GNU ease.js - <AUTHOR> https://www.gnu.org/software/easejs/

<comment><USER3> I'd like to remind everyone that some GNU labeled projects are not financially supported or commissioned by GNU. They are instead supported by individuals who, for whatever reason, identify with the GNU label and have decided to donate their work to the cause.

The comments on this post are _super_ negative, and I think that is because people really don't like the GNU project. We don't even know if the author of this library is the person who submitted it to HN.

I would be a nervous wreck if I woke up one day to find my personal work submitted to this site, and have it trashed as thoroughly as it has been here. You don't have to like it or use it for your next project, but for the love of God, don't call it a shitty ugly abomination (to combine some of the comments here...)

<comment><USER4> The comments are super negative because it's a useless and ugly library, most of these things can be done with vanilla javascript.

I love the GNU project, but this thing is ugly.

<comment><USER3> Well, so be it. I think the comments here are unnecessarily mean. YMMV. I didn't want to call anyone in particular, or I would have been more specific about what I thought was wrong with the criticism posted here. You can criticize the technical aspects and applicability of the library without being insulting.

> ... it's a useless and ugly library, most of these things can be done with > vanilla javascript. ... but this thing is ugly.

Your criticism is that "most of these things can be done with vanilla JavaScript." Great. What is the point of the rest of your message? Keep in mind what you have written here is fairly tame compared to things that others have said in this topic.

When people complain about how hostile "Show HN" topics are, keep this topic and its replies in mind. Can't we be nice?

EDIT: This work was written by one developer, in what I am guessing is his free time. This would be different if it was a large project backed by a group of people/company. We might as well have selected a project at random from GitHub. I hope all of your work is up to snuff, lest someone submit it and beat it into a pulp on the front page of (probably) the most popular/influential tech aggregator in the world.

<comment><USER4> Comments can be mean, but most of these things are true, i really appreciate the work of this guy, and maybe (i hope not) there are people using his library, but if you see it from a (experienced) developer's point this library shouldn't be used. If someday i have to maintain an application that uses this library it will be a really pain. As i said, i love GNU, but this library is a wasted effort to do javascript "easier".

<comment><USER5> > most of these things are true

that is like, your opinion, man

I think your comments suck though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> (I am the author of GNU ease.js.)

Wow, quite the negative response here. That said, this is something I was wholly expecting from the JavaScript community, so I am not swayed; I'm merely providing something that I found to be useful in the hope that it is useful to others. So thank you to those who recognized that.

I feel that many of the negative statements here could have been addressed if the posters had taken the time to understand why the project exists:

      http://www.gnu.org/software/easejs/manual/About.html

The framework exists for those who wish to have the benefits of Classical OOP using JavaScript _without_ the need for a compiler; it provides a standalone library for something many frameworks currently do, but do so incompletely: their own class systems. If there is a feature of ease.js that you do not like, you are not forced to use it; it simply generates prototypes. Language and paradigm flamewars will always exist, but let's be respectful of those who want to "program into" their language (as Steve McConnell put it).

Note that GNU ease.js was created when Harmony was just barely getting off the ground, and it is still not released. Even after it is released, there will still be users who do not have the newest features. Part of the reason for GNU ease.js is to address the issue of consistency across all browsers. It works in IE 5.5 (although that wasn't intentional)---you don't have to worry about whether or not ES6 is supported. ES6 also doesn't address some concepts ease.js does.

      http://www.gnu.org/software/easejs/manual/Implementation-Details.html

Let me be clear---I have a strong understanding of the prototypal model, and it does have its uses and elegance. For those who want some of the features of GNU ease.js without the framework itself, I provided both the above link and this paper which demonstrates how OOP is generally done in ECMAScript (and its problems):

      http://mikegerwitz.com/docs/coope.html

GNU ease.js encapsulates those hacks. There's value in that alone.

To answer some of the Harmony-related questions: here is a reply to a question I received from another GNU hacker:

      http://www.gnu.org/software/easejs/misc/easejs-harmony-reply.txt

With regards to the licensing: RMS asked if I'd be willing relicense under the GPLv3+, because of their campaign against proprietary JavaScript. Let me be clear on this matter as well: I am an avid free software activist. I hope that people will find GNU ease.js to be useful, but only if they are writing free software.

      http://www.gnu.org/software/easejs/whyfreejs.html

Thank you, conductor, for posting the project---I appreciate input from the community regardless of its tone.

</comment><comment><USER7> Learning a language is about more than just the syntax, it's also about learning the idiomatic way to program in the language. This framework appears to hide the true prototype nature of JavaScript by bolting on a class-based structure, going against the language features the designers already gave JavaScript for things like inheritance.

Admittedly, JavaScript has suffered from a lack of strong idiomatic principles. (But that has improved in recent years with things projects like CommonJS, RequireJS and Browserify)

While I admire the effort that went into a project like this, I can't help but wonder whether it will delay a developer's understanding of JavaScript rather than ease the transition into it.

<comment><USER8> Well......

The next version of JavaScript will have you know class. .. So I guess the javascript designers are going against the nature of JavaScript by bolting on a class-based structure going against the language features the designers already gave JavaScript for things like inheritance.

<comment><USER7> Good point.

However, if this was a shim for some future language feature it would probably be a good idea. It doesn't appear to be and if it was widely used, would only add to the confusion once language support for classes did emerge.

Furthermore it appears to put variable name declarations within strings, which might further confuse editors/IDEs that already have trouble with the dynamic nature of the language.

I really don't mean to belittle as I'm sure a lot of effort was put into this project. It may serve a purpose somewhere and someone may find it beneficial. I just feel that it goes against the language constructs a little bit too much.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Please no more of these. They have the worst impact on javascript "ides". Most barely understand prototypes, and once you use class abstractions like this or ExtJS they simply are useless unless they have specific integration with it. It's not feasible to ask of tool writers to work with every class emulating library out there, and its a constant drag on having anywhere near useful javascript tooling.

</comment><comment><USER10> If you want a shitty Java reimplementation wrapped in arcane syntax to prevent a JS parser from choking on it, check out this library.

<comment><USER9> that you think its java like shows that you dont understand the library or java or both.

<comment><USER11> what language do you think it's like?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The author's paper on this: [http://mikegerwitz.com/papers/coope/coope.pdf](http://mikegerwitz.com/papers/coope/coope.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm fairly new to JS, and I started watching the Crockford on Javascript videos. He really presented prototypical inheritance and using JS as it was "meant to be"(?) well, as opposed to trying to shove in classical inheritance. Even with my limited knowledge, ease.js doesn't seem to be a good way to use JS...

<comment><USER14> This is to be taken with a grain of salt, as I don't really view myself as that great of a developer (iOS, Android, PHP, Postgres, and all things frontend) but ease.js makes js even more weird.

People already have a hard enough time dealing with a pseudo functional async language. Trying to lay formal OOP concepts on top of JS is an abstraction for which I cannot find an analogy.

I think the project is incredibly cool though, as I've always found "meta" programming like this to be fascinating, but this causes a somewhat serious problem:

When someone needs to go into a formal JS framework, take angular for example, they really need to unlearn all of the other JS tendencies that were absorbed over time. Switching from jQuery thinking to Angular thinking is hard enough, but going from ease.js to Angular is a horrifying thought.

In every context that you would find JS (Web dev and game dev in Unity come to mind), it will look and perform absolutely NOTHING like this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Why? Javascript isn't class based. Why not embrace the paradigm of the language you're using?

<comment><USER16> ES6 adds minimal JS classes, which I'm a fan of. They're just syntactic sugar over:

        Animal = function () {};
        Dog = function () {};
        Dog.prototype = Object.create(Animal);

But this? This is an abomination.

<comment><USER17> that's Object.create(Animal.prototype), and they do add a little more, like a working 'super', and getting the .constructor property right.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm not sure what this really adds, and as it's GPLv3 why anyone serious would use it for anything.

Ok, looking through...holy hell it's ugly. I've never really felt the need to use public/protected in JS, and it looks inspired by PHP.

Bolting this stuff on on top of JS, in such a broken feeling way...I just can't see why anyone would use this at all.

<comment><USER19> _" as it's GPLv3 why anyone serious would use it for anything"_

Serious people never set out to produce GPLv3 works?

I totally grant the "this doesn't look like it's actually useful", though, although I've not been neck deep in JS for ages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> To summarize: Let's take the one thing the js actually does well, rip it out because it's too hard and "alien," and replace it with a verbose Java-inspired syntax.

</comment><comment><USER21> Wow. Could someone explain why Coffee script doesn't trigger this much negativity? Is it because it doesn't look like java? From where I sit it is the same idea and all of the flame here applies to it too. Just wanna keep the haters honest. I like how immediate and simple JavaScript is. I started my career with it 15 years ago and I'm not who these metalanguages and frameworks are tar getting, but it's becoming clear that as a JavaScript developer I'm going to have to learn these because those who prefer other languages are using these "adapter pattern" techniques on applications that I will inevitably have to maintain or fix. In that respect, I can certainly see how this trend can breed negativity.

</comment><comment><USER22> Another desperate attempt to turn Javascript into something that it's not meant to be.

</comment><comment><USER23> GNU says, "us, too!"

Yet another JS framework.

</comment><comment><USER24> Why would you introduce that distinction into what is an inherently dynamic language? "virtual" keyword in C++ is an option to avoid paying the cost for a polymorphic call (so it can be inlined at compile time and/or no extra pointer dereference is done). It's a compromise to allow incremental cost of language features--but in JavaScript?

<comment><USER6> There are certain optimizations that I am able to perform by knowing if a function is virtual or not---this is especially important in the Trait implementation.

However, the original intent is based on compelling rationale from C#. I cannot find the original article where the article explains the rationale, but aside from optimization benefits and self-documenting code, he makes the point that virtual methods are essentially callbacks/hooks into existing code; you therefore need to put careful thought into how to handle those virtual methods properly and expose the proper APIs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Curious about performance overhead... Not seeing the benefits of this over something like Resig's Simple Class Inheritance?

<comment><USER6> See the test cases in test/perf; they can be run with `make check` (or `make test`).

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> With a name like that I thought it was yet another easing plugin but this... this is something else. I have a hard time thinking of an application for myself. It's not something I would want to learn and I would not work on a project which uses it.

</comment><comment><USER27> It it even possible to enforce 'access modifiers' and 'constants' in any real way in javascript? Is this much more than syntactic sugar or is it useful (despite it's... aesthetic issues?)

<comment><USER11> that's been possible for years.

Pull your understanding of what javascript is out of 2005.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Gross. It's also GPLv3, that seems a bit restrictive for a class system.

<comment><USER29> Yeah, Gross! GPLv3 is so restrictive – I hate free software licenses, it gives you too much freedom.

<comment><USER30> You do realise that GPLv3 grants the user less freedoms than a license like MIT, right?

<comment><USER19> No, the GPLv3 grants the _user_ more freedoms than a license like MIT - <USER2> can demand the source from someone who has provided them the binary. It grants potential _distributors_ fewer freedoms - they must provide sources and cannot distribute under incompatible licenses.

<comment><USER30> When I said "user" I meant "developer". Most of my open source code is licensed under the MIT license because it grants developers more freedoms than a GPL-like license would.

Also, I believe that by allowing distributors to use your code without forcing them to release their code you don't restrict potential users' freedoms - if a company wanted to use your library in their project and your license is not compatible with it they will just find another project or write a similar one themselves. The result for the user is the same: they will not get access to the code.

<comment><USER31> In the world of GNU any mention of "freedom" refers to end users.

<comment> loup-vaillant …because, in case someone hasn't noticed already, there are are more end users than programmers.

<comment><USER19> And frequently programmers are users as well!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Thanks for this - looks like its well thought out and executed.

</comment><comment><USER33> With thousand and one problems in the GNU software ecosystem one wonders what they are doing in a completely unknown terrain releasing such a redundant and unnecessary JavaScript library.

<comment><USER26> Their motive is clear, they wanted a free javascript framework.

<comment><USER34> But it's not a framework. It's a framework as much as jQuery is.

Why not use TypeScript? It offers similar features, without the extra overhead and ugly syntax.

<comment><USER35> Because... err... umn... Micro$oft is the devil!

Seriously though, I don't care much for typescript either... I'm okay with CoffeeScript as it brings as much to the table without having to type twice as much to get it.

This just seems like a sick joke foisted on people who are too lazy to learn a slightly different paradigm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> God why is it so ugly. If they made it into a language that compiles into JS, it might be good, but why this?

</comment><comment><USER37> And a bunch of people coming out of their caves to tell us how JavaScript's quickly cobbled up hacky prototype system is a design by God himself, and everything else is the Devil trying to trick us into his Java ways... Sigh.

Which is why the next versions of JS (ES6 and ES7) will have:

1) Modules (namespaces)

2) Classes

3) Member visibility

Whoops. Ignore the cognitive dissonance and continue with the flame!

Now. While the library linked here isn't the prettiest thing I've seen, I immediately get it. And I can immediately start coding in it and get the expected behavior.

This, in itself, is a huge feature compared to the awkward incantations one has to do in barebones JS to do OOP (of any kind). Even the fact it's string based doesn't make it inferior to some of the other unreadable stuff I've seen by people doing JavaScript "properly" (or so they think).

So, I say kudos about that. Here we have an implementation solving a practical problem in a practical way. No plot twists and surprises.

I prefer TypeScript, but this one doesn't require a parser, so it has its benefits.

<comment><USER11> I assume this message is aimed at me. I'm not worried about ES6. ES6 classes are just syntactic sugar over prototypes, so it'll still confuse the FUCK out of java, c#, c++ and flash developers, because they are still SEMANTICALLY weird and confusing to people used to classical inheritence.

So I'm happy about that. As long as Java developers are unhappy with something, I likes it.

The awkward incantations you speak of are indeed awkward, I will admit.

I mean, how fucking confusing is

        Object.create({ your prototype here });

am I right? This is much better:

        MySpecialFramework.extend({ my prototy.. .*ahem* class here! })</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is anyone else having issues with stripe? - <AUTHOR> I am having issues when processing a payment using stripe. I am using Stripe::charge and 80% of transactions are getting declined. Previously (20 days ago) everything worked smoothly.
According to stripe logs, a successful transaction has 3 steps: create a token (/v1/tokens), then the customer (/v1/customers) and finally generate the payment (/v1/charges). At the moment, all the transactions are falling when they receive the customer (/v1/customer). Stripe has been telling me it is an issue with the bank. But the bank it is telling me that they don't are receiving request for payments (transaction is falling on step #2).
I've talked to several friends and they are having the same issue, so hopefully someone from the HN community can help :) <comment><USER2> We had a similar sounding issue involving where the token is passed in the Stripe client. Are you using the API directly or through a client library? We were using Go and there was a field that was pretty clearly not needed in the documentation but pretty clearly needed to make the customer step work.

<comment><AUTHOR> We are using stripe's api in the frontend to generate a token and then it to our backend in order to generate the "customer" and the "charge". Our backend is on Rails so we are using stripe's ruby gem.

Any advice?</comment></comment>


Show HN: Explore Trump's Stock and Business Returns - <AUTHOR> https://www.govtrades.com/executive <comment><USER2> You posted a Show HN of this project a few days ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23407643](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23407643). You can't make a new Show HN out of the same project on a different example, such as Trump instead of senators. That's not different enough. This is in the Show HN guidelines: [https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html).

 _New features and upgrades ( "Foo 1.3.1 is out") generally aren't substantive enough to be Show HNs. A major overhaul is probably ok._

</comment><comment><USER3> Would be amazing to get expanded view into family members and friends

</comment><comment><USER4> No way this is his actual portfolio.

<comment><AUTHOR> Unless he's been lying on his legally mandated personal finance disclosure docs for the past three years, it is: [https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/President%20and%20...](https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/President%20and%20Vice%20President%20Index)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As I understand it, Trump's net worth has taken a big drop during his presidency [https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/trump-has- los...](https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/trump-has- lost-1-billion-personal-wealth-running-president-n916221)

While this doesn't mean there hasn't been any wrongdoing, I think it does weaken the narrative that he's exploiting his position for personal gain.

<comment><USER6> My understanding is that most of his decline in net worth is due to problems with branding and security at his hotels / resorts -- i.e. problems with his non-publicly traded assets. In my mind, this would, if anything, create additional incentives for him to move public markets for his financial benefit to recover some of the money he's lost elsewhere.</comment></comment>


Backchannel Is Moving to Wired - <AUTHOR> https://backchannel.com/backchannel-is-moving-to-wired-dcb693c26ac0 <comment><USER2> theringer[1] also decided to leave medium recently which makes me think that they have the exact problem that facebook/myspace had just in reverse. When you visit a site built by medium it is quite obvious due to their styling and format choices. I'm guessing that these media companies want to build a brand and it only hurts them if their white label solution makes them look like everyone else's site.

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/30/business/media/the- ringer...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/30/business/media/the-ringer-vox- bill-simmons-medium.html?mcubz=0)

<comment><USER3> All the commercial sites on Medium are finding new homes since the company abandoned the ad model earlier this year[0]

> Upon further reflection, it's clear that the broken system is ad-driven > media on the internet. It simply doesn't serve people.

> We decided we needed to take a different — and bolder — approach to this > problem. We believe people who write and share ideas should be rewarded on > their ability to enlighten and inform, not simply their ability to attract a > few seconds of attention.

> So, we are shifting our resources and attention to defining a new model for > writers and creators to be rewarded, based on the value they're creating for > people.

It has created an opportunity for other platforms to pick up these marquee titles. I thought Medium providing the tech and ads for bloggers was a great idea - but for some reason they decided to abandon it.

[0] [https://blog.medium.com/renewing-mediums- focus-98f374a960be](https://blog.medium.com/renewing-mediums- focus-98f374a960be)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why would any site trying to turn a profit from its content be on Medium?

It's a great solution if you want to share content to drive traffic to your business that you can convert but it's never been focused on revenue.

</comment><comment><USER5> Hope it works out better for Backchannel than it did for Ars Technica.

<comment> aaron-lebo Not familiar; what happened there?

Just checking their current site against Backchannel, the former is snappier and not any worse looking.

<comment><USER6> If I understand the root comment correctly, here's my 2c.

Ars used to be the premiere tech news website, focused on tech instead of things like society and politics.

After it was acquired by conde Nast (owner of wired) many think there has been a steady drop in quality of writing on that website, and a move away from tech towards political things, similar to Wired.

I'm not sure if I'd attribute the drop in quality to conde Nast or just a general trend in websites getting more popular (e.g. Reddit), but I think it's there.

Edit: missing the last sentence

<comment><USER7> I recently let my Wired subscription of 13 years lapse because of the politics. Wired use to be about the intersection between tech and society. Now it's bloated with advertising, extremely light on substantive content, and has become way too political.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Medium just became Small..:(</comment>


Former Mayor Daley hoping to cash in on green cards - <AUTHOR> http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/7/71/336814/watchdogs-former-mayor-daley-hoping-cash-green-cards

<comment><USER2> I'm totally okay with foreign rich people investing money into the Chicago area in return for being allowed to move there. I can't think of a better alignment of incentives.

<comment><USER3> Did you read this part?

 _Tur's foreign investors need invest only $500,000 because the federal government agreed that the Lakeshore East development is an area of high unemployment. Lakeshore East, a community of high-priced apartments, is bounded by Randolph Street, Wacker Drive, Columbus and Lake Shore Drive._

It smells fishy. Lakeshore East is full of really nice high rise condos and apartment buildings. Jeanne Gang's Aqua Tower is there. I think most people would support a program that allows residency for serious foreign investors. But what people don't want (especially people in Chicago) is a federal program that allows Daley to use his connections to basically charge a toll on the foreign investors who would participate in such a program.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> EB5 stuff is quite common down here in Miami, mostly for construction projects. Lots of chinese, colombian, brazilian, and venezuelan moneys going into pools for high rise developments. There has been talks of creating an EB5 pool for startup investment, but not sure if it has gone anywhere.

Here there has been some crackdown on this, as lots of it was fluff businesses where they had no intention of keeping the business beyond the 3 year or whatever requirement.

Makes perfect sense for a former politician to get involved in this kind of stuff.

</comment><comment><USER5> Patrick isn't the only mayor cashing in on EB5. former SF mayor Willie Brown is using it as well, albeit in a truly downtrotten part of SF:

[http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/11/china-e...](http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/11/china- eb5-lennar-urban-willie-brown.html?page=all)

<comment><AUTHOR> Minor point: Patrick is the son of the former Mayor,and hasn't been mayor himself.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Patrick has quite the track record:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_R._Daley](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_R._Daley)

<comment><USER7> Welcome to Chicago politics.</comment></comment>


UTorrent For Linux Is Coming, Finally - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-for-linux-is-coming-finally-100601/

<comment><USER3> I feel that they might be a little bit late. Since the Linux community's "Aha!" moment regarding the usability of Desktop apps, Transmission has really taken off.

Even uTorrent's web interface is old news compared to Transmission's web interface.

Although - competition is always good.

<comment><USER4> There are still private trackers around disallowing transmission (heck - <USER2> client but uTorrent), so this might be a valid reason to go with a future utorrent for Linux release.

OTOH, these same trackers are insisting on utorrent for windows anyways and are also disallowing utorrent for the Mac, so my point might be moot

<comment> loup-vaillant That's odd. Why would a tracker ever want to disallow any torrent client? Are they silly, or paid by BitTorrent Inc?

<comment><USER5> Apparently, Transmission used to have issues (may still have them, don't know) and misbehave, leading to its banning from several trackers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> These 3254 people voting for the Linux client might encompass the whole of the future user base of the client.

Linux users traditionally have been more involved in a community, so it's entirely conceivable that next to 100% of potential uTorrent Linux users have taken the opportunity to vote whereas only a fraction of a percent of utorrent's total user base voted for the second highest rated feature.

I would probably not use a poll like this to direct the future planning of my product.

<comment><AUTHOR> In that case, it is already pretty remarkable that 3254 from a group of people who currently can't even use your product want it to be developed for them. If that happened to a product I were making, I sure as hell would begin targeting that platform.

<comment><USER6> It's 1300 people, not 3254 people. The way the idea bank works is that when you make a new account you get 10 votes, and can allocate up to three of them per idea, which is what happened here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been using rtorrent on my Linux box and have been reasonably happy with it.

<comment><USER8> I've just tried Transmission, and it is quite slick, but I'd like to chime in with two of my favorites: the enhanced version of CTorrent (<http://www.rahul.net/dholmes/ctorrent/>), a handy command-line client, and btpd, the BitTorrent Protocol Daemon (<http://www.murmeldjur.se/btpd/>), a client designed to run in the background.

I'm also fond of the original, reference versions of BitTorrent written in Python, but they can be a PITA to install from source because of dependencies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Still not open source? No thanks.

<comment><USER10> Why does everything have to be open source?

<comment><USER11> Because competition is.

Being closed source plus the half-hearted job and lip service to support means bad experience for users. And users are not masochists, so they will use whatever works better.

In this case, Transmission.

<comment><USER9> Also, I prefer to be able to know what the software on my computer is actually doing, especially when it comes to internet communications.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Ever try qBittorrent? its very light(QT + C++) and low on resource use. It was the first linux client to build support for magnet links.

I like it for its excellent torrent search.

It is available in more than 25 languages and is also available as a Mac client.

Oh and its open source.

<comment><USER6> ...and banned on my trackers because of its peer-id spoofing feature.

<comment><USER12> not sure whether you knew it or not - but peer id spoofing (as uTorrent) was added because it was being banned on several trackers. Take a look at the bug to see a few examples <https://bugs.launchpad.net/qbittorrent/+bug/497450>

I think most private trackers allow Ktorrent and Transmission as they are considered defacto.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> loup-vaillant zepolen pointed out that µtorrent still isn't Free Software (or Open Source, if you prefer).

Does anybody knows why? As far as I know, µtorrent is free of charge, so I don't see how locking the sources could be an asset.

<comment><USER13> The original author was looking forward to selling it. He sold it to BitTorrent. BitTorrent is looking forward to selling uTorrent to media companies for swarm-based content distribution.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It has been always usable through Wine.

<comment><USER15> indeed, i've always combined wine, utorrent and its webUI. Before that it was rtorrent and another web interface, but utorrent is so much easier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm sure it's _micro_ torrent...

</comment><comment><USER17> rtorrent for life.</comment>


It's later than you think - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/its-later-than-you-think-j-r-storment/ <comment><USER2> I took a step back in my career to work from home, and bring my kids to the kindergarten with my bike some days, and take a late lunch and eat their "dinner" with them, and it has been totally, totally worth-it.

Remote work being a set-back is possibly a side-effect of how I selected my new gig, but it has suited me so well, I don't care about the (temporary) career stagnation.

Beautiful story, I felt it hard.

<comment><USER3> I had the opposite path 4 years ago.

After working from home (and watch my kids grow) I had an opportunity to work to help finishing a big project that would make money.

It was just 3-4 month of hard work (including almost every week ends and some nights) and then back to normal hours when the project would be on track.

Well, as often, months turned to a year, then a year and a half, and no real end of the "hard" part in sight.

My son started ignoring me, my daughter waked up early to have a glimpse of me before I go.

I finaly ended it (mostly when the word Divorce was pronounced out loud) and fight to be a member of my family again. And work from home.

For now, this period was the biggest mistake of my near-half-a-century life, and until the kids can take themselves in charge, I won't move from home again.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I've never had the experience that those project schedules ever turn out to be realistic. You get to the end and then there's just more stuff to do in less time. And now that you've put in all those hours everybody wonders why you're backing off from the project.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Such a heart breaking story. For me it was taking a walk around the office and seeing a private plane take off from San Carlos airport, here its engine sputter, and then watching as it fell from the sky into the "lagoon" next to a hotel. Life ends. Really slammed home how a 'normal' day could suddenly be a really bad day, or your last day.

One of the unfortunate challenges of tech work is that as someone young and single you can spend all your time at work with your colleagues building really cool stuff and get the social fix and the financial rewards of lots of hard work. And if you get married and have kids, and suddenly the demands of the family keeps you from putting in the same amount of time at work, well you find yourself either explaining to your boss why you aren't getting as much done, or explaining to your spouse why you don't seem them as much as they would like. Can be tricky to navigate to a new normal.

<comment><USER6> Was it a twin airplane? I was doing flight training out of San Carlos around the time that happened and yeah, it was sobering. I haven't flown since my daughter was born.

This one: [https://m.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/NTSB-Engine-failure- in-...](https://m.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/NTSB-Engine-failure-in-fatal- plane-crash-3900028.php)

<comment><USER5> That exact one

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> IMO, the best PG essay says the same thing differently [http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html).

It has had a profound impact on how I think about everything, but especially the time I spend with our now 1 year old.

I'd recomend everyone read it, and internalize that you only get 52 weekends in a year. You also only get a handful of each holiday with your kids. His words are better than mine, and I encourage everyone to take the 2 minutes needed to read the essay, then implement a life strategy that gets you home with your family more.

<comment><USER8> > And while it's impossible to say what is a lot or a little of a continuous > quantity like time, 8 is not a lot of something. If you had a handful of 8 > peanuts, or a shelf of 8 books to choose from, the quantity would definitely > seem limited, no matter what your lifespan was.

And yet if you had a handful of 8 loaves of bread, it would be a lot of bread, if you had 8 luxurious chocolate truffles it would be more than you want to eat in one go. If you had 8 shelves of books the quantity would still "seem limited". If you stepped outside and there were 8 cars on your driveway, that would be a lot of cars and a long driveway, if none of them started and you had to walk 8 miles to the train station, that would be a long walk, if you went to the dentist and needed 8 fillings that would be a lot of fillings, and if there was a creature as tall as 8 humans, that would be a long horse.

Just choosing that the units of measure are peanuts and books, is not enough to establish that 8 is a small quantity, objectively and unquestionably. Everything is relative, everything is viewed in comparison to something different. Peanuts compared to how filling they are, books compared to .. how much choice you feel you deserve, outside of reading time. 8 books is quite a lot of reading time.

If you decide that 8 Christmasses is a paucity of Christmas, where did that decision come from? Why is it not enough, and how many would be enough? (and is the answer an eternal "just one more"?) If you have $8 but you want to spend $10 then $8 is not much money. If you have $8 but you want things which are ten a penny, $8 is a lot of things.

If we can't control how much we have, but we can choose what we want, why do we so often choose to want more than we have, then feel annoyed at the disinterested universe for being so mean to us?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I live in Portland. I switched to being a software developer when my son was born, starting a new career.

I make probably $20K less than my peers. (I make $82K a year as a fourth year C# software dev. I've got a law degree and am willing to travel around the country a few weeks a year for stakeholder meetings.)

I'm home every day by 3:15. I take my son to the library, to the park, to the forest, to OMSI, on weekdays. Some days he and I just sit on the couch reading and talking about superheroes for two hours until dinner.

Do I feel envious of my peers who make more? Yes. A lot. The urge to keep up with the Joneses is strong. Do I second guess my decision? Never. My job is relaxed, I come home and party with my son and wife with energy. I cried reading this story, but it only affirms my decision.

<comment><USER10> You can do both. You're worth more than that. It doesn't need to be one or the other.

<comment><USER11> I believe it's almost impossible. Each of us have 24 hours per day and as of now, there is no way to stretch it.

<comment><USER10> With that mindset yes it's impossible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Remember that performative workaholism is poison to life. Every time you put in more hours over the weekend "just because", dial in to a meeting on your vacation, or get on Slack at 10 PM "just to check a few things" \- you're shifting the culture to make it that much more acceptable to demand it of everyone. The parents in your meetings that run until 7:30 bitterly hate you.

It might seem OK when you're single, childless, etc. but once that time starts coming from your family you will realize what a prison you've built yourself.

STOP IT. STOP IT RIGHT NOW.

<comment><USER13> I agree if you're talking strictly about salaried employees, because you don't get paid for that overtime work. But as a contract developer if I want to work 60 hours each week, instead of 40, to earn an extra 50% when I invoice them at the end of the month, that is my prerogative.

<comment><USER14> That is of course your choice, but if you do that for a long time, there's a chance of burning out, divorce, losing touch with friends and family etc. Money isn't everything.

<comment><USER15> 'Money isn't everything' is kind of truism. Stories abound, however of divorce, losing touch with friends and family once a person faces money troubles. Note that I am not trying to justify any particular way. It is just things are going to happen irrespective of one's outlook towards money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm in tears reading this and his wife's account ([https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-remains-dr-jessica- brande...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-remains-dr-jessica-brandes/)) - I didn't realize how short life was until I realized I only had 52 weeks with each of my one-year-old sons, and stories like this are a reminder about what's really important.

A friend said it well when I was feeling guilty I wasn't putting more time into my work, "No one has ever looked back on their life and said 'I wish I spent less time with my family'".

<comment><USER17> > "No one has ever looked back on their life and said 'I wish I spent less > time with my family'".

Not everyone has a family worth being with.

<comment><USER18> At some point your family is not so much the people you were born to or grew up with, but the people you've chosen to be with, build a live together... Also, if I had to guess, no one has ever looked back on their life and said 'I wish I had spent more time being deliberately obtuse on the Internet' either.

<comment><USER19> > _At some point your family is not so much the people you were born to or > grew up with, but the people you 've chosen to be with, build a live > together..._

Point still holds though. Your "made" family (marriage, heck, even kids) might turn up not to be all that great either. Happens to millions...

> _Also, if I had to guess, no one has ever looked back on their life and said > 'I wish I had spent more time being deliberately obtuse on the Internet' > either._

Those are people who die with regrets though, so perhaps not the best people to listen to what to do not to have regrets! Their "I should have actually done that instead" deathbed choice might be equally bad as the original choice they made...

<comment> 52-6F-62 I think they meant the people that become your real family. It doesn't have to be marriage. It can be a select of friends where a strong bond has formed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Just a note for everyone who tends to go through the comments and weigh if they should actually go read the post (I'm guilty of this), go read the post. Even if you have nothing to relate this to, it's a great contrast to the majority of posts on this site. It's a breath of fresh, troubling air.

</comment><comment><USER21> My deepest condolences to the family. I hope no parent goes through that experience the author and his family had.

On the other had, I met a lady at the gym counter. She looked very tired so I enquired about her. She said it was third job. She said that she was doing that just to barely put enough food on the table for her family. I think some of the benefits IT folks enjoy is not what rest of the world experiences. She too complained that she doesn't spend enough time with her kids. Life is difficult for so many people that they to make such compromises. The rest of us who can take time off a little should put it to best use.

<comment><USER22> I was shocked when the author of the post said he had had twins and founded his business in the same month. I just had twins a few months ago and founded my business ten years ago. I couldn't imagine doing both at the same time.

I have massive newfound respect for parents, and especially for working single mothers. I have no idea how they do what they do. I am fortunate enough to have a nanny, work from home, and it's still very challenging.

<comment><USER23> I see this kind of stuff from time to time and I also don't understand how people do it. I wonder if they either don't sleep or over report their contribution to parenthood

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Many of us, especially younger folks with income anxiety and families see no other choice but to work slavishly at the expense of time with our families because we see avoiding starvation as more important than quality time. We could all be forgiven for this.

I've made it past that phase of my life, having missed the entire first year of my middle daughter's life, not being there properly for my family after the loss (cancer) of one of our daughters at 2 1/2\. My oldest daughter (are you keeping count) who is 18, I barely know and am just now building a relationship with.

I have the luxury of not making that mistake with our youngest daughter (we're up to 4 girls now) who is now 5. I still remember giving up time at home so that I could ensure I kept my job and was investing in the skills to get the next raise.

Hindsight is 20/20 and you already know what I'm going to tell you. You'd be surprised how little of your stress about your current job translates to you keeping it, but that stress makes you grumpy or distant and difficult to feel love from. You'd be surprised how something as small as dinner together, tucking them in at night, or an unrushed breakfast, can take so little time but mean so much to you and to them, still leaving you with the time to advance your career on behalf of the ones you love.

Please spend those special moments, they're so few and they pass so quickly. Your family likely won't starve, and maybe even getting fired from a toxic environment will be the break you need to see what else the world has out there for you and your family.

 _" For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future."_

Jeremiah 29:11

</comment><comment><USER25> I read things like that with totally different eyes than when I had no kids.

<comment><USER26> I could read things like that when I had no kids.

<comment><USER27> I can't imagine. I don't have kids and the horror and grief is tangible.

<comment><USER28> I can feel the panic that the author describes as he runs out of the office. I can feel it in my chest. Before kids this would have been a story to read. With them, reading this is me falling apart at my desk.

<comment><USER29> Yep. That horrible feeling from this story stuck with me for DAYS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Very touching, I shed a few tears on this part.

"I'm guessing you have 1:1 meetings on the books with a lot of people you work with. Do you have them regularly scheduled with your kids?"

I am totally doing this, but more like 1:1 days.

<comment><USER31> Definitely, make sure there's just "time". Everyone I've spoken to who has a real quality relationship with their kids has reiterated quantity is better than "quality".

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that making it to the odd piano recital is the same as being there every day for dinner.

As the piece sadly reminds us, that calendar invite might be scheduled too late.

<comment><USER32> Yeah this "quality time" trope is often just a justification for not being there very often.

<comment><USER33> You become a manager of your kids, not a parent. The quantity time is when you're there to emotionally engage with them. If you only show up during quality time, you're teaching them that it's only during big moments that life matters.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Reading this post I can't help but feel for the sibling. When I was 5 I lost my sister and best friend; you just aren't equipped to deal with the event at that age.

<comment><USER35> Yes, so many years with the pains unravelling as you learn to cope with that loss. Children are great at handling traumatic events, but it doesn't mean it's any less traumatic. That poor kid is probably going to struggle with this for a long time.

<comment><USER36> One hot August day my father was involved in a farm machinery accident, and died of his injuries two weeks later. I was 5.

All the time I was growing up, it used to surface every couple of years. Later when I got into college and took a bunch of psychology and child development classes, I learned that the brain undergoes a major reorganization at about two year intervals, the last being in the early twenties. Looking back, I realized that at every brain re-org, I mourned again. I mourned like a 5 year old at 5, like a 7 year old at 7, etc.

After my twenties, I thought I had put it completely behind me.

Then when my own daughter was 5, I had a period of several months where I felt an unfocused dread. A feeling of impending doom that I just could not explain or account for. Then in late September of that year, somehow I snapped out of it, with the realization that I was still alive. I looked at my daughter and understood that I was her age when my father passed. And it all made sense. And I am free.

Thanks for listening.

<comment><USER35> That's an incredibly hard event to process at 5. Someone close to me lost her dad at 6 in a similar way (major injury, passed away shortly after), and I've helped her process that in conversations over the years. It's still hard to grasp what that experience would be like. I can see the pain it inflicts, the questions it triggers, but I suppose I'm fortunate enough that I don't fully comprehend it. Losing parents is so hard, and hard enough as an adult when it's easier to process and you may even feel secure in your independence.

I'm glad you feel free now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Heartbreaking to read and every parent's worst nightmare. Life has become so fast and everyone works too much these days. Growing up in India, I remember my parents (who had challenging jobs as a math prof and doctor) still spent all evening and all weekends with us and my one surviving grandparent also lived with us. Cousins came by every week and there was so much family around. Now, here we are with all this money in a giant house in this expensive place, working 60-70 hours a week and I wonder if I'm doing right by my kids. Need to spend more time with them..

</comment><comment><USER38> Crying as I read this. I can't imagine. Thank you for sharing. So sorry for your loss. As a new father, hits home hard. Nothing is more important in life than your family and friends.

As a new father, things like SUDEP and SIDS are terrifying. I hope one day technology will improve, so we'll have fitness bands or smart cameras or smart mattresses that can detect these rare events and report back data so we can understand them, and hopefully at some point, intervene and prevent them. Sharing your story will hopefully inspire people to keep working on this kind of thing, so hopefully it might help save some other child in the future.

</comment><comment><USER39> Wow. That's a jolt of sobriety. God bless this man and his family.

</comment><comment><USER40> _No man is an island,

Entire of itself.

Each is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea,

Europe is the less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thine own

Or of thine friend's were.

Each man's death diminishes me,

For I am involved in mankind.

Therefore, send not to know

For whom the bell tolls,

It tolls for thee._

I hope you heal in time, and we're with you in your grief.

</comment><comment><USER41> Wasn't planning on wiping away tears from my eyes this evening...

<comment><USER42> same, and I don't have kids yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> An incredibly heart-breaking story. I can't relate as I'm younger and just graduated from college last year. However I've lived away from my grandparents and my mom for the last 3 years and I'd like to move back home so I can spend as much time as I can with them.

</comment><comment><USER44> As a father of a toddler, I really appreciate stories where you get a phone call out of the blue and somebody tells you your child died. I didn't have enough anxiety about him already, so thanks for giving me a reason to panic at random phone calls from my wife.

</comment><comment><USER45> >Wiley was obsessed with starting a business. One day it was a smoothie stand, the next it would be a gallery, then a VR headset company, then a 'coder', then a spaceship building company.

To me, this sounds like the father shouldn't be worried too much. Wiley loved the way his father was to the point of wanting to emulate him.

>Damn, could that kid dance.

The kid gave it all, like his father. Without such a role model, would he have been the same kid? Would he have had such a precious life?

</comment><comment><USER46> Thank you very much for this. As adults, we often forget we need to cherish those around us. I hope author finds peace.

</comment><comment><USER47> i went through a very similar experience a year ago. its been hard looking to go back to work, in particular responding to the inevitable question of "what have you been doing the past year". if you respond truthfully, its so shocking the interviewer never knows how to process it, so almost immediately feels like the doors just close. i know these things dont happen every day, and they are existentially challenging to contemplate, but they do happen. if you're responsible for hiring, please remember that your candidates are first and foremost human beings. i wish the author luck when he is ready to begin the next chapter.

</comment><comment><USER48> I thought it was about my favorite poem [0], but it turned out to be even more heartbreaking.

> Lastly, you who read; aye, you

>Who this very line may scan:

>Think of all you planned to do ...

>Have you done the best you can?

>See! the tavern lights are low;

>Black's the night, and how you shrink!

>God! and is it time to go?

>Ah! the clock is always slow;

>It is later than you think;

>Sadly later than you think;

>Far, far later than you think.

[0] [https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46651/it-is-later- tha...](https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46651/it-is-later-than-you- think)

</comment><comment><USER49> I don't know you, but I send my love and good thoughts.

</comment><comment><USER50> Condolences for your loss...

We should all focus on things that matter in our lives and not take as granted that we (or our loved ones) will be around for ever.

Stories like this remind me of a nice post about the "lifetime calendar": [https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/life- weeks.html](https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/life-weeks.html)

</comment><comment><USER51> I don't have kids of my own but my SO's sister has twin boys, aged 5 months.

Reading this article was tough. What if one of her sons doesn't wake up one day? What if something happens to both of them?

She and her husband have busy careers, and while I won't share this article with them (it'll probably be a sore spot) I'm hoping that they'll make enough time for their kids.

</comment><comment><USER52> This is a horrible fate and I wish the parents of the boy all the best. It's important that you don't beat yourself up and search for regrets though. Maybe that's part of griefing but it's not okay if it stays. It's very important to look out emotionally for yourself, only then you can reliably look out for others.

</comment><comment><USER53> Enjoy yourself, its later than you think

Enjoy yourself while you're still in the pink

The years go by as quickly as a wink

Enjoy yourself enjoy yourself its later than you think

</comment><comment><USER54> I hate you for posting this, but I'm going to hold my children really tightly before bed tonight.

</comment><comment><USER55> When I was 16 I started my education as a software developer in a company and for the first time realized there are fathers who cannot go home and eat lunch with their kids.

My father was always at home for lunch.

My daughter was born 11 months ago and I switched jobs and work now fully remote.

</comment><comment><USER56> I think for me the biggest lesson is that I am taking from these kind of stories: be focused. When you are spending time with your loved ones don't look at your phone all the time. Be there with them. I am really bad at this...

</comment><comment><USER57> Orthogonal to the main point of this post, but was anyone else struck by the part about "he had kissed multiple girls" (by age 8)? I find that fairly incomprehensible.

</comment><comment><USER58> Thanks for writing this. I'm sorry for your loss.

</comment><comment><USER59> Glad he's able to take time off.

I've known people who couldn't get time off if such a tragedy happened to them. Sure as hell stronger than I am.

</comment><comment><USER60> >The big question is how to return to work in a way that won't leave me again with the regrets I have now. To be honest, I've considered not going back. But I believe in the words of Kahlil Gibran who said, "Work is love made visible.''

Imagine you just came into enough money that you never have to work again.

What would you work on, then?

What is something that you can do that no one else can?

What can you do to help make the world more harmonious?

How can you help humans, animals, plants, machines, and the planet as a whole?

Think about these questions, and then do that.

Ignore money.

<comment><USER61> I'd probably find some open source project to dedicate myself to. Maybe work towards sustainability in some shape or form, or at the very least invest in it. But it's tough to ignore money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> It hurts hard. I'm taking day off tomorrow for long overdue day out with my daughter.

</comment><comment><USER63> Yeah time and the self.. a harsh lesson to get.

</comment><comment><USER64> Nothing is more important than family.

</comment><comment><USER65> I honestly was not expecting that.

</comment><comment><USER66> Really bravely written post.

</comment><comment><USER67> I have liked this video by Sam Harris for several years now. It is all to easy to go through life, lost in discursive thought:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3JzcCviNDk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3JzcCviNDk)

</comment><comment><USER68> I think we need to care about our parent too. As they become old, we are just fly away from them and they will struggle in their stage as us. Damn life.

<comment><USER69> I think those who like their parents do already. I think those who don't like their parents don't need to. It's the parents' job to be a person worth loving and caring for. It isn't the child's burden.

<comment><USER70> Exactly this. I have divorced parents who each remarried.

I have a mother who makes so much effort to make sure she stays in our lives. Calling/Facetiming every week at minimum. And she has visited at least once or twice a year the past five years. And we visit at least once a year if possible.

By contrast, I have a father who has literally done nothing to try to visit us in five years. It was always us making the effort, taking time and money away from ourselves, for them. And we got very little in return. We have been given very little respect by them despite showering them with undeserved respect. Every time we visit, it's like they're acting out their own Seinfeld episode -- literally worth nothing except waiting for the next opportune moment to be sarcastic "gotcha" asshats.

Some people would say, one shouldn't look for a return, that it should be all about giving. Those people must never have been burned in their lives. For me, reciprocation is the bedrock of a relationship. Any relationship. It doesn't have to always be equitable, but time and effort must be shown. Otherwise, I'm out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> If the author is reading this, I'm so sorry for your loss. I can't imagine the devastation you must have felt and must continue to feel.

It's important that you take care of yourself though. As someone who works in mental health, I've seen how these events sometimes have a way of affecting your mental state in a gradual and cascading manner. Please stay cognizant of you and your family's mental health in this difficult time.

<comment><USER72> I'm divorced, with one young boy that I split time with my ex. Were this to happen to me, I am really not sure a mental health professional could help.

This quote FTA may have just changed my life:

"I'm guessing you have 1:1 meetings on the books with a lot of people you work with. Do you have them regularly scheduled with your kids? If there's any lesson to take away from this, it's to remind others (and myself) not to miss out on the things that matter."

<comment><USER73> I was logging on here to call out that quote specifically. My kids are both in college now, and we're empty nesters for the first time as of a week ago.

My advice to all of you with young kids is to follow that advice. Schedule 1:1 time with each of your kids, and make it more important than your most important meeting at work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> tin-foil-hat i'm not crying you're crying</comment>


Here's my plan to save Twitter: Let's buy it - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/29/save-twitter-buy-platform-shared-ownership <comment><USER2> This is a really inspiring idea. The activation energy to pull it off is high though. There is a Loomio group of people already getting organised around this [https://www.loomio.org/d/3XinMm75/buy- twitter](https://www.loomio.org/d/3XinMm75/buy-twitter)</comment>


Optimize A Fresh Ubuntu Installation - <AUTHOR> http://howto.wired.com/wiki/Optimize_A_Fresh_Ubuntu_Installation

<comment><USER2> Nothing wrong with the article, but I was expecting... optimizations. It seems to instead be a list of additional software your average desktop user may find useful.

</comment><comment><USER3> Doesn't seem like a very useful article. DVD playback, etc, are givens....even for people new to ubuntu (you'll find the info with any google search). And is amarok really that much better than rhythmbox? Seems a bit KDE oriented.

<comment><USER4> Forget Amarok, mocp beats them all hands down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Maybe it's just me, but perhaps a better article would be "Optimize a fresh ubuntu user"....

Something along the lines of: =Scenario! You don't know how to do X= 1\. Don't panic 2\. Google 3\. Google 4\. Google 5\. Ask a friend 6\. Panic

</comment><comment><USER6> I have issues with Ubuntu. When I switched to a Unix based environment 12 years ago, I did what was expected of anyone at that time. I read up and learned about my environment. It seems that users (end users that is) simply do not think that these things should be their concern. That Linux should just do everything out of the box. While I am all for the simplification of Linux for the masses, understanding that software patents, copyrights, and intellectual property (in the US mind you) is being infringed upon by following guides like these is important.

Ubuntu is basically encouraging such acts by offering these "solutions" in their repositories. There are commercial solutions that could be explored which would provide legal solutions. I understand that they are trying to "grow their brand", but it seems a rather unethical way to do it.

<comment> Tuna-Fish What copyright is being infringed by something that is in the ubuntu repositories?

Perhaps they are just mainly providing their solutions to people like me who don't live in countries with ass-backwards IP laws? You cannot seriously expect that a company that isn't based in the US and isn't hosting their stuff in US is going to have to follow US patent law for products offered to people out of US?

As far as I know, any potentially patent-infringing stuff is kept very far from US-based servers.</comment></comment>


How Apple killed the Linux desktop & why that doesn't matter - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/08/osx-killed-linux/

<comment><USER2> That only means Miguel de Icaza did the job MS paid him to do. Fragment and alienate the Linux desktop from the inside with Gnome.

Apple OS X success is an unrelated phenomenon that happened later, the plan was for people to migrate back to Windows.

And then he started his .NET compatible Mono software stack

</comment><comment><USER3> Well I beg the difference! <http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>

<comment><USER4> But those stats are only from people who visit w3schools, no?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> GNU/Linux is dead?</comment>


Google Play - <AUTHOR> http://play.google.com/ <comment><USER4> I know that there is probably conflict between Google Wallet/Checkout - <USER2> they need to get on this issue like last YEAR -

GIFT CARDS!

It just implies that they don'y know anything about who is using Android phones in the U.S. I only have my gut to back this up (after observing who carries Android for the past 2 1/2 years or so) but Android devs will be able to make so much more money once Google starts selling gift cards in retail stores.

Why? Metro PCS, Boost Mobile, and teenagers. My guess is that they're a large part of the Android user base that is very unlikely to link up a credit card to their account. They _would_ however be great candidates to use gift cards bought for them on birthdays/holidays.

I swear if they don't do this soon, it'll only keep more and more developers from releasing apps on Android. /rant

<comment><USER5> As someone with a couple apps on the Market, I wish I could also issue promo/gift codes for those apps (iTunes lets you generate promo codes).

I could send someone the APK file, yes, but then they'd need to sideload it. And, they wouldn't get updates from the Market from it, so I'd have to keep sending them new copies of the package. That isn't really a tenable solution.

<comment><USER6> This was probably the single biggest reason why I didn't participate in the last Humble Bundle. Having to sideload APKs of updated games is a huge timesink that I'd rather not have to deal with.

<comment><USER7> Really? I was able to open my Humble Bundle download link on my phone, which took me to a mobile-formatted page with direct links to the APKs. I just had to tap on them, open the "finished download" notification, and tap Install.

<comment><USER6> Yes, but every time they release an update you have to go to that page again and redownload the APK. You can't just open up the market and click "Update all".

And that's even if you hear about the updates. I've never seen any email from them after I've purchased a game telling me about new updates; you have to hear about that stuff through Twitter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Google Play? Is that like Google Labs, where they play around with new technologies? No, it's where you get apps for Android"

"Get music from Google Play. No, not Google Music. You play music in Google Music, but you buy it in Google Play. Got it?"

"You get apps from Google Play too. No, not apps for your music. No, not apps for Google services. Apps for your Android phone. Any type of app - <USER3> Google Play."

Sigh...

<comment><USER9> "Google Labs" => defunct

"Google Music" => "Google Play Music"

"Google Play Store" => where you buy things (apps + music + movies + books)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I get the idea. Android Market is essentially Google's iTunes now, and they want to push the music/movies aspect. Google Play makes more sense than iTunes branding does (tunes are about 1/8 of what it does these days), but there is some weirdness. Play works well for music/movies/games, but not really for apps/books. I was introduced to the brand with an update to Google Books app saying it was now Google Play Books, which made me think Google was expanding into sports team management or something.

<comment><USER11> No name will ever be ideal for every scenario. It always has pros and cons. But statistically, most people looking for apps are looking for games. So this name is better for the majority of the cases. So I'd guess the pros outweigh the cons.

<comment><USER12> Exactly. It also evokes the idea of 'playing' with a new program or gadget, something done with non-game applications all the time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I like the new name because it makes it clear that this is one of Google's apps, not a part of Android.

'Android Market' was confusing a lot of people. I've seen more than a few journalists thinking that, for example, the Amazon Kindle Fire is not a complete Android based system, because it does not ship with the Android Market. Some even called it a fork.

<comment><USER14> It is a fork (as are all non-stock Android devices in the wild).

<comment><USER15> You're confusing Android with AOSP. "Android" is like "UNIX", it's more of an definition and API but not a specific product. Just like you have Solaris, IRIX, AIX, etc that are all UNIX because they satisfy the UNIX definitions; likewise AOSP, Sense, Blur etc are kinds of Android. I assume all known Android variants are derived from AOSP, but they don't _have_ to be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is a great concept, but the execution leaves something to be desired. Google really needs some detail obsessed folks. How do they not notice the flicker on the transitions of the app market carousel? Also, a linear transition? Yuck.

<comment><USER17> Agree.

I'm reading this on an ipad, and in portrait mode this page <https://play.google.com/about/features/> is unreadable because the text slides behind the pictures.

Apparently noone has thought about whether the site is even usable for someone with a horizontal screen resolution of less than 1024px - which in this age of mobile devices is probably a double digit percentage of users.

<comment><USER12> It looks fine in my phone's browser.

<comment><USER17> probably because you're getting a mobile page of some kind.

I just checked it in firefox on my laptop, and if you scale the window you'll see the text slide behind the graphics leaving the text unreadable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Just what I needed. Yet another service that doesn't offer any content in my country and even if it did, it doesn't seem like they would let me download the songs I paid for. Screw that.

Edit: I stand corrected about downloading. Thanks for the info, abraham.

<comment><USER19> Music users can download uploaded and purchased music. [https://support.google.com/googleplay/bin/answer.py?hl=en...](https://support.google.com/googleplay/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1233029)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> There was a strong freedom connotation in the name "Android Market", both in that it used the Android brand which is associated with an open source project, and in the meaning of the word "Market". No such connotation exists with "Google Play".

Sad, but not surprising.

</comment><comment><USER21> For those developers wondering where <http://market.android.com/publish> went, you can find your apps here: <https://play.google.com/apps/publish/Home>

</comment><comment><USER9> Their new app badges[1] say "Get it on Google Play". It's not clear at all what platform you'll be getting it for. Most people know they have "an Android", not "something with Google Play". Bit of a step back.

[1] <http://www.android.com/developers/branding.html#google_play>

<comment><USER22> The app badge says "Android app on... Google Play". I'm guessing that the other badge is for non-Android-specific content, like a song or a book.

[http://www.android.com/images/brand/android_app_on_play_larg...](http://www.android.com/images/brand/android_app_on_play_large.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> > We're sorry. The Google Play music player is currently only available in the > United States.

Should've known...

</comment><comment><USER24> If you are not from the US, UK, Canada, Australia or Japan, you may only be able to download apps. No ebooks, games or movies. They should at least add private, non-commercial podcasts. No benefit to me in South Africa. Source - [http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/introducing-google- pl...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/introducing-google-play-all- your.html)

</comment><comment><USER25> Anyone know if the apps will work on the Google TV? If so this is a lot more compelling. I'm assuming a pure Google Reader would be the next logical hardware step, in which case Google is ramping up to become a bigger threat to Amazon, which should prove to be very interesting. Apple vs Microsoft vs Google vs Amazon. That's a battle of the giants if I've ever seen one.

<comment><USER26> Android apps run on Google TV, but it requires layouts for a different screen as well as responding to the unique input device (Logitech mousepad/keyboard).

</comment></comment><comment> brown9-2 Anyone care to guess what's up with these crazy long URLs? For instance [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bithack.ap...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bithack.apparatus&feature=editorial- apps_editors_choice#?t=W251bGwsMSwyLDIxMSwiY29tLmJpdGhhY2suYXBwYXJhdHVzIl0).

The ?t= part doesn't seem relevant to the document being shown as you get the same page without it.

<comment><USER27> I'm guessing it's a tracking string.

It's actually past the # in the URL so it's not being used by the server, rather it's probably being picked up and reported with Javascript.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> We're sorry, the document you requested is not available in your country. :(

<comment><USER29> Yep ... same old same old :/ Why do these people (and I don't mean google) refuse to take my money?!

<comment><USER22> Google would really like your money, but in order to get it, they'd have to spend a lot of money. The reality is that there are so many laws about IP and money that it's nearly impossible to sell music or collect money in the US. Any business that does this successfully only does so after much hacking around US-based corporations and laws. Each new country is a fresh start, and the intersection of laws between two countries is almost always the empty set, meaning that there is no scaling effect. It's like swimming to shore while being sucked out by a rip current. You die.

A Google engineer implementing payment processing rules costs the same as a Google engineer inventing the space elevator. So Google is not going to do something like launch a brand new super complex product in every country, because that's money that could be spent on something actually cool.

<comment><USER30> It's getting easier though, at least in Europe... a common currency (mostly) and an ongoing harmonisation of data protection (just started), business and IP laws. It's not there yet but at least it'll make European countries a lot easier to enter eventually.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Maybe this is a preparation to unify the Android Market and the Chrome Web Store? This is a brand that would make sense for both android and web apps.

</comment><comment><USER31> evertime.. everytime the same thing. Why are those services most of the time not available in my country? Makes me mad.. Google Voice, Google Music, Google Play, netflix, hulu, pandora, etc etc etc(!!!)

pff... :(

</comment><comment><USER32> Or as it's known in Germany: "Leider ist das gewünschte Dokument nicht in Ihrem Land verfügbar."

Stupid geo restrictions...

</comment><comment><USER33> The animation on this page renders very poorly for me (Chrome, OS X)

<https://play.google.com/about/>

<comment><USER34> That's because they are animating top and left instead of using CSS3's translate, so they aren't getting nice smooth hardware acceleration.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> It doesn't work well with Google's account switching yet.

I happen to have 2 google accounts (personal and work) and was logged in to both. With mail and docs I can switch back and forth between them.

In Google Play, there wasn't a way to switch from the "default" account to purchase music unless I signed out of 1 and signed in with the other.

I'm sure that'll come along later, though. I realize my usage is an edge case.

</comment><comment><USER36> Google Play is a smart attempt by GOOG to gain more control of MO/OEMs. Platform fragmentation exists across 5 axes (UI, Device, OS, Marketplace, and Service).

By bundling these services together they may make it harder for MO/OEMs to implement their own and reduce fragmentation across both the "Service" and "Marketplace" fragmentation axes.

</comment><comment><USER37> While I like the overall concept I find that the navigation on Play is horribly broken. For example from Google Play Music I don't see any way to get back to the main Google Play store to buy apps or movies:

<https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#start_pl>

</comment><comment><USER38> The Market autoupdate mechanism is going to ensure that the Market icon spontaneously disappears on all devices running 2.2+ (with Google branding) in unison, much to the confusion of every single user who just knows "I press the 'Market' thing and I get games."

</comment><comment><USER39> Once again, not available in my country (Germany). Which is extra dissatisfying because Google Music worked just fine (I was in the early beta).

Is there any way for me to get a US credit card and bind it to a German bank account, or PayPal, or whatnot?

</comment><comment><USER40> Had to read quite a few comments to understand what was happening. Accessing the site from France, I only see Android apps and games.

What is on the US site exactly? Movies and music? Would anyone mind posting a screenshot?

<comment><USER41> here you go: <http://i.imgur.com/5Bdmk.png>

<comment><USER40> That makes more sense, thanks!

Here's the version I get if anyone's curious:

<http://i.imgur.com/HIb4d.png>

(Notice the 1 $ = 1 € conversion...)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> For a moment I thought Google was getting into gaming...

Hey, after Valve's Steambox anything is possible, and if rumors are true they are trying to emulate Android's model with OEMs.

</comment><comment><USER43> Hm, it looks like market.android.com now also redirects to Google Play. Wasn't Android supposed to be a separate entity from Google?

<comment><USER44> The Android Market has always been separate from Android.

Also, I think Google should've adopted the same strategy with Android as they did with Chrome and Chromium. Basically, they make everything open source, but they only promote the "Google Chromium", known to us as Chrome.

They should've done something similar from the beginning, because it's obvious Google wants a "Google Experience Android" to be separate than the Android that is accessible to anyone. If the projects had different names, it might've avoided some of the confusion about others using "Android" to make their own projects (like Amazon, B&N, and some Chinese companies).

Also, it would've forced manufacturers to keep it mostly the same (Would you get a Samsung branded Chrome?). But because they promoted Android instead of the "Google Experience Android", now they are coming out short in some ways, and manufacturers get to do almost whatever they want to Android. I'm not saying this is good or bad - just that it's bad for Google, and for their sake, it would've been better to use the Chrome/Chromium strategy.

Now they're trying to do this by renaming everything into "Google X" instead of using Android anymore. It might work, but it should've happened from the beginning, and it might be a bit confusing to do it right now.

<comment><USER12> On the flip side, they've only been able to get as far as they have on the strength of alliances that may not have flourished with such a clear line drawn.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Appears some of the apps have been put on sale as part of the launch. HotUkDeals has a list of what's available for those that are interested:

[http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/android-market-play-sale- app...](http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/android-market-play-sale-apps- game-49p-great-deals-1161744)

</comment><comment><USER46> For having as much money as Google does (presumably), they really don't invest in design talent all that much. This UI is killing me.

Edit: Which is kind of bizarre because they hired this guy a while back: <http://dribbble.com/KounterB>

<comment><USER47> Prediction: he has a blog post in 5 months about google, creative restriction, and why he quit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> I find their departure away from their usual logo styles pretty interesting. I like the logo, but it doesn't really say "google" to me. Maybe that's what they were intending <http://cl.ly/053t0P2T1w441L3h3P0w>

<comment><USER49> A lot of new google properties have that style, eg. <https://developers.google.com/> and the Google Apps icon.

<comment><USER50> But that at least is using the bold primary colors associated with Google's logo. The Play logo uses off-colors (this goes beyond the logo, look at the main page: movies/music/apps and games/books are in the same colors as the Play logo). I thought this was weird as well -- all of the other Google favicons (gmail calendar, docs, spreadsheets) have strong, bold colors used in the Google logo -- just glancing at the favicon I couldn't tell this was a Google site.

I wonder if this is intentional though; it seems very odd to depart from their traditional colors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> This is the least exciting thing I have seen today. There are hundreds of these throw away games which are nothing more than a time sink and contain no more depth than an A4 sheet of paper.

So there is an new/improved platform store to buy/sell these apps. Greeeaatttt....

</comment><comment><USER52> Gah.. The logo looks like something Microsoft would come up with.

</comment><comment><USER53> There are a total of 71 movies listed, or am I missing something?

<comment><USER53> Ok, I see the rest, apparently I was looking in "Staff Picks".

I don't see a way to buy, is this rental only for movies?

<comment><USER19> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> This brings many of Google's stores under one brand, but the Chrome Web Store remains separate. (It has web apps, extensions, themes, etc.)

</comment><comment><USER55> Why isn't the Chrome Web Store a part of this?

</comment><comment><USER56> It looks like a carbon copy of Apple App store / iTunes.

<comment><USER22> It does look similar, though it does have cloud-based music syncing, more books, and other nice incremental improvements.

<comment><USER57> The only problem with Google is they just have no taste.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> And still no API for music.</comment>


WPA2 wireless security cracked - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140320100824.htm

<comment><USER2> Wireless networking is/has always had potential for infiltration. It is inherent since the signal is broadcast out without any regard to who is listening. This security flaw, using brute force, is a good, if slow, way to exploit the open nature of WiFi. They do not specify any timing for breaking a psk so I assume this isn't very fast. And the article doesn't state if the brute force can only be attempted while the back door is temporarily open. Security threat yes. How long to break, who knows.

A great reason to use wired when you can!

<comment><USER3> I've wondered about using SSH socks proxy on my devices to help get around this. Even if they break WPA2 they'd deal with SSH traffic only.

For example, it seems reasonable that I could have my laptop or phone use a ssh tunnel and it can only go to my wireless router. The router will only accept SSH traffic with a certificate and route traffic to an SSH somewhere on my wired network, or from the router itself.

At work I do something similar. I setup a firefox profile (firefox -ProfileManager -no-remote) to use SOCKS proxy on some port and setup SSH to connect to an EC2 instance I have lying around (ssh -i cert.file email@example.com -ND 8888). This way I can browse sort of in private. :p

FYI: Some sites like craigslist or redfin reject ec2 traffic.

<comment><USER4> This is a perfect use case for openvpn. I use it whenever I connect to a public wifi to spare me worrying about how secure it may or may not be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm confused; I thought this was a known flaw in WPA2 (see e.g. [http://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa](http://www.aircrack- ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa)). Can anybody explain what's new about this?

<comment><USER6> yeah, this is interesting to me as well. I first heard of this method about a decade ago. The bibliographic info says:

Achilleas Tsitroulis, Dimitris Lampoudis, Emmanuel Tsekleves. Exposing WPA2 security protocol vulnerabilities. International Journal of Information and Computer Security, 2014; 6 (1): 93 DOI: 10.1504/IJICS.2014.059797

I got on the Inderscience website to see what they charge for a subscription to this journal, but when I clicked the 'Subscription Price' link it hung, and now the whole site is strangely down for me...

Perhaps expensive journals are having trouble finding original content in our culture of openness?

<comment> r-u-serious > Perhaps expensive journals are having trouble finding original content in > our culture of openness?

Apparently: [http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more- than-120...](http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more- than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763)

<comment><USER6> yeah, its back up, a year of just that journal costs 706 Euros = 959.45 USD currently. Wow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Behold! Some "researcher" just updated his Wifiway for the first time in the last 2 years and realized it comes now with a `crack WPA2` feature! "What's this all about?" He asked to a couple of fellow "researchers". "Oh yeah, it seems we can capture the handshake and try to bruteforce the PSK now. And there is a couple of deauth attacks to force the handshake too!" Now the two- step get-rich-quick scheme, as a fellow slashdot user commented, comes to play:

(1) Publish Paywalled Article Exposing Security Holes in Commonly-Used Security Protocol

(2) Profit!

</comment><comment><USER8> Is this something new or the good ole' hole196?

[http://arstechnica.com/business/2010/07/wifi- hole196-major-e...](http://arstechnica.com/business/2010/07/wifi- hole196-major-exploit-or-much-ado-about-little/)

</comment><comment><USER9> Are there any wifi standards that are actually "secure" that are available for soho users? (Short of the ssh/open VPN solution)

</comment><comment><USER10> Deauth is a not a new attack.</comment>


The Symmetrical Foundation of Measure, Probability, and Quantum Theories - <AUTHOR> https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.201800057 <comment><AUTHOR> From the abstract:

> Quantification starts with sum and product rules that express combination > and partition [...] measure theory formalizes addition, and probability > theory formalizes inference in terms of proportions. Quantum theory rests on > the same simple symmetries, but is formalized in two dimensions [...] in > order to track an object through its binary interactions [...] The standard > quantum formalism follows. There is no mystery or weirdness, just ordinary > probabilistic inference.</comment>


Facebook "PLEASE DO ME A FAVOR" request is rubbish, a good explanation why... - <AUTHOR> http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/09/26/facebook-ticker-privacy-scare/

<comment><USER2> _If you want to stop strangers from seeing everything you do_ then you're probably better off just not using Facebook. Seriously. They're never going to shut off these eavesdropping things because that's the only online way they can grow the interconnectedness of their network - and the denser the network, the more value. To Facebook.

<comment><USER3> Telling somebody something on facebook is like talking to them at a party. I actually think it's cool that this sort of serendipity becomes possible. And I don't even like facebook anymore.

<comment><USER4> Except that most parties don't include live streaming to strangers. Nowadays it's a lot easier to have something you said or did exposed to the whole world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The whole friends of friends setting was never really an awesome way to limit sharing, in my mind, since it isn't possible to know how many people that actually is. Facebook's definitely phased it out recently, so that's why you only have 'Friends' and 'Public' now (or 'Custom', but the average user won't use that). This article is really sensationalist, and contains some incorrect information:

> Custom means that the post will be safe to comment on with no leakage to > strangers via the ticker/news feed.

No it doesn't. It means you don't know the privacy of the post, and it may be more or less limited than the 'Friends' setting.

The best advice from the article:

> And don't forget - next time you leave a comment on someone else's Facebook > post, don't say something that you may later regret.

Never do this on HN either. Same concept.

<comment><USER6> Friends of friends is a joke the second your cousin goes to college and friends the entire freshman class.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Demanding that someone take action to protect you from your own ignorance is rubbish.

<comment><AUTHOR> ...and another good explanation why.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> What the hell does this stuff do on HN front page?!

</comment><comment><USER9> Their privacy settings are a huge mess...</comment>