way, it's kind of like blaming the soldiers for the 2003 Iraq war. I don't blame them. I want them to fight their guts out believing that they are answering their highest calling (otherwise they lessen their odds of surviving it).

But I want the sonofabitch who sent them there and caused the deaths of all those innocent Iraqis to go to jail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that an American court has the power to demand that an American citizen produce an item or information under his control, even if it happens to be in another country (e.g., a man getting divorced can't drive his car and all his gold and jewelry into Canada to shield them from his ex-wife). I imagine that most other countries would behave similarly: being within their borders and subject to their jurisdiction, they can compel someone to do something.

If that's indeed the case, then it seems that an American corporation—a legal person with a presence in the United States—may be compelled by a court to produce items or data it controls outside of our borders.

The thing we need to do is to limit the power of the subpoena generally.

<comment><USER15> > _it seems to me that an American court has the power to demand that an > American citizen produce an item or information under his control, even if > it happens to be in another country_

Does the American government have the power to compel someone to violate foreign law in order to produce an item held in a foreign country? Can the American government force an American citizen to violate Greek law and take a million Euros out of Greece for that hypothetical divorce settlement?

This is the scenario in question here. It is illegal in Ireland for Microsoft to provide the requested information to the US Government. The data resides in Ireland so complying would require performing an illegal act in Ireland. Does US law for some reason override Irish law? Can the US government compel Microsoft to violate Irish law?

<comment><USER16> > Does US law for some reason override Irish law?

It's pretty simple. Whoever has more guns backing up their laws wins.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Of course this appeal will fail. The US believes that it has jurisdiction essentially everywhere. One need only look at the FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act) to see this firmly held belief in action. The US Government is increasingly using it [1] to prosecute people and companies it simply doesn't like by punishing conduct that occurs outside the US that in many cases has no effect on any US citizen or company.

That said, if you're a high level drug trafficker, and you're not at least using PGP, you deserve whatever you get. This is Darwinism at work. Even normal, non-criminals should be using the strongest encryption they can get their hands on, because no one knows what kind of conduct the government will seek to punish going forward. Prosecutors get more creative every day in applying our extremely broad laws to increasingly wide swaths of behavior.

[1] [http://www.fcpaprofessor.com/a-focus-on-doj-fcpa- individual-...](http://www.fcpaprofessor.com/a-focus-on-doj-fcpa-individual- prosecutions-3)

</comment><comment><USER18> It's important to remember that this is the same company that snooped through the emails and files of one of their users while looking for evidence of piracy. They came clean about their snooping moments before court documents were publicly released that detailed what they did.

</comment><comment><USER19> The pending TISA trade treaty may limit data sovereignty, [http://www.zdnet.com/article/wikileaks-leak-shows-data- sover...](http://www.zdnet.com/article/wikileaks-leak-shows-data-sovereignty- threat/)

 _" 50 countries including Australia and the US may be signing away rights to ensure sensitive customer data remains in its country of origin ... the draft document reveals that the United States and the European Union are pushing to prevent signatory countries from preventing the transfer of data across nation borders."_

</comment><comment><USER20> It's good to know there are people like Brad Smith standing up to government demands for full access to people's data. It brings up an interesting privacy contradiction. While storing data locally seems best for privacy, if it's on a networked computer, there are still ways for people to get it, and unless you have really good lawyers, nobody is going to challenge governments across the world if they want to access it. By moving data to the cloud, we are creating incentives for companies like Microsoft to fight against government intrusion.

</comment><comment><USER21> It's great this article about Microsoft fighting for our privacy came put in the midst of the upset over Windows 10 phoning home.

<comment><USER22> Microsoft aren't fighting for _your_ rights here. They are fighting for market share. Not turning your data over to the FBI is now a product feature.

<comment><USER23> I can't help but disagree -- they are caught between a rock and a hard place. Following the demands of one Federal government (Brazil) will result in them violating the laws of another (US).

They are fighting for a unified legal regime that spans across all international boundaries.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> > Microsoft has lost twice

No kidding, they are trying to convince the US to recognize that they actually have limits on their power outside of the country.

</comment><comment><USER25> Not to change the subject but why does this sound like Gibson Guitar all over again? National law vs External laws = sovereignty?

</comment><comment><USER26> Interesting side note... the author must have originally called this something along the lines of: "As Microsoft takes on the feds, Apple and Amazon watch nervously" or something like that, since the link to the article is "as- microsoft-takes-on-the-feds-apple-and-amazon-watch-nervously".

</comment><comment><USER27> If they lose, the solution is of course to re-incorporate outside of the US.

<comment><USER15> Is that a working solution? Does the US government claim jurisdiction over US corporations or over corporations operating in the US?

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> this is sad. for all the misguided hate against the US there is a lot of very justified hate that comes from these sorts of attitudes coming from its government and enforcement agencies. they should have more respect for the laws of other countries, especially somewhere like Ireland which could, not unreasonably, be called a crime free paradise compared to the US.

its terrifying when law enforcement doesn't understand the difference between right and wrong...

</comment><comment><USER29> First thing that came to my mind when I read the headline: "Google has to go."</comment>


In Defense of Narcissism - <AUTHOR> http://bostonreview.net/books-ideas/vivian-gornick-defense-narcissism-elizabeth-lunbeck-christopher-lasch-feminism <comment><USER2> I can't help but think the term "narcissism" is being used in the article as a provocative substitution for the work ego or egoism. The way the article uses the work its almost as if the work egoism would be more accurate.</comment>


A Big Case of Oops - <AUTHOR> http://www.communities.hp.com/securitysoftware/blogs/rafal/archive/2010/02/25/a-big-case-of-oops.aspx <comment><USER2> Lovely to know they aren't smart enough to check their other urls:

[http://www.mythaichicago.com/menu.asp?locationid=000004%20OR...](http://www.mythaichicago.com/menu.asp?locationid=000004%20OR%201%20=%201)

also, the site was built with dreamweaver. Telltale JS markers. Makes me think it's a web agency/ad agency type.

EDIT:

these are the people responsible:

<http://www.orangefuse.com/> \- who built www.linusinc.com. I chose another orangefuse site at random and produced an XSS error and a potential path disclosure error (i.e. read other things on the server).

<comment><USER3> Could you delete that link? I clicked on it out of habit, but tptacek's comment has me paranoid that my IP is going to end up in an investigation. I'm guessing other people would prefer to just not have the option to click on it.

<comment><USER4> Eh I think you're ok - if they're tracking visitors that closely, they'd know that you came to that link from here after it was already made public. Plus ycombinator.com gets a ton of traffic so I'm sure you're not the only one. :)

But yea, probably not a bad idea to delete that link anyway...

<comment><USER3> I don't think it would help my case if they knew the referring site was called Hacker News.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So I did a bit of digging and found the website in question:

<http://www.mythaichicago.com/default.asp>

Looks like they're still experiencing "issues" - <http://www.mythaichicago.com/order.asp?locationid=000004> reports:

      "Sorry, On-line ordering is currently undergoing service."

No clear indicator who the web design company behind it is though.

<comment><USER6> How did you dig that one backwards... ? As far as I could tell you only had an image of the site.....?

<comment><USER5> Yep just from images (and Google) - I examined one of the images from the post at a higher resolution (by clicking on it) and took a look at the map on the right-hand side.

It was a map of Thailand, so that gave me the type of restaurant. From there it was just a simple Google query combining that knowledge with the URL structure revealed in the blog post:

[http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=thai+restaurant+locationid%...](http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=thai+restaurant+locationid%3D000004)

Then it was just a case of working through the list of possibilities (it was second on that list) :-)

<comment><USER7> Good searching. Looks like you've found quite a few more vulnerable sites too.

<comment><USER8> I would wager to say a large majority of .asp sites out there are vulnerable to these types of issues.

Most were coded before common sanitization and security practices were observed during dev, not to mention built in to frameworks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The interview I feel worst about was when we had a "web programmer" coming in, and he linked his personal website as an example of what he could do. So, I found an XSS in his login form (first try, first field I tried...), showed it to him, and asked him what just happened. He did eventually get around to it, after two other wrong suggestions, but it took him some time.

Arguably, it was a kick-ass interview question, but I still feel sort of bad about it.

<comment><USER10> What do you mean you found an XSS "in his login form"?

The things you enter into a login form aren't normally displayed to any other users. If you mean you can run arbitrary JavaScript in your own browser, there are much easier ways to do that and you didn't find a vulnerability.

<comment><USER9> He displayed the value you entered as the user as part of the error message when your login failed, as in "User jerf does not exist." No escaping. Login form used GET, not POST. (Not that that fixes it, but the querystring is that much easier to exploit.) Classic XSS.

<comment><USER11> For it to be a XSS, the javascript has to run in a different context (someone else browser). I'd say the issue you found is worrisome, but not in itself a vulnerability.

<comment><USER9> Which rolls us right back around to the point made in the original article, which is that people just don't believe it's a problem until you damn well exploit it right in front of them. This can include programmers.

But to spell it out for you: Cross-site scripting includes as a vector the ability to cause a person to click on a hostile link and cause the resulting page to do something nasty and unexpected. Suppose I post a link in a forum that contains "?username=jerf'><span x='" and tell someone they have to log in. (I changed http to htt to bypass HN linkification.) Now their login goes to my proxy instead, which transparently steals the username and password, and bounces them back to the original site, leaving the user oblivious.

That's why I mentioned it used GET and not POST; it's somewhat harder to fake up a post in a forum (though it's not impossible, I've done it), but faking a "GET" is just a matter of typing the link in. Even if the forum displays the entire link, some people will click. Not everybody is a programmer.

As for whether this is a real threat, don't even _try_ to tell me this isn't, because I've _done_ this. I didn't steal any logins or do anything nasty, but I definitely got far enough to do it if I wanted to. (In fact, same problem: I tried to report it, and the site owner didn't believe it was a really- exploitable problem, either. Yeah... it was.) I don't even say this like it's a point of pride because it was like taking candy from a baby. Just start sticking ', ", and in the case of textareas, </textarea> in places they don't belong and you too will rapidly join the ranks of leet hacker.

(For double-bonus points, it is sometimes possible to create HTML content that will automatically fire Javascript off in a forum; try something like , just as one for-instance. Now, use a browser vuln to load your choice of spyware onto the user's machine. XSS is more important than it seems; in some cases it can lead to your viewer's machines getting completely owned.)

<comment><USER12> You can do much better than that onerror exploit if the site supports arbitrary  attributes, even if they filter everything correctly otherwise.

In IE6, and older versions of Opera,  is identical to


With 1,000 registered cooks, Chef Surfing has its focus set on Latin America - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/la/2013/01/24/with-1000-registered-cooks-chef-surfing-has-its-focus-set-on-the-latin-american-market/

<comment><USER2> I wonder if the success in Latin America is due to existing cultural norms where it is acceptable to eat food that has not been 'authorized', nor subject to crackdown, by a city health dept. In Argentina you can go to a person's home turned into a restaurant for a couple of nights a week, get an amazing meal and hang out with great people who also stumbled across the place. Some of the best meals ever in Buenos Aires were had in these places.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is true. The grey zone in which "Closed door restaurants" operate in Buenos Aires, for example, requires only that the chefs have catering licenses issued by local government fairly liberally.

Chef Surfing is a startup born in Buenos Aires and inspired by the independent chef movement of Argentina and South America. Our favorite purta cerrada Cocina Sunae [1] by chef Christina Sunae serves the best south-east asian food available in Buenos Aires. I highly recommend this place to tourists, expats and local Argentines!

[1] <http://www.cocinasunae.com/>

<comment><USER2> We had a perfect meal at Christina's, and perfectly paired with wine. I really hope this takes off - we also loved <http://colectivofelix.com>, it was more homely in feel and as it was smaller we were able to talk to the other guests, making for a great evening together. If this could become the airbnb of food, count me in as a life-time subscriber.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> We used the service once at Santiago, Chile.

Amazing experience. Much better than going to a restaurant.

<comment><USER4> which chef did you use? what was it for? i'm looking through and this seems like it could be great for when a bunch of people come round and expect food... but the idea that you can order a week's meals for $15.000 is also tempting (we're going to gain weight...).

<comment><USER3> We used chef Nancy (link is at the end. Was a "small group dinner" with around 7-8 people, we got Mexican Food :).

[https://chefsurfing.com/es/chefs/chile/region- metropolitana-...](https://chefsurfing.com/es/chefs/chile/region- metropolitana-de-santiago/santiago/chef-nancy)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the writeup Anna. Founder of Chef Surfing Eric Knudtson, please A.M.A.

<comment><USER2> Can I suggest not getting the geo info when using the site? It was confusing for me and several other people I've shown it to in the last minutes, as we get various cities with no entries, and it's not clear what cities/countries have actual chefs available. Once I selected Mexico for example, it was fine, but it's not clear where the service is actually available.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great suggestion, thank you Marquis! To everyone in California, we do have a few chefs signed up in San Francisco [1] and Oakland [2] although we've only just started to promote the site in the USA.

[1] [https://chefsurfing.com/en/chefs/united-states-of- america/ca...](https://chefsurfing.com/en/chefs/united-states-of- america/california/san-francisco) [2] [https://chefsurfing.com/en/chefs/united-states-of- america/ca...](https://chefsurfing.com/en/chefs/united-states-of- america/california/oakland)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been following them for months, and the team rocks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Gracias Senor Gluck!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> US needs to lighten up so we can get this here!

</comment><comment><USER7> I can't wait for this to break out of the Latin American market and get over here to Australia! :) I love the idea!

</comment><comment><USER8> Way to go Chef Surfing! I've been fortunate enough to meet Chef Nancy in Santiago thanks to them.</comment>


Why visiting your ancestral home feels so familiar: It's literally in your bones - <AUTHOR> https://matadornetwork.com/read/visiting-ancestral-home-feels-familiar-literally-bones/ <comment><USER2> Your DNA and the composition of your bones has no effect on whether a place "feels familiar" or not. This article is entertainment based on science, but without a clear distinction.

<comment><AUTHOR> I read it as poetic license.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Longest you've spent debugging a single issue? - <AUTHOR> Along the lines of this other HN posting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11729806
What is the longest you have spent in any code base, debugging a single issue.  What was it?
I personally spent approximately 15 days finding and fixing a race condition in a custom multiprocessor enabled 3d rendering engine, that I  was not part of writing.  It was reasonably early in my career but I feel would still take many back to back days to find a solution today.  Difference being I know the problem domain a lot better now to know how to break up the problem and where to look for issues.
In the last year, I think the longest is about 3 straight days on an embedded project tracking down bad values getting set seemingly at random (no JTAG etc). <comment><USER2> Two months. My first time programming .NET and learning on the job. I was creating an application to import data into SalesLogix using their API. It crashed whenever there was a single quote in a particular field. Not knowing much of anything at the time, I assumed it was my own code, so I hammered away at it. I raised the issue many times and never got help, so I just worked around it, knowing it would be a showstopper in production. One day, a co- worker casually mentions to me that I should use the latest version of their API. Sure enough, it worked.

Fuck SalesLogix, btw.

<comment><AUTHOR> Never used their API, that bad eh?

BTDT in just working around something because of time/cost constraints, but I have that personality that wants to understand and find the root cause even if we build a workaround. That is a good and bad trait, not everyone wants to pay for you to find the issue just cause you want to.

<comment><USER2> > Never used their API, that bad eh?

It was that bad back in 2003. Knowing what I know now, I would have pressed for a bug report, but it was/is one of those software packages where only a trained/certified person could contact support.

Back then, I knew 0. I had a computer science degree, some hobby programming, but it was nothing compared to real world programming.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> At my current job, 2 years, we have a bug that existed before I joined. However, I was able to provide an alternate solution to it. Its hard to quantify the time spent on it because it was always around. When it became a main focus it probably took me 2 weeks to get an alternate solution.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think this probably happens a lot of the time. Problems exist and existing team members give up on it until someone just says screw it, lets just rewrite that part of the code or someone new comes along and suggests something different.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Focused solely on one bug - probably about 1 week - which was finding a bug inside Apache Thrifts RPC protocol.

But I find you rarely spend time focused on one bug - not just for practical reasons, but this is usually not the best way to fix difficult bugs. If you focus directly on it you're in "alert problem solving mode" rather than "quiet reflective mode" and insight and creativity only come in quiet reflective mode.

I've solved so many bugs while playing minecraft, or standing in the shower, or walking to the train.

If only I could convince my boss that when I'm playing minecraft - I'm only distracting my immediate consciousness (is there a word for this) while my mind is actually reasoning about the bug / rubber ducking

</comment><comment><USER5> I guess hobby / less experienced programmers dont count in this answer.

My way of phrasing the question was: after how long should I quit debugging if unsucessful?

My answer to your question: a day or two, and not talking about advanced programming.

I havent read books about debugging yet but I started to track reasons for why things go wrong and I'm perplexed. Answering this question makes me feel like I tried to reinvent the wheel. That will determine me to read a book about debugging. Right now I want to find out all the reasons why bugs occur. I dont know much about other programmers, this is an interesting topic to read.

</comment><comment><USER6> Almost two years of my free time, trying to get node-gyp to install an npm package properly. I've been working on the same side-project for 5+ years now. One alpha, no release yet :(

<comment><USER7> damn 5 years looks too long

do you work little on it or just expand the features ?

<comment><USER6> It's ambitous, and when I started, I wasn't very good :)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you focus at work? - <AUTHOR> Ambient noise generators like mynoise and noisli have been a great help in getting dev and documentation work done amidst noisy workplaces. What about you? Is there anyone out there who doesnt need noise cancellation headphones or ambient noise generators to get focus intensive work done? <comment><USER2> Addy. 5 mg. Every other day.

I know this will be down-voted, but I've been having issues focussing at work and completing projects for the last 10 years or so.

Visited a Psychiatrist (in Palo Alto). After listening to my situation, she followed it up with a detailed Q & A. She then prescribed 5 mg XR (extended release) of Adderall. Apparently "mild ADHD" is a thing with software engineers in their 30s and up...

The difference has been night and day. I'm completely focussed now, in the zone. I've even gotten side-projects that were languishing for many years, done and shipped over 2 weekends!

I take it only on days I need to focus and get something done. I also take weekends off and also take 1 week per month completely off. This keeps me from building tolerance. Also 5 mg Addy is like the LOWEST dose dispensed, so I feel ok with it.

<comment><USER3> Adderall works but I find Vyvanse to be less intrusive and allows for greater behavioral flexibility which is a must if youre doing any kind of teamwork

Its been around for a while but compared to dexmethylphenidate, or Adderall proper, it doesnt have as much of the euphoria that makes it difficult to objectively assess work output, what with the slower acting formulation (but this seems kind of a given, since its a prodrug after all), it doesnt completely change your personality and you can more effectively context switch

edit: i have a perscription, due to attention span of a drosophilia melanogaster

<comment><USER2> Thanks for sharing.

Do you get good sleep with Vyvanse? The only -ve side effect I'm feeling from 5 mg XR Addy is that I fall asleep somewhat late (like mid-night or later) and wake up a couple of times, and get only 7 hours of sleep. Don't have headaches though, but I would love to get a deep sleep while on it.

<comment><USER3> I've been supplementing with a lot of vitamins despite the evidence that suggests that absorption of supplements is not the same as the ingestion of, for example, fish products to get naturally synthesized omega 3 protein. I've found that a mix of good foods that you enjoy eating, as well as other dietary changes mentioned above, has been a huge boon. Furthermore, any kind of exercise is good but I have found positive mood related changes as a response to recently getting an electric bike which has helped to get regular bursts of exercise throughout the day when I get bored of being around my apartment.

Much like how interleaved learning is a key trick to use to deeply learn subject matter, I've found interleaving a diverse set of activities has been key to finding that physical "balance" \- human body itself is more than sophisticated enough to handle the self regulation itself but without the right component inputs your jets aren't going to be running at peak performance

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This sounds like a silly trick, but I literally put a post-it on my monitor with the name of the task I'm currently working on.

It's very easy to get distracted by things in my environment and on my screen, and just seeing a sign in my line of vision that says something like "making redlines for mobile screens" helps me re-focus.

\</comment><comment>---

Edited to add: the task needs to be something specific, not an abstract like "doing UX work." I take advantage of Asana's sub-tasks to try and break down all my work into the most robot-like steps possible. That keeps me focused on the task itself, instead of figuring out what my next step is.

<comment><USER5> It's not silly at all; it's a good trick. It's one that the Pomodoro technique uses, and at least one piece of productivity software (Vitamin-R) that I know of. Having a clear immediate-term goal is very valuable for getting stuff done. Just _defining_ it is a good start; having it in front of your face can't hurt either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I listen to a lot of music and try to make myself work at late hours, when nobody else is around. ADHD medication helped me over the years as well, and allows me to function well every day.

The best way I've ever been able to explain my thought process is as a branching tree, in which the trunk is the primary focus and the branches are the wandering paths that I think of along the way. Unmedicated I cannot help but only suggest where to think, but when medicated I can choose.

Luckily I can make my own hours or else I can't really manage much social interaction without needing to leave.

</comment><comment><USER7> Get a Bose QC 35, it will change your life and also your future flights.

<comment><USER8> Many have said that noise cancellation does not work for coworkers' voices. Is that your experience or are these for another reason?

<comment><USER9> The QC's don't completely wash out background noise. If you listen to your music loud enough (which is probably too loud), you literally won't hear anything around you. But normal use, I find that it muffles outside voices enough not to get distracted, but not so much to the point where if someone says my name I can respond. An added plus, is people will bother you less if you're wearing them. Sometimes I like wearing them without listening to any music, just to create a quieter environment.

<comment><USER10> I do this too, sometimes I just don't want to listen to other people in the other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> [https://musicforprogramming.net/?two](https://musicforprogramming.net/?two) is something that my wife uses with success.

<comment><USER12> Can attest to musicforprogramming's effectivity, I literally only remember the first 5 minutes of every mix before I totally zone in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Ozric Tentacles. Psychedelic Space Rock. Maybe two songs with lyrics in 30 years of albums.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the suggestion. I've never heard them before, this is great focusing music.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> At my current work my main distraction is in my peripheral vision as I can see every move made by co-workers either side of me. I'm seriously considering buying sunglasses with side shields or some type of goggle, similar to a race horse. In the spirit of Cato the Elder, Open Offices must be destroyed!

<comment><USER15> I have a pair of Julbo sunglasses I use for skiing - those would work great and they stay on your ears even during frenzied hacking sessions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> When I'm struggling to focus I just walk away from my desk. It doesn't matter where I go or what I do. I spend up to 10 minutes letting myself think about whatever my mind naturally brings to the table. Usually when I return to my desk the distractions I was struggling with no longer bother me.

</comment><comment><USER17> I just don't focus and bounce around everywhere :D

But seriously, I try and psychotically keep Jira updated. It probably drives the PM crazy, but it's very satisfying to see your progress grow, and especially satisfying to close a ticket.

<comment><USER18> Kudos for keeping JIRA up to date. As I PM I am fine with that. If devs just kept JIRA a little up to date then it saves me and them the hassle of checking in on the status of things, I can just look it up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Pomodoro timer.

I work for 25 minutes at a time then take 5 minute breaks. This is more to help me start getting into flow. I know I don't do it right, but I'll start the pomodoro and that's my minimum. If I'm really into what I'm working on I'll see my time is up and commit to an additional work cycle or two.

It also helps me track what I'm working on and how long each task takes me. And gives me set breaks in which I get to write comments on HN, like this one :-)

</comment><comment><USER20> Active noise cancelling headphones. Monitors set up to block rest of the office including peripheral vision. Wall behind my back.

Slack notifications and all in browser notifications off.

</comment><comment><USER21> Communicate with your team a physical signal for what is focus time and when you're open to "office hours." The simplest example could be "if I have headphones on" or you can have some sort of trinket on your desk that shows when you're free or when you need to focus.

That combined with proper away messaging on Slack/IM, you should be able to get focused chunks of time

</comment><comment><USER22> 1) A bit of Adderall 15mg XR on the days I need it

2) An excellent automatic-time-tracker app, the transparency into your own habits is life-changing: [https://www.rescuetime.com/](https://www.rescuetime.com/)

3) NC headphones: Sony WH1000XM2 [https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B074KDJVS2/ref=oh_aui_se...](https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B074KDJVS2/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1) ORRRR apple's AirPods

</comment><comment><USER23> Every trick helps, but when you actually get to work and into the flow, the room might be noisy or you might be hungry and you don't even notice. So I try to achieve that state more frequently. Its hard..

</comment><comment><USER24> I hope that this isn't the culprit for you, but I was having a lot of trouble focusing. I kept finding lifestyle reasons for it (a life of attention issues plus a newborn baby were near the top of the list), but then my health went to hell.

Turns out that my blood pressure was through the roof. I fixed that and I can focus again.

I genuinely hope that your blood pressure is fine, but seriously, if this is a new thing, it might be a good idea to see a doctor for a checkup. From experience, it's far better to catch blood pressure early than when you end up in a cardiac unit...

</comment><comment><USER25> As someone who grew up next to a highway in a place with constantly-on TVs, i don't notice most kinds of noise, so i can't offer any advice on that front.

What was a distraction in my case was internet browsing. This got solved by having a dedicated tablet for all sorts of non-essential browsing, and the work computers never having anything but work-related links.

You'd think that's not going to matter, but the little bit of friction that created was enough.

</comment><comment><USER26> By work being more interesting than being bored out of my mind. If the work's boring though, an album or two from my collection; C418's One is pretty great.

</comment><comment><USER27> For me, I have found it hard to focus mostly only when I have another externality in my life on my mind or something outside of work causing stress (mentally).

I also like to listen to video game music via rainwave.cc (OCRemix Radio basically), Bandcamp, or (this may be strange) the classic Retronauts podcasts (still available on Archive.org, not the new ones).

</comment><comment><USER28> \- Disabled notifications. \- I take long walks, frequently. \- Cancel noising headphones

</comment><comment><USER29> I found this post on HN (and ensuing comments) maybe the most ironic of all time.

</comment><comment><USER30> Oh, yes, ambient/white noise has changed my life. I even use white noise for sleeping (via sleep headband), much better than ear plugs

</comment><comment><USER31> Have kids at home.

</comment><comment><USER32> Currently I get my best work done in a cafe. Usually, without using headphones. There is the usual cafe background noises.

I find it hard to work from my small apartment, whether family is around or not, music or no music.

I forget the term but I think it has to do with the fact that I use this same room to watch TV, play video games, sleep, and eat meals. My desk and bed are only inches apart.

</comment><comment><USER33> I try not to read/post on HN.

</comment><comment><USER34> Classical music or alpha waves, with a pair of decent Sennheiser over-the-ear headphones.

</comment><comment><USER35> Goa trance

<comment><USER36> Wow, surprised to see this genre here, I listed to Goa Trance/Psy Trance music when trying to focus at work.

<comment><USER37> I'd also add techno and albums/mixes of any genre which I have listened to a lot previously.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> i use self control app and [https://www.noisli.com/](https://www.noisli.com/)

</comment><comment><USER39> not reading hacker news lol

</comment><comment><USER40> Playing _London Calling_ , on repeat. Turning the volume up to 9, not 11.

</comment><comment><USER41> Meta: Curious how a dup of this comment is downvoted into oblivion under a different account and this is at the top.

<comment><USER42> We detached this comment from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17545540](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17545540) and marked it off-topic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> The OP makes it sound like inability to focus is a normal thing, but it's not.

I've never used white noise or headphones to improve focus, and it's rare that co-workers ever use headphones.

So maybe investigate whether the problem is you or the office. Or if you really understand what you're being paid to do - I can write documentation and diagrams effortlessly.

<comment><USER44> > The OP makes it sound like inability to focus is a normal thing, but it's > not.

But it is normal. When there are noises and distractions all around your desk, of course it's hard to focus.

It's also normal to be able to drown all those things out, and completely zone it out and focus on work.

It's also normal to thrive on activity, getting your best work done in a busy environment.

It really depends on the kind of work you are doing, and the kind of person you are. There is a wide spectrum of what is "normal".

There is a simple reason that libraries/exam rooms/lecture halls are not full of distraction. People focus better without distraction.</comment></comment>


Verdict for Google in Oracle's patent infringement case - <AUTHOR> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120523125023818 <comment><AUTHOR> A few thoughts on this:

Google had pushed for a fall trial date at the earliest but Oracle argued vigorously (and successfully) for an immediate date on grounds that the case was ready with Google only playing for time. To induce the judge to give it an early trial date, Oracle offered to dismiss with prejudice all patents that had been rejected in a final office action by the USPTO subject to reinstatement in the event the PTO reversed itself prior to the start of trial. Trial started on April 16 and, lo and behold, the PTO did reverse itself concerning one significant patent (the '702 patent) such that Oracle would normally have been able to pursue its claims for infringement based on that patent. However, it did so a few days _after_ the trial had started. As a result, that claim wound up being finally dismissed for purposes of this lawsuit. Oracle tried to renege and pushed the judge to reinstate the claim but the judge said no (decision here: ([http://www.scribd.com/doc/91307218/Oracle-denied-using- reviv...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/91307218/Oracle-denied-using-revived- patent-vs-Google\)\[pdf\])).

Thus, Oracle screwed itself as a result of having charged full speed with tomahawk swinging wildly in the air. In pushing aggressively for tactical advantage, it essentially threw away the one patent claim that had any potential for viability (the two patent claims on which it lost at trial were in fact relatively weak, with one of the two patents about to go down before the USPTO and set in any event to expire in December, among other things).

Oracle now finds itself in a deep hole. It won a few crumbs in the copyright phase and got skunked on the patent phase. More copyright drama to follow as the judge rules on API copyrightability. Oracle _might_ win on that issue, as it is a tricky one under Ninth Circuit law (see <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3980642>), but it then faces a retrial in which the judge would give much more refined instructions on what it means to infringe the SSO of the Java APIs than he gave in the first trial - <USER2> that and the (I think, formidable) fair use defense that Google has, it is strictly an uphill fight for Oracle from here on out. (By the way, Google has done a _masterful_ job of arguing the issue of why APIs should not be copyrightable and, for those inclined to read through a superb legal brief on the issues, here it is: <http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/OraGoogle-1137.pdf>).

Oracle may yet rally if a lot of things go its way. I wouldn't bet on it though. Much more likely, in my view, is that the case becomes a testament to what happens when a party makes a high-stakes opportunistic legal grab that goes badly awry. What Larry Ellison set out to justify as Oracle's vindication has instead become Oracle's folly.

<comment><USER3> Sorry for the stupid question that ignores the rest of your excellent summary:

"dismiss with prejudice"

What does 'with prejudice' imply here? I've seen this used many times in various government/legal contexts ('cancelled without prejudice') etc...

What does the 'with/without prejudice' part mean?

<comment><USER4> It means that the judgment is final and the case cannot be reopened.

See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_%28law%29>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Kudos to the jury. They put a lot of effort into understanding the issue at hand. Based on courtroom reporting, the jury paid attention and they asked clarifying questions while deliberating to make sure they understood. Software patents are a mess. Oracle's arguments were terrible from a CS standpoint (and their expert should be embarrassed).

I believe the only issue still on the table is API copyrightability which Judge Aslup will rule on as a matter of law. The jury found for Oracle in that instance because the jury instructions essentially mandated it. I expect Aslup will rule for Google on that claim as well.

Oracle's current claim for money is literally for 9 lines of code called rangeCheck (which anyone in a high school intro to java class could write), and 8 test files copied by a subcontractor and never distributed to end users.

A certain Oracle paid blogger will still manage to post how Oracle basically got everything it wanted.

<comment><USER6> Who's the paid blogger?

<comment><USER7> Most likely a reference to Florian Mueller, of <http://www.fosspatents.com/>

Detail: [http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/04/19/1357207/florian- muell...](http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/04/19/1357207/florian-mueller-outs- himself-as-oracle-employee)

<comment><USER8> Is there any evidence that PJ is not a paid blogger herself? At least Florian was honest to declare on his blog that he was paid by Oracle to do some work and his blog might be tainted by that.

<comment><USER9> Your ad hominem is rather disgusting. Put up evidence or shut up.

I called Florian as a corporate shill here more than a year ago based on publicly available information. I believe him "outing himself" is more recent.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2128882>

Edit: Also pj called it. <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120419070127103>

<comment><USER10> PJ called it alright. No offense but Groklaw's behaviour against Florian has been nothing short of disgraceful and extremely immature.

Who cares if Florian is being paid by Microsoft et al ? It happens all the time amongst bloggers and doesn't mean jack to me. EVERYONE is biassed in some way. Whether through money, previous experiences or external pressures. As a reader you should always consult multiple sources.

It's been really disappointing watching the great work that Groklaw do be sullied by all these personal attacks.

<comment><USER11> Really? Who cares who's paying your news source? Isn't possible bias one of the most important issues when it comes to trusting a source?

There are degrees of bias and as a reader why would you want to waste your time reading from a source known to have a massive conflict of interest?

I definitely appreciate knowing about a source's bias.

<comment><USER12> It's certainly fine to know about it, IMO, but all of the internet taunting seems immature and unnecessary.

<comment><USER13> Part of the taunting now is in response to his past behavior.

Florian repeatedly refused to talk about his funding and insisted it was irrelevant (he has a history at lwn.net among other places). Now that we know the full context, people on the other side of that argument naturally want to underline it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What I want to know now is where we go on the copyright. The judge is taking an incredibly long time working on that. The speculation I've read says that this may be good for Google, but who knows?

I saw a comment from Grellas on a prior story that said that the judge has some crazy precedents to deal with in his circuit and they can't freely adopt the Borland case's logic without dealing with them. I'd like to know how the request for briefs on Sony v. Connectix figures into that. Is that case from the same circuit? If so, that would really make me believe that he's working on a pro-Google ruling. After all, it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a finding of infringement. You only have a lot of justification to do if you want to find non-infringement.

Finally, I wonder what, if any, the impact of the juror telling us that is was 9-3 in favor of Google will be. Does that help support a finding of fair use or not?

That said, I'm glad to hear that Google has been cleared of infringing upon these absurd patents. I just hope they still get invalidated too, so that no one else ever has to worry about them.

</comment><comment><USER15> Almost as memorable as the verdict will be the outright shame and absurdity that was the "rangeCheck defense." It made a mockery of the system and was insulting to the judge and jury. "Check upper bound, check lower bound, throw exception. You can't explain that!"

<comment><USER16> Could you elaborate on that? I'm familiar with the rangeCheck() issue, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say about it.

<comment><USER15> rangeCheck's implementation is a baby step above "Hello World". Oracle's lawyer stood up in front of a judge and jury and tried to claim that that function and Joshua Bloch's admission that he copied it was evidence of Google's guilt. Basically, he tried to take advantage of their lack of domain knowledge to fool them into thinking this was a real Thing Worth Deliberating. Turns out his ploy failed since the judge knew wtf he was talking about and actually codes.

A (flawed) analogy would be if it were a case around the copyright infringement of a book whereby the author, at a new company, copied the phrase "Table of Contents" from a previous novel and pasted it into his new book's table of contents at the head of the page. Anyone with half a brain that understands the domain of writing realizes this is elementary and outside of the scope of what constitutes real, novel IP. Arguing such a point reveals you want to exploit the ignorance of your audience to not know that "Table of Contents" is a phrase used in the industry and obvious to come up with on your own to describe that part of the book. Basically, once the jig is up and the audience knows you're full of it, every claim you make downstream from there ("I know it would take me months to be able to write rangeCheck") makes you look even worse.

The reason this is memorable to me is it makes it as transparent as one could hope as to who in the room was arguing based upon reality, and who was arguing to win. For a software company to do this is an embarrassment since we are supposed to be increasing computer literacy not exploit computer illiteracy to our own advantage.

<comment><USER16> Ah, I was thrown off because you said "rangeCheck defense" -- it sounds like you meant "rangeCheck offense".

<comment><USER15> Ah yes, I was implying a similarity to the "Chewbacca defense" in its stupidity :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Fantastic news for Google and the rest of the world. And a good thing for the other Larry as well, at least now he has some confirmation that he really isn't god.

Next up, the appeal.

<comment><USER18> I don't know. I was kinda hoping Google will license Java for Andorid, and we'll have one Java instead of two.

<comment><USER19> That's not Google's choice. Sun and Oracle are the ones refusing to allow the Java trademark to be used by an open-source implementation for a mobile platform.

<comment><USER20> I think Oracle would allow it if the price was right. The problem is that "one Java" probably means Java SE, which means you have to use bloat like JAR files and Swing/AWT, which would make Android less competitive with iOS.

<comment><USER21> Would it really help if someone paid $Nbn for the Java label for some snapshot of Harmony or whatever? Open source software (which is open in spirit, not just by name) is always a moving target. As soon as you fork it, it's no longer covered by the license. And when is it a fork, exactly?

<comment><USER20> I don't think anybody's talking about a snapshot. During the Sun/Google negotiations there was discussion of an ongoing partnership where Google would be forced to adopt new versions of Java as the JCP released them. Google didn't want the JCP backseat-driving Android, so they declined.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> We all knew Google would win. Next up the imminent appeal (if Oracle want to get themselves butt hurt a second time). If the jury and judge had ruled that API's were copyrightable, who knows what that could have done to sites like Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and any other site that relies on a third party framework, library or piece of code to functionally operate.

Oracle are the rotting enterprise dinosaur that refuses to accept evolution and adapt or just die. The patent system is a absolute joke.

<comment><USER23> Oracle are unlikely to appeal, especially because it was a jury case.

>If the jury and judge had ruled that API's were copyrightable, who knows what that could have done to sites like Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and any other site that relies on a third party framework, library or piece of code to functionally operate.

The jury did see that Google infringed copyright by implementing the APIs, however this doesn't impact others in the way you've stated because using an API isn't the same as copying someone else's, and even then it was still narrowly defined.

>Oracle are the rotting enterprise dinosaur that refuses to accept evolution and adapt or just die.

This isn't all true, while I'm certain their motivation was not in the right place to begin with, the case they brought did have merits regarding the fragmentation of java. (As there are similarities to the microsoft case.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> FTA plus amen: "Patents and software need to get a divorce before somebody gets hurt. The damage is astounding, and the IP is so puny. There is an imbalance in the legal universe, and it needs fixing."

</comment><comment><USER25> Great news for Google, Android, and an entire ecosystem. Bad news for my ORCL stock :/

<comment><USER26> Why do you have ORCL stock?

<comment><USER27> I bought Oracle stock (not much) years ago after watching the final part of Triumph of the Nerds, where Larry Ellison laid out his vision of a thin-client future. He was basically right, although where he saw Oracle serving as the backend infrastructure for this glorious new future, Google and other internet-oriented startups have stepped in.

What I really wanted to buy, I see now, was Google stock. But it didn't exist at that point and when Google's IPO came along a few years later I didn't have enough discretionary income to bother.

<comment><USER28> Yeah Larry came out pretty good in that interview. But it was a different time for sure. (Mid 90s right?) I think in the end greed surpass his ability to implement his vision.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This post made it to #1 on HN in less than 10 minutes.

Is this a record?

<comment><USER30> Don't all posts start at #1 immediately, then trail away until they get upvotes? Or is that just how a user sees their own submissions?

<comment><USER17> You see it as #1 on the 'newest' page, but not on the 'new' page.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> "$6 billion damages" headlines sell more ads is all

<comment><USER32> "Oracle loses $6 billion" should sell pretty well, too. To bad it won't happen, though--it would be nice to have some blowback temper jackassery and chest-thumping.

<comment><USER10> "Oracle CEO kills kittens" also. It's equally as accurate and makes just as much sense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Can someone explain what the practical outcomes are of this verdict? For programmers and companies?

<comment><USER34> This particular one? Not much. But its good news to hear that a jury isn't to be fooled by mispresenting facts.

Oracle literally tried to present dexopt as a dynamic optimizer, because it optimizes for the hardware/software configuration on your smartphone. Thats coming from the makers of the HotSpot VM.

<comment><USER35> I would rather say that Oracle tried to present "dynamic" as a word which refers to what dexopt does. Because there was no dispute over what dexopt does, only over what "dynamic" means.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> > Patents and software need to get a divorce before somebody gets hurt.

Well said.

</comment><comment><USER37> That's good news for the Android and Java community. One less patent roadblock looming over the heads.

</comment><comment><USER38> Oh thank goodness ! Finally its over. I hope Oracle learns some kind of lesson from this.

</comment><comment><USER39> This seems like (yet another) suit that never should have been filed to begin with. Everyone lost time, and everyone except the lawyers and the court (court fees) lost money.

<comment><USER10> You're not serious ? This is EXACTLY the type of suits that should be filed.

There were legitimate issues to be discussed and it made the entire software industry think about what it means for an API to be copyrighted, defense of software patents etc. This decision has set a precedent that we may not see repeated again.

I say it was absolutely worth it.

<comment><USER40> Actually the API copyright question has not been answered yet - the judge has yet to rule on whether it's copyrightable, and the jury hung on whether it's fair use.

This case is not over.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> And now we can re-tweet at the Florian Mueller dick (the bastard at FOSS patents) how wrong he was. Check that dick's article:

[http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/jury-doesnt-find- google-t...](http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/jury-doesnt-find-google-to- infringe-two.html)

<comment><USER42> You realize that you're just giving him more publicity, which is what his end- goal is. No one will pay him to be a shill if he doesn't have an audience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> On a sidenote:

I think most people should be much more questionable about groklaw. I am big open source and FSF advocate, but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power.

I hope it's just a conspiracy theory. But I do think that anonymity works both ways; it can imply that you want to say the truth unencumbered, but it also can imply astroturfing.

Just because the wind blows this way doesn't mean it always will.

<comment><USER44> > but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much > larger power.

Proof? Anything? This line has been used since the early days of SCO. I've never seen anything resembling proof.

Indeed, Groklaw has earned the trust I give them. Do not mistake ignorance for insightfulness.

<comment><USER45> I really like the blog and its my go to site for legal software news and I don't think there is some kind of higher power backing it but I'm still very careful with everything I read there. I haven't seen any evidence of corporate backing, but there is no attempt to hide bias. Its definitely far from an objective news source.

<comment><USER19> What bias? You may be confusing _bias_ with _opinion_. "Equal time" is not unbiased reporting, and having a clear opinion is not bias, unless your opinion turns out to be consistently _wrong_.

<comment><USER46> The editorializing gets tiresome when I just want to find out what happened during the trial. It feels like reading the Daily Mail; you can get actual news from there, but you have to be constantly on your guard against osmosing their opinions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I am not a girl but...yay!

<comment><USER48> huh?</comment></comment>


Why I quit Twitter - <AUTHOR> https://nypost.com/2019/12/26/why-i-quit-twitter-and-you-should-too/ <comment><USER2> >I decided to quit Twitter this year after tweeting a joke about neutron- bombing a journalism school.

Sounds more like he was forced off the platform.

<comment><USER3> Or he realized it was making him pander in a way that was unprofessional and wished to stop it.

Some of the greatest music compositions ever written (Bach's Mass in B Minor, and Bach's Chaconne) were not written for the approval of an echo chamber. They were written to satisfy his personal notions of beauty, and in the case of the Chaconne, to record his feelings about his life with his wife. In fact, incredibly, they were never performed while Bach was alive.

When Bach wrote for approval, for acknowledgement of form, you got things like the Brandenburg concertos. Fancy, showing off... Bach made sure that the listener would not have to work at all to see his adherence to form. They are lesser pieces of music because of this.

Mr. Podhoretz is not the J.S. Bach of the written word. But even so, what art he possesses necessarily suffers for being expressed in the panderdrome that is Twitter. Do it for long enough and it diminishes you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Anything in excess is simply unhealthy. Advising people who aren't addicted to quit is not good advice.

<comment><USER5> Maybe Twitter is like smoking Styrofoam?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> He didn't quit Twitter. He switched to read-only.

</comment><comment><USER7> TLDR: You should quit tweeting if, like him, you tweet 50+ times a day and you occasionally tweet obnoxious insults or bad jokes which get you ratioed.</comment>


Your Fat Needs Sleep Too - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=your-fat-needs-sleep-too-12-10-16&WT.mc_id=SA_sharetool_Twitter <comment><USER2> That's great news, it really is.

But I'm always curious as to the direction of causation.

I would love to sleep more - sure. If only it were that easy. I cannot get a good night sleep for the life of me. Eliminating legumes and gluten, along with a shitton of crossfit has left me with the best results so far.

I guess I'm not making too grandiose a point. All I'm saying is that people that are over weight may not be sleeping well because they are over weight and not the other way around.

<comment><USER3> > I cannot get a good night sleep for the life of me.

Try low-dose Melatonin combined with 5HTP and stay away from backlit displays for an hour before bed [1]. Large doses of Melatonin leave me groggy the next day, but small doses give me a solid night of sleep and eliminates the bags under my eyes. 5HTP seems to augment the effect and promote a more positive mood the next day.

[1] [http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=3074&setappva...](http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=3074&setappvar=page%281%29)

"Our study shows that a two-hour exposure to light from self-luminous electronic displays can suppress melatonin by about 22 percent. Stimulating the human circadian system to this level may affect sleep in those using the devices prior to bedtime," said Figueiro.

<comment><USER4> Note that you can automatically adjust the display colour temperature to match the time. I use this and it makes a huge difference.

On Linux use Redshift. On other operating systems use f.lux.

<http://jonls.dk/redshift/>

<http://stereopsis.com/flux/>

When you toggle/disable them you realise just what a difference it makes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think sleep research is one of the most interesting areas. We still have no clear explanation as to why we sleep, or what purpose sleep serves. The best we can do right now is list the problems that arise if we don't sleep.

<comment><USER6> I'm pretty sure it has something to do with living for millions of years in this place that has a day/night cycle and how limited the crucial visual sense is in the dark. Might as well save your power for when you are at your most effective.

<comment><USER5> That's true to a certain extent, but sleep is more than just conserving energy. People who don't or can't sleep start to have all sorts of problems. There's something fundamental to how our bodies and brains work that we do while we sleep, and that's interesting (doubly so because we don't understand how it works).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "after sleep deprivation, the cells became 30 percent less receptive to insulin signals"

Let's see, insulin causes lypogenesis; signaling fat cells to store energy as fat.

Sleep deprivation causes fat cells to be less receptive to insulin...

So, pass me the doughnuts while I stay up for the next week.

<comment><USER8> I know this was tongue in cheek, but:

insulin insensitivity = adult onset diabetes

so be prepared to have some toes or feet amputated (or to maybe just go blind) if you stay up with those donuts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I would love to see studies like this that further explore the relationship between length of time spent sleeping and health/behavioural benefits.

For this study, did they choose 8.5 and 4.5 hours arbitrarily? Probably not, but a comparison over more gradated time intervals would be really interesting.

<comment><USER10> Coincidentally I can't sleep longer than 8.5 hours (no matter what) and if I get 4.5 hours of sleep or less I'm absolutely worthless.

I'd have qualified for the study if it wasn't for that damn athletic requirement!

<comment><USER9> I think there is quite a body of literature around why 8-8.5 hours is a good amount, what I really want to see is what the different benefits as functions of sleep time looks like. That information would be invaluable for doing a min-max optimisation.

6 hours tends to be my reasonable 'short sleep' time, where anything less and I am significantly tired during the day, but I am easily capable of sleeping all day if the opportunity arises. Usually, however, I think I get 7-8 hours, which tends to be ok.

A big factor also seems to be breathing function throughout sleep. I think I breathe poorly while sleeping and so don't have quite as good a sleep as I could otherwise.

<comment><USER11> > _where anything less and I am significantly tired_

From what I have read, the ideal amount of sleep needed is quite personal and some people are fine with 6 to 7 hours while others just need 9 - but pretty much all studies consistently showed that less than 6 is definitely not enough and when sleeping less than 6 hours for a longer time you might even have hallucinations and at the very least your overall performance will suffer.

So I think you are doing it right. You might want to experiment with those 90 minute sleep phase calculations like sleepyti.me or others.

> _A big factor also seems to be breathing function throughout sleep_

Absolutely! Sleep apnea is VERY serious and one of those things that prevent you from getting a good night of sleep for a lot of (very) large people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> ZMA Max is pretty good. Though have given me the strangest REM dreams of my life.</comment>


Ask HN: Would you still by Apple stock? - <AUTHOR>

I know they are the largest company in the the world now, so I don't expect them to double.  While on the other hand, there was a recent hn article that they still only had 8% of the worlds cell phone market.  What are your thoughts, and better yet your quantitative analysis? <comment><USER2> Their launches are not beating customer expectations as they once used to - think iPhone 1, iPod, Nano, Air and compare that to today's launch of the iPad. Was that launch revolutionary, or modest?

This point alone doesn't mean that they are not a bet worth taking. But that, taken along with the fact that they're now facing tougher odds growing 20% or 30% per annum on already massive sales figures makes it harder to justify investing in them in order to make huge returns. ([http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/business/apple- confronts-t...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/business/apple-confronts- the-law-of-large-numbers-common-sense.html?pagewanted=all))

Lastly, and most importantly, society, especially a free one, always finds a way to mobilize against those that are deemed too powerful. The simple argument here is that in order to scale past the law of large numbers and continue to deliver "predictable" growth to the Street, companies sometimes have to push against the limits of acceptable business practices. We have seen that with Walmart, Microsoft, Exxon, BP, AT&T not to mention the robber barons of old.

Free societies, especially representative democracies check such growth with regulation (sometimes necessary, sometimes far reaching, but in its ideal - self-correcting). The same sorts of regulations that prevented AT&T (of old think Ma Bell) and Microsoft from extending its reach, will soon affect Apple. One can argue, it already has. What with lax supervision of its subcontractors in China etc (Foxconn)

That said, I am very impressed with how quickly Apple responded to these accusations, and tended to being more open than closed. An instinct not easily attributed to Apple.

In closing. Apple is probably a safe place to park your cash to hedge inflation. Perhaps even enjoy 4-5% YoY growth averaged aver 10 years. But blockbuster, maybe not.

</comment><comment><USER3> There's a lot of talk about Apple starting to pay out dividends to stock holders. This could be huge for two reasons. The obvious being that you start making money now rather than waiting for capital growth. The second, less obvious, is that some investors hold the rule that you don't buy stocks that don't pay dividends. If Apple started to pay dividends it would open doors to even more investors. I would assume this would help their stock rise at an even faster rate.

I would still buy Apple stock if I had the cash on hand. I think a possible split would make the stock even more attractive as well. ~530/share makes it somewhat hard to make a meaningful investment.

<comment><USER4> I've been a shareholder since 2007 and I would seriously consider selling if they offered a dividend. Offering dividends is not what true growth companies with good plans for the future do. FWIW, I'm far from risk-averse; I wouldn't invest in a single company that offers a dividend due to the implied lack of growth and innovation that is implied by giving away retained earnings that could be used for R&D, strategic acquisitions and new business initiatives. In Apple's case, this includes new markets/products, increased retail exposure and strategic exclusive supply chain deals.

I hope, for Apple's sake and our own, that they don't offer a dividend anywhere in the near future, if ever.

<comment><USER5> This is correct. It would be a huge event if Apple started paying dividends and I'm fairly certain the market would not react kindly to that. The reason is, the market is pricing the Apple stock high due to what they think is coming in the future. They see lots of growth and expect the stock to increase in price. If Apple starts pay a dividend, that means they have decided that they aren't a high growth company anymore, and more of a stable giant (CocaCola, GE, etc). So all the analysts who thought they were going to have a certain amount of sales and growth have to readjust their predictions. Lower earnings predictions = lower stock price.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wouldn't invest in a single company nor would I try invest in specific companies. This is because I believe in the so called "Efficient-market hypothesis"[1].

tl;dr: "one cannot consistently achieve returns in excess of average market returns on a risk-adjusted basis, given the information available at the time the investment is made"

There are many studies that have shown this.

Even if you think you are better informed than the average Apple shareholder - this doesn't matter in the long-run. You may be lucky of course and make a lot of money - but in the long-term average case investing in specific companies is not better than investing in something like the Dow Jones.

Also - the stock market is a highly irrational market that can be shown by a little experiment - I will make it concrete:

As 100 people the following question: Do you think that you know more about Apple than the average Apple investor? Yes or no?

In a perfect world you should get 50 x "yes" and 50 x "no" as an answer. But in reality more than 50% answer with "yes".

</comment><comment><USER7> I would buy it and I do think it will hit $800 or even up to $1,000 if it doesn't split. Why? In addition to all the exciting products they're putting out, they are JUST starting to get into the iPhone 4/4S business in China. The market over there is at least as big if not slightly bigger than the market here in the U.S. So is there room for them to double their cell phone market share? Yes, definitely. Does iPhones lead people to buy other Apple products like tablets and laptops? Yes.

Whether it's sustainable in the long term or not, there is definitely room for growth in the short term.

</comment><comment><USER4> I've been an investor since 2007 and though I still fully believe in the company and its continued growth, I feel that the stock price's exponential growth in recent months is out of line with it's actual performance. Don't get me wrong, the price should be rising, but not this quickly. Broader market forces are at play in this and I would expect a market correction to occur in the coming weeks or months, which will have a significant effect on AAPL because it has a beta hovering around 2. Of course, the question is: When will the correction take place?

</comment><comment><USER8> Give it some time. For all we know they're in dead reckoning[1] mode right now, where the last fix on their coordinates came from Steve Jobs. They'll continue to extrapolate along their current path but just wait until the winds of change arrive. I think they're hoping to cash in on this period of time between now and when you realize they don't know what the next hotness is.

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

<comment><AUTHOR> I suppose the question is, assuming they are dead reckoning, is the current stock price 531 asking too much, or is there still profit to be made?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I work with stock market data daily (providing charts and technical alerting to end users) and the kind of growth Apple is having is just not sustainable, I mean it's gone from $320 last Jan to $532 today!

I am a fan of Apple products, but I just dont see it as a good investment, I would suspect that it will either level off or have to talk a fall soon.

So my personal preference is do not buy Apple, I wouldn't (even if I could stomach $525 per share!)

</comment><comment><USER10> I had the same thoughts. In my experience, exponential growth in stock price is unsustainable, and usually results in a correction. Since the question is really how long do we have until a correction, I would say two to four weeks. TL;DR - Don't buy now.

</comment><comment><USER11> I still would buy but observe the company closely and how they do with iPad3, iPhone5 and Apple TV... specially at launch and during/after the holiday season

</comment><comment><USER12> Do you like money?

(I'm personally excited for Mountain Lion, how iBook market will shape the field, next gen iPad, so I'm rather optimistic about Apple)

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm excited with where Siri can go as well. Maybe I'm suffering from the "it can go an higher" bias.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I would stay the hell away from it. I might start considering shorting it soon (but buy protective calls to hedge the short)

</comment><comment><USER14> Yeah, there's still time to buy Apple Stock. I asked myself the same thing this time last year when it was around $300. Prediction: $800 by 2014.</comment>


Stanford University requires remote access to students' iPhones - <AUTHOR> http://imgur.com/8oxYN34 All Stanford students were recently required to install this app on their phones and their Stanford accounts were blocked until they complied. <comment><USER2> What do you mean by "requires?" That disclaimer is the boilerplate iOS disclaimer for enrolling the device for mdm, which is generally useful for pushing profiles for wireless access, vpn, e-mail, etc... I'm not sure what their policy is, but I doubt it is as nefarious as your submission implies.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is this real?

If it is, then these are early signs of that dying model, you know. I don't mean to say that the case of these overreaching universities is as bad as that of Hollywood/MPAA but traits are similar. It's a good thing for education space in tech, not so good for those who will be a part of the brick and mortar model during transition.

My 2 cents.</comment>


JOHN MCAFEE: The NSA's back door has given every US secret to our enemies - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-nsa-back-door-gives-every-us-secret-to-enemies-2016-2 <comment><USER2> I'm not a blackhatter. I barely have a hat. His descriptions of NSA/GCHQ backdoors, both the implementation, and the exploitation by anyone in the world who makes the effort, are entirely plausible.

But his descriptions of Chinese software practices from 1979, including auditors and the death penalty for backdoors ... citation needed?</comment>


Ask HN: What is the origin of Baz Quux? - <AUTHOR>

What is the origin of Baz Quux? <comment><USER2> Check out the entry on metasyntactic variable in the hacker's dictionary: <http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/metasyntactic-variable.html></comment>


My experience as a solo founder applying to YCF with just an idea on HackerNews - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@ApplyHN/my-experience-as-a-solo-founder-applying-to-yc-fellowship-with-just-an-idea-on-hacker-news-and-d04d3f44cf77#.54z9hwahi <comment><USER2> Copy/Pasting my response from Reddit:

> They did polarize opinion but overall I think people liked them

I was one of the people who called you out for your "growth hacking," and this assessment is blatantly wrong.

For one thing, your original Apply HN submission had a linkbait title, which you admitted to ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11535928](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11535928)).

What you did later to polarize opinion was to _include an unnecessary link to your Apply HN submission_ to each comment you made, which is Spam in HN's rulebook. On the first comment you made ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11536407](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11536407)) (flagkilled), 3/3 of the comments called you out as spamming.

On the second comment you made ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11537017](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11537017)), half the comments _still_ told you to cut it out with the advertisements.

On the third comment you made ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11537818](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11537818)) which made it obvious you were ignoring the comments on the first two comments, I stepped in and told you were breaking HN rules, but you still did not edit out the advertising URL. A HN moderator eventually killed your comment.

These shenanigans most likely disqualified you from winning the YC fellowship, which counteracts your "growth hacking is good" sentiment. The results do not justify disregarding community sentiment.

\---

OP replied on Reddit:

> Hey man you can't see the upvotes but I can, combined the 3 comments > received more than 100 upvotes. People complaining = 10.

> If it was against the rules I would have been banned, it was not. Anyway if > you are suggesting I took advantage of a grey area to come up with a way to > showcase my product, yes I did. When it was no longer gray I stopped. > Community sentiment is subjective, even you admit half the people loved it > but I have data to know it was way more than half. So sorry about your > sentiments. I get your point but don't know why you care so much about it.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> BTW one can find out the rankings of all ApplyHN applications by _just_ upvotes here: [http://www.thefinac.tk/applyhn/](http://www.thefinac.tk/applyhn/) (sort by rating)

Pinboard is not a serious application so that can be ignored I guess

<comment><USER3> Not sure on what grounds you think you can ignore Pinboard. The people have spoken!

<comment><AUTHOR> Hahahaha, I'm sure a lot of people (including me) got a nice laugh from your troll.

I suppose you are "too far along" for YC Fellowship anyway ;)</comment></comment></comment>


America, Home of the Transactional Marriage - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/08/marriage-rates-education/536913/?single_page=true <comment><USER2> I'd wager entertainment and advertising plays a large part in it as well. Educated people see the folly in shows like the Kardashians, daytime soap operas and ads showing material wealth as virtuous and something to aspire to. Less critical thinkers lap that stuff up and misinterpret the source of happiness and contentment. TV shows can create toxic expectations that can't be practically met by everyone, and for many people these shows have replaced community culture and personal belief systems.

The culture of material expectation could help explain the difference between Canada and the US when it comes to relationship stability and partner selection. Obviously better social welfare in Canada/West Europe is a massive driver, but it would still need to be paired with a culture where the stigma of poverty isn't as great and material wealth isn't as coveted.

<comment> compiler-guy There is remarkable data showing that the television show "Sixteen and Pregnant" reduces teen pregnancy rates in locations where it is shown. This would tend to support your hypothesis.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and- entertainment/w...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and- entertainment/wp/2014/04/09/how-mtvs-16-and-pregnant-led-to-declining-teen- birth-rates/?utm_term=.523213462be8)

<comment><USER3> I'm almost certain that this was the initial effect, but later seasons (where every one of the cast members are reasonably wealthy due to cash from MTV) had the opposite effect.

I can o ly find 2014 data right now rhough.

Relatedly, "baby simulators" lead to an increase in teen pregnancy -[https://www.statnews.com/2016/08/25/infant-simulators- teen-p...](https://www.statnews.com/2016/08/25/infant-simulators-teen- pregnancy/)

<comment><USER4> >teenagers are handed an electronic doll to care for for a day or two

Not surprised this had the opposite effect. It completely misses what is, in my opinion, one of the most dramatic aspects of being a parent. It doesn't end until you die.

Many parents have a baby that destroys the parent's sleep schedule for so long that it feels like it will never end. Then there is worrying about your child reaching important feeling development milestones, worrying about your child's ability to make friends and to survive bullies, where will they go to school? "how can those shoes be too small? We just bought them!" etc etc. A child is a never ending stream of things to worry about.

Any bozo who has been provided with the most basic baby care instruction can take care of a baby for 48 hours. Simply knowing that there is a fixed period in time at which it is over makes it manageable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is a pretty provincial piece. Marriage has been transactional for thousands of years. To this day, the practice continues around the world. I have a colleague in the US who has an arranged marriage (he was born overseas). But of course, let's pretend that "romantic love" is the historical norm (versus recent movie invention) and we've somehow fallen from this expectation.

<comment><USER6> The divorce rate is a new thing though, right? I'd bet that even if it was an arranged marriage, if you knew you weren't going to get divorced, you'd try to find ways to love your partner...

<comment><USER7> Recognizing domestic violence and spousal rape as outside the bounds of acceptable behavior and/or grounds for redress is also a new development, in the grand scheme of things.

<comment><USER8> Do you have any evidence do suggest this is actually a leading cause of divorce, as opposed to other things like personality clashes, financial stress, etc.

Everything I've read seems to suggest that incompatible personalities and finances are the main reasons people in our society split up - which would seem to debunk your theory.

<comment><USER9> Do you seriously think that all the fights and demonstrations to get the right to divorce were mostly because of "incompatible personalities and finances"?

<comment><USER10> Do you think those fights would have been possible without the possibility of financial independence?

<comment><USER9> Yes, there is no correlation between the ability to fight and one of the possible outcomes of the fight

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> An interesting somewhat related phenomenon is the rise of the medical divorce, where a couple will divorce to protect assets from medical debt bankruptcy[1][2]. The ACA and Medicaid expansion lowered the divorce rate by a measurable amount in some population groups[3] which I find amazing.

[1] [https://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyplanner/2014/08/21/divor...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyplanner/2014/08/21/divorce- due-to-medical-bills-sometimes-it-makes-sense/)

[2] [http://www.helsell.com/helsell-news/medicaid-divorce-an- over...](http://www.helsell.com/helsell-news/medicaid-divorce-an-overview/)

[3] [http://fortune.com/2017/02/16/obamacare- divorce/](http://fortune.com/2017/02/16/obamacare-divorce/)

</comment><comment><USER12> I can recommend reading The Rational Male, he discusses the dynamics of marriage and you get a much better understanding after reading the books or the articles on the website. [https://therationalmale.com/](https://therationalmale.com/)

Teaser: women initiate 70+% of the divorces and the reasons they do is not what is shown in the media.

</comment><comment><USER13> There really should be no financial benefit to marriage. It becomes a coercive force that encourages people to marry and stay married, even though they may not want to.

<comment><USER14> Actually, for a couple who earn about the same each, there is a marriage penalty:

[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/16/upshot/marria...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/16/upshot/marriage- penalty-couples-income.html)

<comment><USER15> If the tax penalty is smaller than the savings from sharing a household, it's still an advantage to be married vs single and living alone.

<comment><USER16> Well, you could be unmarried and living together.

<comment><USER17> I don't know how it is in other places, but in Vancouver, if you cohabit for a number of years, you are subject to the same stuff as if you were married couples. I can't remember the details, forgive me, busy work day.

<comment><USER18> That's called common-law marriage and it exists in California too, but it doesn't mean you start paying married tax rates. It just means that, e.g., if your partner falls terminally ill you are allowed to make medical decisions for them just as a spouse would, or if they die you take custody of the children rather than their side of the family, etc.

<comment><USER19> California most certainly does not have, and has not had for over 100 years, common law marriage. Many people think they're fine, then are in for a horrible, rude awakening when their long term partner is either sick or dies as the title holder to assets.

Spread the word!

[https://apeopleschoice.com/common-law-marriage-in- california...](https://apeopleschoice.com/common-law-marriage-in-california/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This reminded me of a book I read last year that takes about the role of work and poverty in a poor, anonymous town in California. Definitely worth reading if you're interested in this topic: [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0043GWQ22/ref=oh_aui_d_de...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0043GWQ22/ref=oh_aui_d_detailpage_o02_?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

</comment><comment><USER21> > The country's exceptionally thin safety net prompts residents—especially > those with less-steady employment—to view partnership in more economic > terms.

Huh? This is literally the opposite of reality.

It's the poorer countries with low GDPs per capita that have thin public safety nets, and where strong marriage and family ties are a must, economically speaking.

Here in The West, we're so rich that we'll redistribute our money (tax dollars) and allow you to become a single mother.

Furthermore, name me another part of the world with fat homeless people.

Marriage is not "transactional" in the country with one of the richest countries on Earth. With a GDP per capita of 57,466.79 USD (2016), marriage is _optional_ , and economically independent women don't need to settle with mid- tier men, especially not during the "fun years" (e.g. 18 - 30).

Remember, 80% of men are below average: [https://theblog.okcupid.com/your- looks-and-your-inbox-8715c0...](https://theblog.okcupid.com/your-looks-and- your-inbox-8715c0f1561e)

<comment><USER22> > _It 's the poorer countries with low GDPs per capita that have thin public > safety nets, and where strong marriage and family ties are a must, > economically speaking. Here in The West, we're so rich that we'll > redistribute our money (tax dollars) and allow you to become a single > mother._

That was then, this is now, as they say.

In the west safety nets might not be as thin as in the "poorer countries" but they have been getting increasingly thinner. And being a "single mother" is the last thing (economically speaking) anyone would wish for in today's climate.

So you're both right. Marriage is even more transactional in the poorer countries, but the article is about how it's becoming more transactional in the US too, which is indeed a thing.

> _Marriage is not "transactional" in the country with one of the richest > countries on Earth._

That doesn't matter for those who can't find a job, or that are an illness away from being homeless and with no savings -- which are millions.

<comment><USER23> >In the west safety nets might not be as thin as in the "poorer countries" but they have been getting increasingly thinner.

I can't speak for the rest of The West, but the safety net in the US has been getting better over time. Compared to my childhood it's easier to qualify for government assistance and it's easier to get medical care.

<comment><USER22> > _I can 't speak for the rest of The West, but the safety net in the US has > been getting better over time. Compared to my childhood it's easier to > qualify for government assistance and it's easier to get medical care._

Compared to the time when a single income earner in a family of four, could buy a house in their 30s and send their kids to college?

<comment><USER24> That's not the safety net, that's a condition contributing to whether people who need the safety net.

But, yes, in a number of key respects, the safety net has gotten worse, too. And it's _harder_ to qualify for most assistance (other than health insurance subsidies) than it was pre-"Welfare Reform".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This article seems completely unmoored from any historical context.</comment>