Ask HN: How should I approach buying my ideal domain name? - <AUTHOR> The problem is simple: the domain squatting company,  http://www.buydomains.com/, owns the domain that I really want for my idea. Whois records show that the domain is set to expire on May 26th. It looks like they renewed it last year so I don't hold out much hope that they will let it expire.<p>The real question is, how should I approach this kind of negotiation? Do any of you have experience with this scenario? <comment><USER2> I've bought two domains from a squatter company. They were asking $14k and $10k each. We placed two low-ball offers and ended up settling at $2k and $1k. This was from a major domain seller so you might find you can get them for 1/10 the asking price.

<comment><USER3> That's still a _ton_ of money. I had no idea people paid this much instead of coming up with a clever name.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, there are domain names that sell for millions. Candy.com for example sold for $3 Million.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Email Justin Murgo jmurgo at buydomains dot com - he's a reasonable sales rep of theirs (I've purchased 3-4 domains from him at far below their list). I agree with the post stating that you can sometimes get a domain for 1/10 what they have it listed.

<comment><USER6> This sounds like the best advice. Email the guy mentioning that he was recommended. Then negotiate from less that a grand to as much as you're willing to pay, never exuding urgency.

Don't lose sleep planning/hoping to snag the domain if/when it drops. It won't. Businesses don't abandon inventory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> BuyDomains is pretty good to deal with. They are a buy and sell domain company, not buy and hold.

Just make an offer on the low side of reasonable. (recent sales: <http://dnjournal.com/domainsales.htm>).

If I was prepared to pay $2K for a domain, I would start with an offer in the $800-$1.2 range.

If they have a fixed price, don't be afraid to offer 50% of their asking price.

</comment><comment><USER8> Here is some interesing read about how to snatch an expiring domain : [http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2005/03/how-to- sn...](http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2005/03/how-to-snatch-an- expiring-domain)

<comment><USER9> However this won't help if buydomains.com chooses to renew again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> We used a non-ideal domain name for about 3 years before buying our domain from a domain squatter. It cost us 3 times what it would've cost if we'd have bought it up front, but the money was needed for other things earlier on.

Our domain cost about US$1000 in the end, versus $370 if we'd have bought it at the start.

<comment><USER11> I've mentioned this a few times before, but when we started with didn't own the .com.

It took 10 years of trying to negotiate a reasonable price - all the while our business increasing the value of the domain - before we bought it for $400,000 at auction.

A $1000 today might save you $399,000 (plus 10 years worth of legals) in the future.

<comment><USER12> what was the domain name you started and ended with?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> You gotta remember that the name of your site really doesn't matter that much. Just make sure whatever it is, it's spelled how it sounds (most people can spell it right on the first try).

<comment><USER14> I can't disagree with your first sentence enough.

Names matter. I'd have thought with a name like "nutter" you'd understand that, didn't you get teased at school?

<comment><USER15>
        ...
        I tell ya, life ain't easy for a boy named "Sue."

        Well, I grew up quick and I grew up mean,
        My fist got hard and my wits got keen,
        ...

(I first saw mention of that Johnny Cash song in Mad Magazine, many moons ago, but never heard it. Now that there's internet search, I finally got to read the whole thing ...)

<comment><USER14> Having a bad (derogatory, tease-worthy) name is not necessarily bad you can swing that to your advantage as you (or Cash at least) indicate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If you can't get your ideal name, think about adding words onto it and coming up with some variation.

Many web properties started with less than ideal domain names, ending up with what they wanted in the end.

Facebook - thefacebook.com Dropbox - getdropbox.com Delicious - del.icio.us Twitter - twittr.com

I'd suggest a tool like <http://www.bustaname.com> would help you out getting what you want.

I recently did this very same thing with a domain and got something incredibly close to what I originally wanted.

<comment><USER17> Also, <http://www.nxdom.com/> is good for searching for domains.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Yea I mean, give it a shot, but don't stop looking for alternative names for now. Can't forget, it used to be "TheFacebook.com"

<comment><USER13> Twitter also used to be twittr.com

<comment><USER19> And, Square is squareup.com.

<comment><USER20> And dig is doing good being digg.com. And I see Flickr doing well too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> You can also use services such as <http://www.sitevaluecalculator.com> and <http://www.rapidsitecheck.com> to get a good feel of how much a domain is worth. It can give you some additional ammo in a domain name fight.

<comment><USER21> Those sites only seem to value domains on the basis of things like traffic and pagerank. I own a .com domain that is a three letter, cool sounding English word (I bought it 15 years ago). Those sites calculate the value of my domain at about $1000. Since I've already turned down an offer of $60k I'm certainly going to ignore anyone offering what is hardly more than pocket change.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> first person to name a price loses.

You can usually low ball a domain squatter because they only make money if their inventory sells. The domain isn't usually a revenue producing asset that would demand a high price on its own.

<comment><USER12> I've tried this, i offered $100 for domain that i was kindof interested in. The domain guy laughed in my face, i bumped up my offer to 120 because it wasn't worth more than 200-300 to me, and im not going to start in that price range. The domain guy came back and said they were looking for five figures. Then i laughed in his face, and we haven't spoken again.

Yes they want to move product, but they also believe that you (or someone else) NEEDS that domain. They live on margin, not on volume.

<comment><USER23> Similar thing. My neighbors didn't renew their domain for their business. They picked up a .net which worked fine for them, but they still wanted the .com back. I offered the new holder $100 a couple times but they wanted $1000+. I eventually put in a backorder at GoDaddy and it finally expired and we got it back for them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> You should also check some of the listing sites. We got the .com version of our domain via GoDaddy's "premium domains" rather than the squatting company directly. You can usually find the one you're really interested in by searching for a close match, and letting their suggestion engines select the real one for you without seeming keen.

(We got the domain out of GoDaddy as soon as we could. They're a nightmare, they couldn't even manage to send an email and required phoning them to sort out various problems. But at least we got it in the end.)

</comment><comment><USER25> I bought a domain name for a project from BuyDomains. I offered 25% of what they had it listed at, and ultimately got it for that price.

I had inquired a few times to purchase the domain, but never got very far with the negotiation.

They sent me an email last summer advertising their "No Serious Offer Refused" sale. I responded with my offer, and was patient. Close to the end of the month, a sales rep called me back, and I found he was much more willing to a negotiate (probably to meet sales targets at the end of the month).

The big take aways for me were to 1) be patient when dealing with them, 2) don't sound over eager to get the domain, and 3) commit to an amount you're willing to spend before going into the negotiation.

</comment><comment><USER26> Bidding at 25-35% of the original offer is something that worked for me in the past. Also a thing I found very useful is doing your initial offer from a alternative e-mail that doesn't have anything to do with you or your company, especially if you already have a established brand. Some reps research clients before proposing the price thus if you`re a "nobody" there`s a higher chance of getting a lower offer.

</comment><comment><USER27> I'd set a backorder on my registrar and wait till that date. You could have the domain for as low as 100 bucks this way.

<comment><USER28> backorders almost never ever work, especially if the domain has any value. First off if the domain is somewhere like GoDaddy, even if you have a back order with GoDaddy, it will first go to their auction system before actually expiring. This means a back order on a domain owned by GoDaddy is pretty pointless since you could buy it at auction for less.

If you really want to get a name when it expires you have to use Snapnames, they work with tons of different companies to make sure you get the name. I did this recently and it worked out great (although you end up with a domain registered at some crazy company half the time and have to transfer it 90 days later)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This advice worked for me when buying a domain recently:

[http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/02/27/how-to- buy-d...](http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/02/27/how-to-buy-domain- names-like-a-pro-10-tips-from-the-founder-of-phonetagcom/)

</comment><comment><USER30> I've had good experience with SnapNames - <http://www.snapnames.com> I'll suggest you to try grab the domain yourself first, and if it fails then you can make an offer to the owner.

</comment><comment><USER31> Don't keep visiting the domain and make sure others who are involved don't visit it - the company is likely to monitor traffic and think there's more interest than there is which might push the price up a few $.

</comment><comment><USER32> Isn't it pretty much automated with domain squatters? Eg, they have a "buy domain" or "request price" button, and see what you get back?

<comment><AUTHOR> The fear is that if I do request the price that it will express cursory interest in the domain name and thus increase the price. That said, I really don't know how these things work and it may be harmless to click their "request a price" button.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Also check out <http://domai.nr> \-- might get some good suggestions for alternatives.

</comment><comment><USER34> Ask for the price from an anonymous email as a starting point....fairly easy.

<comment><USER35> Bad idea. Then you make the seller think that there are TWO potential buyers, so they get greedy and try to run a little auction.

<comment><USER14> Sealed bids against yourself could go well...</comment></comment></comment>


A bucket a day – a hack in agriculture - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@pravenj/a-bucket-a-day-a-hack-in-agriculture-8b8176b7d285#.o7seviday <comment><USER2> >considering smoke from kitchens as source for CO2

Mushrooms expel CO2 and intake O2; there are several products such as [0] but you could just as easily grow some edible mushrooms to raise CO2 within the enclosure.

[0] [http://www.planetnatural.com/product/exhale- co2-bags/](http://www.planetnatural.com/product/exhale-co2-bags/)</comment>


German intelligence agency halts Internet monitoring for NSA - <AUTHOR> http://www.dw.de/german-intelligence-agency-halts-internet-monitoring-for-nsa/a-18435768 <comment><USER3> German Spiegel reports, that mostly European agencies and diplomats were being spied on by the NSA with the help of the German Intelligence Agency, but

"Schindler [Head of Germany intelligence agency] tries to play it down: Most european agencies and most diplomats from the EU don't communicate through unsecure emails. Connections over a Vpn would prevent the capturing of emails by the BND [German intelligence agency]"

And obviously, no terrorists would ever use a Vpn.

Source: [http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/bnd-kann-daten- wei...](http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/bnd-kann-daten-weitergabe- an-nsa-nicht-rekonstruieren-a-1032596.html)

<comment><USER4> Over VPN - but is that key exchange safe? Is that proprietary crypto system in use at $diplomacy backdoored with a weak RNG?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Good, the more political fallout, the better.

These kinds of cold shoulders are the language of diplomacy and power. In some small abstract way, the US's ability to defend itself has been reduced by this action-- power has been reduced. The power players in the government will take note of this, and ultimately tiny intangible reductions will be unsustainable and policy will have to change.

<comment><USER6> While I don't disagree that it is a strong political move, and an appropriate one, I have seen no proof that any of the NSA's operations have made the USA materially safer.

<comment><USER7> "Being safe" does not matter as much as "having power" does.

<comment><USER8> Well, once you're one of the people in power...you'll have a staff of people whose sole job is to ensure you stay safe.

Everybody else? Something about eating cake, I think...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The question here is, if it is only a temporary halt until the dust has settled. As much I read in the source, phone calls and faxes are still submitted, so it appears to me very half-hearted.

I know, that the German intelligence agency "BND" always wanted to have a more tight corporation with the NSA.

<comment><USER10> There is a significant difference between the collaboration of surveillance of fax and telephone on one side and the internet on the other side. In the former case, specific justification was and is needed for each selector. In the latter, case that was not the case.

<comment><USER9> Are you sure? I'm not. Who controls what the BND is doing? Oh, yes, I know, they report to a group of politicians, right. They already admitted, that they are overworked and have not the facilities to check up the BND. Also, the BND already lied to parliament ... I guess, the BND is likely worse controlled than the NSA and the NSA has still more control over the BND than our own parliament, since the NSA is in the same building as the BND surveillance team, the politicians from parliament are not (they are hundreds of miles away in Berlin).

<comment><USER10> No, I'm not sure.

I just read that the BND-officials said that they are overworked, too - <USER2> years.

There seem to be systematic issues in the German intelligence services.

<comment><USER9> I guess, they have to much to do, spying on people.

<comment><USER10> And we want them to spy on some people. But supervised and controlled by the parliament.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Right at the end of the article is an interesting statement:

      The report said the NSA had equipped the listening station
      in Bad Aibling with sophisticated technical equipment. A
      number of NSA personnel are believed to work there together
      with some 120 BND personnel.

The point here is that NSA personnel are on secondment or implants to use another term. Having implants encourages complacency. You end up with scenarios like:

       Bob (NSA): hey Klaus, can you add these new selectors to the filters please?

       Klaus (BND): Ja, when do you want that? Tomorrow ok? I'll get Alice to run them tomorrow. You still want to come to the summer party this weekend?

Familiarity in security scenarios is dangerous. Implants breed familiarity.

</comment><comment><USER12> Happy to hear this, as an expat living in Berlin and being very concerned with the current NSA situation.

<comment><USER13> Same here. Privacy issues are something that boosted Berlin's (and German in general) startups or at least gave them an opportunity for easy marketing -- "we are not in five eyes". Now it's kind of awkward.

By the way, the pictured building (new BND headquarters) is in my neighborhood; I cycle past it nearly every day.

On the other side of the building there are two conspicuous palm trees; really tall and green, they even survived winters. I always joke these are actually antennas in disguise but who knows.

<comment><USER14> I wonder what the fee for is for intentional damage of a public tree (hoping it would not be a "good tree, that would not be nice to damage). Worth trying? :)

<comment><USER13> It's behind a tall fence. You'd probably be in a bigger trouble for trespassing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Now on to UK, Sweden, Spain, France, etc to make them do the same.

</comment><comment><USER9> Newest news from Germany: An important information artifact that was needed to illuminate this topic, was deleted. So, it should be clear, that the BND did not change, but somebody is now hushing up the whole topic.

(German) Source: [http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/NSA-Ausschuss-BND- hat...](http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/NSA-Ausschuss-BND-hat-Liste- brenzliger-Ausspaehziele-geloescht-2638435.html)

<comment><USER16> This seems like a common theme with intelligence agencies, building datacenters to store petabytes, but no one can spare a 2TB external to store the list of selectors that were queried.

(I mean, there really aren't too many options here. Either they did store the data and deleted it, in which case the person in question and everyone up the chain in command committed treason, or they just don't store queried selectors, in which case 1) the program is probably illegal, 2) they are incompetent if they don't monitor what the 'allies' query. Intelligence agencies have no allies, that is the whole point of their existence.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Yeah, just because it's a major topic in German media...</comment>


Ask HN: What's the worst Oracle can do to OpenJDK? - <AUTHOR> I've recently started a project using Java. From a technical perspective and after careful analysis of alternative technologies, for what I am doing it currently is the right choice.
But with the Google-Oracle lawsuit, Oracle laying off the Sun team, and my professional experience, I really have to convince myself building anything on top of a technology stack where they are such a powerful player.
I understand that OpenJDK is GPLed with class path exception, but is that enough? Could Oracle somehow sabotage OpenJDK into oblivion? What's the most probable steps Google, IBM and RedHat could take if Oracle pulls the plug on Java, or worse, plays some dirty legal tricks?
I know my concerns are vague but I wonder if people who know better could share their thoughts? <comment><USER2> The worst Oracle can do is to stop investing resources in improving it. There are wide range of other sources that you can get a JVM from. Ranging from big IBM, to smaller players like Azul (zing or zulu), RedHat, Excelsior, JamaicaVM from aicas and many more... Who would all be happy to take your money and the mindshare away from Oracle.

OracleJDK might be the no brainer install today for servers. But given any drop in commitment the community is large enough to continue by itself. It will slow down because Oracle puts a lot of money in JVM development so that would be a pity...

Oracle likes to use its lawyers, but only if they can actually win money. If someone can imagine how Oracle could make money out of stopping OpenJDK then I would be worried but I just don't see it. I sooner see them sueing Intel for using some patented trick in ICC to make their SpecCPU results look worse than not continuing to support OpenJDK as they have done today.

Their model is support JVM's for cash. Improve it internally ahead of the curve for making Oracle Cloud better than the other clouds and just get a foot in the door in Marketing materials and good will.

In any case the Java community is so deep and all encompassing that one does not see the giant jungle anymore. The hardcore VM community is much larger than those of Python, Bash or Ruby. With only JavaScript coming close in VM developer head count.

<comment><USER3> > Their model is support JVM's for cash. Improve it internally ahead of the > curve for making Oracle Cloud better than the other clouds and just get a > foot in the door in Marketing materials and good will.

It's quite jarring to see "Oracle" and "good will" in the same sentence.

<comment><USER2> I can see that but acounting wise it probably the right term. .. and seeing it acounting wise is probably the best way to look at large Oracle strategies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Oracle controls the "Java" trademark. They can prevent OpenJDK (and any other implementations) from being able to call future major versions Java (or indeed JVM/JRE/JDK), simply by not publishing or not licensing future versions of the TCK. (Licensing terms for the Java trademark require an implementation to pass the TCK to be able to call itself Java.)

Just removing the word Java from the OpenJDK sources and documentation would be a huge endeavor. All the standard tools ("java", "javac" etc) would have to be renamed. It might also require completely breaking backward compatibility, because APIs are now copyrighted and the Java standard library packages are named java.* (and probably there are class and method names mentioning "java" too).

ETA: even ignoring copyrights on API, the trademark itself might stop you from publishing the not-Java standard library under the package java.*.

ETA #2: other commenters say it's allowed to use a trademarked word as long as it's necessary for compatibility. But it's not allowed to actually say you're compatible. Apparently. I don't claim to understand this, but law is not require to make sense, so this could be true.

<comment><USER5> Trademark and/or copyright can't be used to block interoperability, see the Lexmark printer cartridge lawsuit where they embedded their logo into a MCU on the cartridge to try and block third-party cartridges.

And while, yes, one circuit so far has decided that API's are copywritable the argument of fair use is still up in the air (unless the appellate court has finally finished that case, I haven't bothered to check).

Also, Oracle and Sun before have continued to release OpenJDK under the GPLv2 (with classpath exception), giving an implicit license to the API with the worst case being an implementation needs to use the same license - it may not be able to call itself "Java" on the packaging but "compatible" probably.

<comment><USER4> Even if you ignore API copyrightability, it's impossible for a Java implementation to be compatible without using the word Java in very many places, including in the API. (Presumably trademark law applies to an API; I can't publish an API under the package name com.oracle, and similarly I can't publish under java.xxx). Also the whole tool system and the documentation of everything.

Removing the word Java from all docs and sources isn't nearly as easy as removing the name RedHat and making CentOS. And even if you do that you won't be compatible because all the existing tools and programs expect you to be called java.

<comment><USER6> As the parent poster explicitly said, trademarks cannot be used to block interoperability - since, as you say, impossible for a Java implementation to be compatible without using the word Java in very many places, then this means that you are allowed to use that word without permission.

I'm not entirely sure if you're actually prohibited from publishing a _new_ API under the name of com.oracle.* or java.* (IMHO you can, but I'm not sure), but even if you're prohibited to do so in the general case, you 100% can name a package com.oracle.java.everything without any permission if naming it so is actually needed for interoperability, that's a legitimate use of a trademark that its owner cannot restrict.

<comment><USER4> > since, as you say, impossible for a Java implementation to be compatible > without using the word Java in very many places, then this means that you > are allowed to use that word without permission.

If this is true, then why did the Apache Harmony project have to close because it couldn't get a TCK license and so couldn't call itself Java or even Java- compatible?

<comment><USER6> Using the word "Java" in the _human_ naming, branding, advertising material, etc is not required for technical interoperability and follows the usual trademark restrictions. Getting _actual_ interoperability is protected, _calling_ yourself compatible is a bit trickier.

Having a project branded "Magic Java Bean" with a class name com.mycompany.magicbean requires permission from Oracle, but having a project named "My alternative black magic drink SDK" with a classpath com.oracle.jdbc or java.something does not require any licence, _if_ that _particular_ name is _required_ for interoperability.

TCK, despite "compatibility" in it's name, isn't required for compatibility in the legal sense (it's required to _demonstrate_ compatibility, not as an unalienable part of any component that happens to be compatible) so it can be licenced (or not) however Sun/Oracle wishes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Imagine Oracle's current business model goes downhill. Imagine Oracle has plenty of money remaining and asks "How can we monetize Java?" They will not ask Hacker News, they will spend potentially millions of dollars asking lawyers.

Given Oracle's past behavior with respect to Java, their general competitive model and their financial resources the answer is "Worse than you you or HN can imagine".

If you already have a significant investment in using OpenJDK, you may not have a choice, but otherwise there are other good technologies and you should avoid any JVM, JDK and other Java/JVM based technologies or languages. IMHO.

<comment><USER8> I agree in principle though I don't see that happening anytime soon.

But the point is: why should I use Java in 2017 when there are plenty alternatives around? Mindshare, maturity, and ecosystem _are_ good reasons to choose Java still. But what's the point in Java bytecode or other compile-to- bytecode languages when the only ISAs left are x86_64 and ARM (this is also a problem I have with WASM). Back in 1996/97, there was a very real danger of MS operating systems eating the world, and Java was welcome as a cross-platform language (for me, it was very important to be able to continue developing on Unix). I'd say Java was successfull in preventing MS dominance on the backend.

In 2017, it's time to move on. Personally, I'm not into languages dominated by a single party, or having a single implementation only. So it's C and C++ for me, plus JavaScript for scripting.

But Java has been the go-to language for most of the time starting with the WWW boom in 1996, so the sheer amount of Java code means I don't need to worry about Java's demise. In fact, I'm fully expecting to do Java development gigs until retirement.

<comment><USER5> As a counter-argument, why NOT use Java? You have multiple free and open source implementations to choose from, and there's a library on Maven Central for almost anything you'd ever want - and if you don't like the language itself there are many alternatives to choose from.

<comment><USER8> Where I'd recommend Java

\- fat backends for eCommerce, eGovernance, etc. with deep business logic

\- when developing on Windows and deploying on Linux (though I'm personally _much_ more productive with Unix/Linux) eg. pjmpl's point

Where Java isn't great IMHO:

\- must carry around a JVM and must have a JVM for the platform in the first place (so no deployment on the BSDs with first party support)

\- desktop GUI apps

\- web apps where you want to share front-end and back-end code

\- environments where garbage-collected execution isn't desired (such as realtime apps or performance-oriented apps with special memory layout requirements)

\- asynchronous, evented I/O (though Java has libs for it as well, yet not in mainstream Java APIs)

\- environments where JITing isn't desired for security reasons (NoExecute segment bits)

\- environments where single address space apps aren't desired (security isolation)

\- realtime apps including high-frequency trading apps

\- OP's point of becoming dependent on a potentially rogue party without necessity

<comment><USER9> Not an expert, but I thought that nearly all of high-frequency trading (and finance in general) was Java. They spend handsomely on huge heaps and controlled-allocation data structures.

<comment><USER8> I'm not an expert in HFT either, but know personally someone who's developing HFT apps in C++. I guess if your profit depends on milliseconds and lower, there's no point in taking chances with Java.

But Java is of course huge in all kind of financial apps, including settlement of HFT deals (eg. not on a critical code path).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't think they can do much to harm OpenJDK as it's GPL and developed by various parties and individuals.

What they definitely can do is start charging for Hotspot which would have a disruptive effect on the whole ecosystem. From my experience around 9 i 10 shops use Hotspot before any other JVM implementation.

They may also withdraw access to the TCK which would render alternative JVMs not suitable for organizations that heavily rely on standards and have strict policies in that respect.

Should this happen, I am absolutely positive companies like Azul, IBM or RedHat will step in and build a new (friendlier) open Java platform based on OpenJDK. Heck, maybe that would even mean resurrecting Apache Harmony.

I wouldn't be too much concerned about that in genereal. Oracle does not have absolute control over Java.

<comment><USER3> > Oracle does not have absolute control over Java.

Oracle does have absolute control over whether they sue anyone over Java.

<comment><USER10> So how did that play out in Oracle vs Google?

<comment><USER3> Google can survive being sued, win or loose.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Oracle uses Java in its own products extensively: in fact the Oracle DB has the JVM integrated into it as a component, so they need Java to develop regardless of the details of how they do it.

Oracle can't really sabotage OpenJDK specifically. What they could do is take all development back in house. Oracle is the main contributor to OpenJDK so that'd effectively make future versions of Java closed source. However they aren't the only contributor by any means and presumably doing that would lead to a fork of the project. Red Hat contributes quite significantly already (ports, an entirely new GC engine) and I guess they'd become a rallying point. Probably a lot of Java engineers would quit and go join companies supporting OpenJDK. It'd cause a lot of disruption.

However, are they going to do that? Well, probably not. They've owned Java for years. In that time they've increased funding significantly and open sourced large new components that were not open sourced when they bought Sun. They've also sorted out Sun's management issues with the result that the project started moving again.

There's a lot of Oracle hate around due to their aggressive sales tactics and the Google lawsuit. But if you restrict your view to just the technical side of Java, they've not done a bad job. They got the project back on track, open sourced a lot of new code, they've got a solid long term technical roadmap with experienced engineers doing very professional work entirely out in the open. The design process isn't just open, it's done through the community process, so other firms have their say (see the recent Jigsaw hooha for an example). You can go take part in the design process of major new changes. Oracle's proprietary bits on top of OpenJDK are really pretty thin, I'd be surprised if they make much money from that.

Ultimately the question is, can you have something like Java without being worried about the owners? I think the answer is no. If you look at the alternative companies that might have bought Sun and continued funding Java, there'd have been maybe IBM, maybe Google, _maybe_ Red Hat but probably not. Red Hat would have been the best but are they big and rich enough to have boosted funding to the level Oracle has? Even if Google had acquired Java, well Google has a shit ton of languages and frameworks all competing for internal attention. Whilst Google has a lot of code written in Java, it's not clear to me that Java would have won out for funding and executive attention in the battle of internal politics against Go, Dart, whatever. And of course there are lots of people who are worried about Google and the direction it's taking as well.

<comment> dyu- > in fact the Oracle DB has the JVM integrated into it as a component

So java stored procedures inside oracle?

<comment><USER12> Yes, since the early days of Java.

Microsoft has the same with .NET on SQL Server.

<comment> dyu- Cool. They already have PL/SQL though, so I'm wondering what's their motivation to adding a full jvm inside their process.

<comment><USER12> Back in the .com days they also had Perl.

Is also a way to extend the SQL languages, and to bring existing code into the server side.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Probably the worst I can think of is taking the Google Android playbook open with closed extensions then deprecate the open. You already see this a little bit with things like JavaFx in the Oracle distribution but not the OpenJDK. Sure you can build it yourself, but how long till we see extensions that are in the Oracle distribution that can't be built for the OpenJDK? Eventually it looks like Android where what is open and what people actually use are two different things.

</comment><comment><USER14> > I understand that OpenJDK is GPLed with class path exception, but is that > enough?

GPL v2 does not say that it is irrevocable. Oracle could throw a huge monkey wrench into OpenJDK by announcing that they are revoking the current license on all of the code in OpenJKD that they own and either no longer licensing it or licensing it on terms incompatible with the current license, and start suing people who continue using it as if it is still under GPL.

This would put us into legally uncertain territory.

Generally, non-exclusive copyright licenses that do not specify a definite duration and do not say they are revocable are revocable at will. They may be irrevocable if supported by consideration.

The key question here would be whether defendants can find an argument that there was consideration (unlikely) or a substitute for consideration (much more likely).

Another approach Oracle could take is not to try to revoke the license, but rather simply announce that they are no longer issuing new licenses. People who have OpenJDK licenses now can keep on using it, but anyone who comes to Oracle for a new license is told no.

Unfortunately, GPL v2 explicitly says that you cannot sublicense and when a licensee distributes copies their recipients do not receive their licenses from the distributor but rather from the original licensor.

If Oracle succeeded with this approach the consequences would be murky. Existing licensees would probably be able to continue distributing copies and derivative works, and their recipients would be able to use them, but those recipients might not be able to further distribute copies.

For those drafting future open source licenses who want to keep these things from happening with software under your license: (1) explicitly say in the license that it is irrevocable, and (2) explicitly say that licensees can sublicense under the same terms.

Of the major free/open source licenses, the only one I know offhand that does this right is Apache.

<comment><USER4> The GPL is not (easily) revocable. The license for any concrete version already published in OpenJDK under the GPL can only be revoked 35 years after that version was published. Even then, the owner must provide public notice 2 years before revoking the license.

Source: [https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/832/is-a- copyright-l...](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/832/is-a-copyright- license-by-default-revocable-or-irrevocable)

<comment><USER14> That's specifically talking about 17 USC 203, which is a termination right that applies to all copyright licenses in the US, even those that explicitly say they are irrevocable and were backed with consideration.

That a license is eventually revocable under 17 USC 203 does not preclude it being revocable under other circumstances.

The case law holds that a non-exclusive copyright license without consideration that does not say it is irrevocable is revocable at will. That's why nearly every case you can find where someone tried to revoke a non- exclusive copyright license turns into a case about whether or not there was consideration.

Google "non-exclusive copyright license revocation" and you'll find a few articles discussing some of these cases.

See also Rosen's book on open source licensing, available free online [1].

[1] [http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm](http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm)

<comment><USER15> Can you please provide a case in which a gpl licensed item was revoked "at will". Since I am pretty sure such has never happened you could alternatively provide another case in which a piece of software was revoked?

I honestly don't believe that you can make such an offer allow man years of work to be built upon your offer, derive benefits for years based on providing such an offer and say sorry changed my mind.

Even if an unproven legal theory existed that would Theoretically justify this, it would end in 7 years of litigation during which the ecosystem would have collapsed.

They would own at best a billion dollar legal bill and 100% of nothing at worst a billion dollar legal bill and nothing to show for it.

Its hard to imagine that this is a real issue.

<comment><USER14> As far as I know, no one has seriously tried to revoke the license on software that they have released under GPL.

The cases involving non-exclusive copyright licenses that do not specify a term usually just involve a couple of parties.

> I honestly don't believe that you can make such an offer allow man years of > work to be built upon your offer, derive benefits for years based on > providing such an offer and say sorry changed my mind.

That would be the argument defendants would use. In particular, they would use that to argue that "promissory estoppel" applies.

As I noted, non-exclusive copyright licenses that do not specify a term are revocable at will _unless_ there was consideration or a substitute for consideration. Promissory estoppel is one kind of substitute for consideration.

If I had to bet, I would bet that a promissory estoppel argument would work to save the license, at least for people who already have copies.

People using GPL v2 (or other free/open licenses that fail to say anything about being irrevocable) and who want to ensure that if someone else ends up owning the copyright they will not try to revoke the license should be able to do so by wrapping that base license with something like the following.

(Don't actually use this. It's just an outline of the general approach one could take, written quickly. A real license should be drafted by a lawyer experience in software licensing)

\</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment>---

0\. This license is called the "No Backsies License for <base license>".

1\. Licensor grants you an irrevocable license to <name of software> under the following terms and conditions.

2\. This software is dual licensed under both this license and under <base license>.

2\. You may copy, distribute, make derivative works of, distribute derivate works of, run, display, and perform the software according to the same terms and conditions specified in <base license> for those activities.

3\. You may sublicense <name of software> to others under the terms of this license. Your sublicensees receive all rights to the software that you received from this license or from <base license>, including the right to sublicense it. When you distribute <name of software> or a derivative work of <name of software> to someone else, you automatically sublicense it to them under the terms of this license.

4\. Licensor will provide a <base license> license to anyone who receives the software from you, directly or indirectly, under conditions that according to <base license> result in them receiving such a license. This license is provided automatically, with no need for the prospective licensee to notify or contact licensor or for licensor to take any action.

</comment><comment><USER16> If those are your concerns get back to your project and get it finished. These issues shouldn't affect you

</comment><comment><USER17> If it ever did happen the whole industry would immediately develop a migration strategy. I wouldn't worry about it.

Are you so sure your project will be successful? The odds are much higher that your project will not be successful and so the choice of technology doesn't really matter. If it is massively successful, you'll have the resources to work around any shenanigans. You could even do the unthinkable and buy a license.

<comment><AUTHOR> > The odds are much higher that your project will not be successful and so the > choice of technology doesn't really matter.

I'm very well aware of that. I wouldn't recommend anyone to give such what-if scenarios much weight in their technology choice without tangible concerns. Yet, Java is one of the few technologies where I find myself thinking about its legalese at all, so I wondered if others had the same thought.

I guess it's because there's now a good bunch of new programming languages that start to compete on Java's grounds and don't have such PR disasters like the Google-Oracle lawsuit.

To be fair: most of the technical reasons for me choosing Java are based on improvements that came to Java under Oracle's ownership.

<comment><USER17> I apologize as I wasn't trying to be negative by suggesting your project might fail.

You should always use the best technology choice (for a lot of reasons). There was a recent HN post about over-engineering side projects, and the top comment was (paraphrased) "Over engineering is the point of a side project!".

I think there is a counter if you want your side project to be successful, and that's to leverage as much technology as you can to make your MVP. Licensing costs don't change whether or not it's the best technology to solve the problem. That's why I wouldn't worry about it. There might be another promising JVM language you could use without the legal hassle, but if you've already determined Java is the best choice, the development costs of using something else will outweigh the legal costs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Well, they already have the "-XX:+UnlockCommercialFeatures" command line switch which apparently costs money to use. They might move more stuff behind that flag?

<comment><USER19> As I see the main reason to use this switch is to be able to use Java Flight Recorder.

Any references that this switch is a paid 'feature'? And what other options are behind it?

<comment><USER2> Other than the name of the option? and the fact that this rather clearly spelled out in the OracleJDK binary license text? [http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/license/...](http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/license/index.html) and otherwise documented at [http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/products...](http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/products/index.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > Ask HN: What's the worst Oracle can do to OpenJDK?

Nice try, Oracle.

</comment><comment><USER21> Wouldn't they shoot themselves in the foot by sabotaging the JVM? They seem to be taking a serious push at taking over the dynamic language space atm?

<comment><USER22> Never underestimate there ability to shoot themselves in the foot. I got offered a breakfast with Oracle the other day, and I said a very definite "no".

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Oracle fired anyone related to openjdk... they fired some people related to Solaris.

<comment><USER24> The way I read it was that OP's concern about the Solaris firings was just one example of Oracle's general bad behavior, and their tendency to not only suddenly stop supporting products but actively working to extract money from or otherwise hinder open sourced products that they have some claim to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Nobody mentioned patents yet, so: Go full patent-troll on users of OpenJDK. This would also sink the Java ship because nobody would dare depend on the graces of Oracle and their Java support anymore.

Oracle's Java patent grant doesn't seem very broad on the face of it, since it only grants patents that are "essential" and only those for implementing the "Java language specification".

"essential" would seem to exclude implementation technology like HotSpot/JIT technology, and "JLS-only" would seem to exclude a lot of the defacto Java platform that real world apps depend on.

So what's left is the GPLv2 implied patent grant, which more of a legal theory and is untested.

</comment><comment><USER26> The worst thing they can do is keep on maintaining it so people still have to use it.

<comment><USER27> Nobody "has to use it". Furthermore several JVM languages are developing LLVM- targeting compilers like ScalaNative and Kotlin Native.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Isn't Java the safest language in that regard? The JVM is one of the few VMs I know with so many viable alternatives, both open and closed. The Google vs Oracle suit also means that they couldn't reattempt a similar claim, if it already went through all courts and list. Also, you'd be taken care of by IBM, Amazon and all the other massively dependent on JVM companies. So an alternative would probably present itself without you needing to spend a dime.

Other VMs are at similar risks, but would have less opposition, and no existing viable replacement.

</comment><comment><USER29> If Oracle would do something very stupid, the facts are these:

IBM has a Java VM with - likely - iron clad licensing around it A patent portfolio regarding virtual machines that (at least uses to) be quite deep, and a database engine partially competing in the same market as Oracle.

Almost every large enterprise runs Java somewhere.

End result might be that Oracle gives away quite a bit of business to IBM while simultaneously angering the IT departments of just about substantial company on the planet, not a great strategy.

</comment><comment><USER30> Not to retread on what you laid out but, why is java the one true choice for all of this projects code? If this project is just not that massive I'd say that it shouldn't make much difference. But you've kinda specified a larger problem which is vendor lock in. I'd spend a little time thinking about what locks you in to that ecosystem. At least to have it on your radar, but that might inform design a bit if you're really worried.

</comment><comment><USER31> I apologize for not answering your immediate question (I think it might be quite difficult to predict what dirty legal tricks someone "might" pull in some uncertain future), but is your project really all that dependent specifically on OpenJDK? Or (if not) are you concerned that there might be some event in the future that will make running your code on any JVM (OpenJDK, IBM JVM, Oracle JVM, etc) impossible?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm less concerned about JVM incompatibilities and more about licensing terms.

In my opinion, you only own your technology stack if you can build the build systems of your product on your machines. I can do that with OpenJDK, and with Debian's apt-sources it is a matter of two command lines and waiting for the build.

From a glance at IBMs Java site I don't really find anything about their licensing. The Oracle JVM isn't open-source, nor is its JDK.

Let's be honest: the impact of most (including my) project to live or die with what Oracle does with Java in the future is marginal, in comparison to much bigger unknowns. Still I think that the big Java shops out there must have a contingency plan in mind, and I wonder if anyone could hint at what's their plan.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Oracle needs to be convinced to not be evil. #probablyjustapipedream

</comment><comment><USER33> The worst thing Oracle can do to OpenJDK is kill it completely like Microsoft killed Mono by open-sourcing .NET coreclr and C#.

<comment><USER34> Oracle Java is based on OpenJDK. It's not a separate implementation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> They can abandon OpenJDK and stop contributing any further updates to it, focusing on closed-source Oracle JDK. This will be enough to kill the project. This is exactly what has happened with OpenSolaris.

And, of course, Google or IBM can't take the flag and continue working on OpenJDK on their own, because patents.

<comment><USER36> The last part about patents is not true. The OpenJDK has a patent pledge in it. Google even started incorporating OpenJDK into Android to protect itself from the patent case. The whole patent case with Oracle was not about OpenJDK but about Dalvik / Harmony, Google's own Java-like implementation.

<comment><USER35> Could you please point me where the patent pledge is? I can't google it, and its license is GPL2, which is not patent-protected.

<comment><USER37> The GPLv2 has an implicit patent pledge:

 _6\. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients ' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License._

In particular:

 _You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients ' exercise of the rights granted herein._

Of course, whether it is enforceable may be a different question (IANAL).

<comment><USER38> Didn't Java go big around 95? When do the main patents expire? Or is the issue copyright around the language/APIs?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> If Java goes its spot will be filled in less time than it takes to think about it. The JVM used ideas from Self, and other "old" languages, its designers are still working on things, there are other people with knowledge and ideas, I'd bet a few dollars that the Steele pack could come up with a leaner and meaner VM right away.

<comment><USER8> The Java ecosystem isn't so much about Java the language as it is about the extensive mindshare, quality of available packages, portability and long-term viability etc. The JVM has been the go-to environment for a whole generation of developers, and even though I don't (primarily) target the JVM anymore, it's not going anywhere.

I may be in the minority here, but I think a monetarization strategy for Java maintenance (by Oracle and/or others) isn't completely unthinkable of.

For new projects, performance and other constraints permitting, I tend to use JavaScript (ES5 or even ES3) for its excellent portability, including on the JVM which has two quality JavaScript engine implementations (rhino and nashorn). A couple years ago, there were even Node.js-compatible web containers by Oracle and RedHat, though these are discontinued, unfortunately.</comment></comment>


How statisticians changed the war, and the war changed statistics - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/christmas-specials/21636589-how-statisticians-changed-war-and-war-changed-statistics-they-also-served

<comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8802316](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8802316)</comment>


1k 3D Christmas tree in Javascript - <AUTHOR> http://js1k.com/2010-xmas/demo/848

<comment><USER2> The author's explanation on how it was done: [http://www.romancortes.com/blog/how-i-did-the-1kb- christmas-...](http://www.romancortes.com/blog/how-i-did-the-1kb-christmas- tree/)

<comment><USER3> It's like watching Bob Ross paint. He makes it look so easy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great job - but again, I'm reminded how slow Firefox is, in comparison to Chrome. I really hope it gets up to speed in 2011.

<comment><USER5> For some reason, in Firefox it runs a lot smoother if you constantly move the mouse around over the tree.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Jaw-dropping. Time and again I am amazed with what 1K of JS can look like.

Wonderful holiday gift. Merry Christmas.

<comment><USER7> I think it's both impressive with what people can do in 1k of Javascript because, well, it's Javascript running in a browser, and not given what the rest of the 1k demo space consists of, even in comparison to those for platforms that are older than most js1k participants.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> update to his/her submission with the addition of snowflakes: <http://js1k.com/2010-xmas/demo/856>

</comment><comment><USER9> I really wanted to mouse over it and see pine needles or bits of fluff fly off. Very impressive.

</comment><comment><USER10> I just wish I'd known of this comp a bit earlier, so I could have had a crack at it (before Christmas busyness).

</comment><comment><USER11> this is really good, is it possible to convert this to png?, with out losing any quality? :)

<comment><USER12> I don't understand your question....

PNG is a lossless format. The JS code doesn't use vectors for this, it has its own images.... Anyway, if this is what you wanted, here you go: <http://grab.by/grabs/9be42370650b27bbf3ae37169bca9243.png>

<comment><USER13> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APNG>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> well done.</comment>


First Look At Google Mobile App For iPhone: Great But Not Second Coming - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/18/first-look-at-google-mobile-app-for-iphone-great-but-not-second-coming/

<comment><USER2> First, this app shows Google's stunning ability to innovate across all platforms. While there are some certainly some flaws, this clearly is revolutionary technology, and it seems prophetic that Apple held this technology back for whatever reason, even if only for two days. Surely if this app can be held back it seems like iPhone developers are going to be in for a headache in the future.</comment>


Ask HN: Dreamhost VPS - <AUTHOR> Hi Hackers, does anyone around has experience with the dreamhost VPS offer? I have concern about the reliability, and it seems like i could bring it with amazon S3 services together, any info will be very helpfull. thanks <comment><USER2>
      [mahmud@sitename:~]$ uptime
       00:58:33 up 1 day,  1:55,  3 users,  load average: 0.81, 0.84, 0.97

For the longest time, my idle dreamhost box has never gotten more than 5 days of uptime, and I've never rebooted it. And, btw, it's a dedicated server. If I was paying for this POS it would have been gone ages ago.

Don't use VPS products by "shared host" companies like DreamHost, BlueHost, HostMonster, HostGator, GoDaddy and other shitty, bottom-feeding slime-balls.

Personally, I have been very happy with Linode, tech.coop, Prgmr, and VPSFarm.

<comment><USER3> I've honestly never considered Dreamhost a "shitty, bottom-feeding slime- ball."

In fact, they're one of the companies I admire most. They're up-front, honest, and transparent about everything they do. EVERYTHING.

Downtimes? Reported accurately and constantly. Mail server problems? Same. Accidentally over-charge your customers millions of dollars collectively? They told us about that too, even though similar incidents at other companies were covered up as well as possible.

Seriously, they air their dirty laundry almost faster than they hand out their press releases. It's refreshing.

Now, I wouldn't buy a DreamhostPS from them, no. I've heard about all the downtimes they keep having with them. But even still, they're one of the few companies I KNOW that about - pretty much everone else, I had to guess.

(I'm still with them for my personal website and main email. Their control panel is the best in the business and their customer support is absolutely astonishingly good.)

<comment><AUTHOR> They are trully honest, but that doesn't really help your site stay up, pingdom is almost spamming my email box with alert from dreamhost downtimes, at least twice a day, I was expecting to have a better service with the VPS, but as I've just learned: very very bad idea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you're going VPS, use a company that built its business around VPS, not a company that built a business on seeing how much it can oversell its shared hosting.

I use Linode personally, and it's rock solid.

<comment><USER5> rock solid with a recent multiple-hour outage in the middle of the day?

<http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4765>

<comment><USER4> Reliability isn't measured by the recency of an incident, but in incidences per period of time. Reading the link above should be evidence enough that Linode's customers are generally happy with the reliability over the long- term.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I used a DreamHost private server for a while. The first thing to be aware of is that it's not as easy to configure from the group up as a true VPS. Their private server systems give you the ability to customize the setup, but not as extensively as as SliceHost or Linode. Also, DreamHost's private server offerings are not any cheaper than SliceHost or Linode. You need a standard account + a private server package (starts at $15) and probably a private server MySQL package (another $15).

That said, I think that DreamHost has a good offering - nice big quotas, pretty good support - but for someone who needs a very customizable environment for something like Rails or Django, you're better off with a true VPS.

<comment><USER6> Also -- also take a look at the RaceSpace Cloud Servers offering. A similar VPS offering to SliceHost that may be a little cheaper, depending on how much bandwidth you end up using (SliceHost packages in 100 GB of bandwidth, you pay per use with RaceSpace Cloud Servers). Other than that, very comparable packages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Dreamhost can burn in hell.

Rackspace/Slicehost, EC2, VPS.net, Linode.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Mikeyur, that's a great list to start with, and thanks to all the valuable answers, the main trend is: Stay away from dreamhost VPS, so I will be checking the list above and probably pick one of the Host.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I have a buddy who's on Dreamhost, and he seems to be mostly happy with it. I'd still go with Linode, Slicehost, et. al if you know a thing or two about sys admin.

I'm on Linode, and I haven't had any issues with it that weren't my fault. Pingdom has yet to report the server down in the six or so months that I've been with Linode, save for a few times I messed with some config files and made the site unreachable. I'd suggest them, but I've also heard very good things about Slicehost. I went with Linode just because it was cheaper, but I'd imagine the snazzy interface and integrated backups are pretty nice.

<comment><USER9> I have active accounts with both, and I like the Linode interface better. Integrated backups are nice, but checkout [http://blog.linode.com/2009/04/03/backup-service-enters- beta...](http://blog.linode.com/2009/04/03/backup-service-enters-beta/) if you're concerned about not having them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If you're doing Python, do consider Google App Engine. If you're doing Ruby, Heroku is a great option. Otherwise, I'd probably recommend using Slicehost. They have a great "articles" area on their site that has lots of information about setting up your own server. Plus, you can add backups for $5 a month, which is a good safety net in case something goes wrong.

</comment><comment><USER11> I was with Slicehost for a long time and really like them quite a lot. SchoolRack.com runs on a small 5-node setup at Slicehost, and it's nice having the internal ip's (one machine up front doing load balancing and static content, some db/app servers behind it which are inaccessible to the outside world). We've rarely suffered downtime in the past few years (we were with layeredtech previously, which was a disaster)

I'm running Linode for my own personal site (whalesalad.com) and have been happy with that as well. The control panel is definitely more advanced, and they're cheaper. I'm broke without and unemployed, so the cheaper price is what has me on linode right now. Help a guy out if you choose Linode - <http://j.mp/linodesalad> (referral code)

</comment><comment><USER12> I use dreamhost VPS for around a dozen sites, and it's pretty damn good. The control panel is really useful, and there has only been one stretch of a few hours in which the server was slow because of a network problem on their end, but it's never gone down.

It's not the kind of thing I'd trust for something really critical, but the price is great, the support is reasonable, and the product is fine.

</comment><comment><USER13> Initially i was on shared hosting, then upgrade to VPS, within less than 3 months, and then upgraded to Slicehost. It's been more than 1 year, never been happier.

Dreamhost VPS isn't really a true VPS. First you don't have root access, hence can't install anything other than pre-configured modules.

</comment><comment><USER14> Blatant Self Promotion: I'm one of the founders of SuperBytes.net we are obviously much smaller then Linode and Slicehost etc. but we strive to have a high level of customer service. Would be happy to give some HN peeps a discount, just shoot me an email email@example.com

<comment><USER15> Dude, I'm in the market for a UK based VPN, but your IPHouse speed test is not responding.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Go Slicehost.

<comment><USER17> I can't recommend Slicehost enough. They're not cheap, but my sleep is _expensive_ , and I can't remember the last time I lost any as a result of hosting with them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Nobody's talked about Gandi Hosting <http://www.gandi.net/hosting/> ? :)

</comment><comment><USER19> Anyone here uses Windows by any chance ? :)

Any recommendations ?

<comment><USER20> www.rackforce.com has good windows VPSs

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> qubovps.com</comment>


Student Entrepreneurs: If Peter Thiel Calls, Hang Up - <AUTHOR> http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130926030101-29380071-adult-supervision <comment><USER2> There's a valid point in here about the way the structure of the Thiel program, with its strain of radical individualism, might blind new entrepreneurs to the idea that most of them shouldn't be CEOs. I think more entrepreneurs should try to grok this idea. Even people who are "born leaders" don't necessarily belong in the CEO role, because CEOs need to be more than leaders. They often also need to be moderating influences, level-headed, execution-focused, and accountable. I've been in startups since I was 18 years old, and have started multiple companies, and would not hire me as a CEO.

Unfortunately, the article makes that point by inflating the importance of management theory and by suggesting that college is somewhere you go to pick up a trade. So, someone else should try to write the good article that makes the CEO point.

<comment><USER3> Yes, this would be a really good article if it made a completely different point.

<comment><USER2> If I'm mistaken, and it's not trying to make the "CEO argument" I was playing with upthread, you could correct my mistake using evidence. I read the article and I don't think I'm mistaken, but would love to be surprised.

Otherwise, I'm not sure of the point of your comment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> ...Says the man who went to school when the opportunity cost wasn't a decade in debt (at the very least).

If you succeed, then you didn't need school. If you fail, then you can always go back to school afterwards. I don't see the downside of the Thiel fellowship, at least on its surface.

<comment><USER5> There are plenty of school options that involve much lower debt than that. You don't need to go to a school that costs $50k a year, there are plenty of alternatives.

<comment><USER6> There are plenty of alternatives, but do they provide the same quality of education for your degree of choice?

<comment><USER7> Why wouldn't they? It's not like MIT/whatever uses special books that no other uni can use. It's not like prestigious universities follow some special program that makes it so their students gain a much better insight into the subject than people who go to other universities.

The perks of attending a prestigious university typically has nothing to do with your education. It has to do with rubbing shoulders with blue bloods, creating a powerful social network, and being able to woo people with the pedigree associated with the words "MIT graduate" on your resume.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I appreciate the article and the point of view but I have to disagree completely with his recommendation that you spend your years working for someone else before you launch your own business.

He talks about working for a company after finishing college to learn about how they operate and do business. You know what I learned in the five years after college I worked for a company as a dev? A whole lot about software development. Nothing about hiring (beyond what I gleaned while interviewing), basics of management and nothing about marketing or sales. You know what I learned in the first few months of trying and failing to launch a business? A heck of a lot about everything, including a lot more about software development.

Working in my trade for a few years out of school made me very good at what I do but it certainly did not make me a very good entrepreneur.

<comment><USER9> I agree that working for another company doesn't always make you a good entrepreneur. But I do think that, depending on the size of the company, the dynamics and your role within the company you can learn, for free, a lot about what _not_ to do, particularly regarding the basics of management. And regarding hiring, you can learn, what you _actually_ want/value during the interview and in an employee vs. what you _think_ you want.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If Peter Thiel calls you, it might make sense to at least hear him out. Slamming doors is rarely a good approach to life.

And school will always be there to go back to.

<comment><USER11> I don't think it's really worth going back to school. I dropped out to join the military. (Later left that too) 10 years later, every time I think about going back I think, "why?". I've already got a job, and I make decent money. I'd learn much more, faster, by taking on more responsibilities here than I would in some sandbox environment. Unless I went to, like, Harvard or something.

<comment><USER12> ... which is actually an argument for staying in school in the first place. Once you're out, the realities of life make it very difficult to go back.

<comment><USER13> Is it? That argument assumes that school is worthwhile in the first place. If you assume your conclusion, it seems an awful lot like begging the question.

If you don't go to school, live your life, and find out everything is just hunky-dory without it - what exactly have you missed out on? Maybe you were right in the first place, and can congratulate yourself on making wise decisions that turned out to be vindicated in the end?

<comment><USER12> The OP said he has thought about going back multiple times. Obviously it has _some_ value to him.

<comment><USER13> ...and then decided against it every time, so obviously it has less value to him than other things he could be doing with his life.

<comment><USER12> ...a life which is much, much more complicated after leaving school, serving in the military, having a career, starting a family, etc. If school has any value to you at all, the utility of finishing school vs dropping out is higher earlier in life than later. Maybe for some people it makes sense to drop out (Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg being canonical examples). But for most people the decision isn't so clear-cut, and going back becomes tremendously more difficult as time goes by.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There seems to be a consensus here that all big corporations are inept and the all that you can learn from them is what not to do. Only ~5% of startups are successful while 100% of big corporations were at one point. If you can't learn anything from Big Corp you aren't trying.

<comment><USER15> Yeah, I encourage people to go work for one for a year or two to learn all the stupid things they do and the ways they are vulnerable. Also to understand why you should love what you are doing now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Also, yes, hiring is difficult. Do you really think you are learning how to do it properly by working at Big Corp first?

<comment><USER17> Well, you will at least learn how not to do it.

<comment><USER18> Not true. Rarely do you (a cog) see the hiring process (a different cog) used by your massive company (the machine). Especially when you're just out of college.

<comment><USER13> Hmm? I've done interviews for both of my past two employers. The first one was a startup, but the second one is Google.

Do the big companies you work for not have people interview with employees in their particular role? It seems relatively common among my friends for them to be interviewing people just 1-2 years younger than them, either for internships or to fill the position they're about to be promoted out of.

<comment><USER18> A startup isn't a massive company and Google is notoriously atypical with transparency and inclusiveness with hiring. Even so, just conducting an interview is far from learning about the thought process behind the actual act of hiring.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> "I'm a crotchety old guy. I worry about all these new companies. I'm glad that they're easier to start, but the problem is, they're just as hard to finish as they have always been"

This is a great observation from Mike Olson. I think a lot of people who are dropping off to start on the entrepreneurial path vastly underestimate the difficulty of building a company to a point where they can sell or IPO or get just get a good return. Lot of the startup-lore is built around expectation of success that has vastly diminished in the last few years and we will soon find a lot of people who are thirty-five, have worked through three-four failed startups and nothing to offer to the broader world.

If you look at number of seed accelerators in the US[1], we have about 175. Every year about 3000 companies are formed and a vast number of them fail. Take the top accelerator in the country (perhaps the world). YCombinator. It has funded about 550 companies, pg is rightfully proud of the value created. However, if you took out the top 10 of them I suspect 99% of the value goes away. I remember just AirBnB and Dropbox making 75% of the value. Think about it, even if you came out of YC, you have a 2% chance of success. That means if you even if you join a startup accelerator in Middletown, USA your chance is probably 0.5% and if you don't even get to join a accelerator it is probably even less (0.1%?)

I suspect a lot of people still think there is a 5% chance you will succeed in a startup. That was the case 15 years back. With a 5% success rate, you could possible iterate to a better than even odd of success if you went through 3-4 startups. If you were told you have a 0.1% chance of success, it is more of a random crapshoot. What is it that you will learn and show after 3-4 attempts?

The other option of going to college, working for a big company and the associated payoff hasn't changed much. If the startup option is now 50 times riskier, you need to think hard about your choices. Maybe you are an optimist, that's OK but don't default to choices.

[1] [http://www.seed-db.com/accelerators](http://www.seed-db.com/accelerators)

</comment><comment><USER19> This is an important point, but it also shouldn't be overstated. There are many examples of where professional managers lacking passion and personal interest in a business's market have hindered more than helped.

As Thiel often says a variety of ways, copycat behavior is unlikely to produce success in a high risk/reward context like a startup. You need an information advantage, and often that advantage is someone who knows their own itch very well.

I also hate that the meme for this has become "adult supervision." It's such a patronizing and self-aggrandizing description.

</comment><comment><USER20> In some sense, though, most of these situations _do_ see the founders learning management on someone else's dime.

It's just a segmented capital super-structure, rather than a traditional corporate system.

</comment><comment><USER21> "Management is a tremendously undervalued skill on the tech startup scene, and that single fact contributes, I believe, to the failure of more companies than any other factor."

Truth.

<comment><USER22> If a company let's children be managers without any prior experience or training, the company should force all their child prodigies to _at a minimum_ read [http://www.amazon.com/Great-Danes-Barrons-Dog- Bibles/dp/0764...](http://www.amazon.com/Great-Danes-Barrons-Dog- Bibles/dp/0764197541)

<comment><USER23> Why?

<comment><USER22> If you can't learn how to manage a dog, what hope do you have in managing multiple divergent human personalities?

<comment><USER24> Sorry but that's a pretty outlandish statement. dogs may occasionally act like people, and they may require management, but they are not people. It doesn't follow that if you can't/haven't managed dogs you have no hope with people. I've done both and it's a different ball game.

<comment><USER22> I've worked under multiple managers who: gave no positive feedback, set no expectations, and provided no treats.

That's really the minimum you should do with dogs or people.

<comment> UK-AL "gave no positive feedback" "provided no treats"

Seriously? If you try to control people pain and reward system, most people see through it and hate you for it.

You want them to have a innate feeling of accomplishment. You completed something difficult? And that felt good. You don't need cookies from a master for that.

The number one thing you need to do, is set something up which they can measure themselves against. 90% of the time people will enjoy improving it, without any input.

<comment><USER22> The world isn't full of self-involved creatives who just want to create to create. Most people like being rewarded (money), promoted (power), and growing in their positions (knowledge).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Seeing how successful companies work is extremely valuable. No company is perfect so you get to see what works and what does not. If your idea is something highly technical, then the degree (or equivalent experience) is very important. Name one highly successful company whose product is highly technical where the founder was not also technical? I cannot think of one myself.

<comment><USER25> apple?

<comment><USER23> Woz was/is extremely technical. Steve also knew how to build computers although not great at it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is good advice, because the right sort of person to be a Thiel fellow would read this and scoff anyway.

</comment><comment><USER18> He reduces the entire situation to two options. What I've learned from being in a startup? There are never just two options. His article does students a massive disservice by creating just an A or B scenario.

</comment><comment><USER27> You can gain more "experience" before you try to do your own thing, however the more experience you gain, the worse you become at creating the next billion dollar startup. For every year that you don´t start your own business, your capability to think large and taking risks and your resourcefulness dramatically declines.

That´s the reason why none of the four horsemen in tech, Google, Apple, Amazon or Facebook were founded by founders over 30.

Looking at all the other billion dollar startups Microsoft, Dropbox, Airbnb, Twitter, Instagram, Waze, Paypal, Tumblr none of their founders were over 30. See a pattern? There are probably billion startups who were founded by founders older than 30, but there are very few.

The less experience you have, the more likely you are to create the next billion dollar company. If you start your startup after 30, it's very unlikely that you will be able to make it into a $1B startup.

<comment><USER28> This is abhorrent ageism, and completely wrong.

Peter Thiel, 31, Paypal, 37, Palintar. Larry Elison, 33, Oracle. Reid Hoffman, 35, Linked In. Evan Williams, 35, Twitter. Mark Pincus, 41, Zynga. Arianna Huffington, 54, Huffington Post.

Can we stop making things up? Maybe five minutes of research would be good? You know, there is a place they teach these things.

<comment><USER27> Founders that had had successful startups before don't count.

That's why I was referring to "experience BEFORE you try to do your own thing."

And yes there are a few startup founders that were older than 30, I give you Larry Ellison.

However none of the 4 horsemen had founders >30, plus the other founders except for Peter Thiel had already sold their previous startups.

Regarding Palantir, they had Peter Thiel as a cofounder, I don't give you that one.

<comment><USER27> I don't want to be ageist or anything, I just like discovering facts.

Except for Peter Thiel who was 31, 1 year above, only Larry Ellison is a first time founder, all the other ones where very successful before.

Huffington Post is not a billion dollar company, since it was acquired for US$315 million by AOL 2 years ago.

<comment><USER28> I'm not sure if you are intentionally lying, or just didn't bother, again, to do any research.

Reid Hoffman started his first company at 30. Mark Pincus at 29 (just one year shy!). Excluding Huffington simply because it didn't meet your arbitrarily set profitability threshold is unfair.

Hell, even Google had Eric Schmidt help run the company at the start. Eric was 46 at the time, though surely you claim "but he's not a founder!"

Data is somewhat hard to collect for this topic, but see:

[http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/28/peak-age- entrepreneurship/](http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/28/peak-age- entrepreneurship/)

> The research shows that an older age is actually a better predictor of > entrepreneurial success, and that three other traits also correlate strongly > to success: strong fluid intelligence, high openness, and moderate > agreeableness.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The best way to learn, anything, is by trying, failing and iterating. This is true (for me at least) in programming and otherwise. I generally believe you should stay in school, and more importantly stay learning technical stuff (whether undergrad, grad school or in a technically challenging job). It's the best way to get ideas, and more importantly find people to work with (if you want to start a company). So I do harbor doubts about the Thiel Fellowship (though I happen to know quite a few talented kids in the program, and think it's working well for most of them).

However, you will _not_ learn how to be a Founder/CEO without being a Founder/CEO. Some have a natural ability at this, but 99% of even the best CEOs probably just have the ability to learn quickly on their feet. By the time their mistakes might be noticed, they've already learned and corrected them.

The only thing you'll learn by working your way up the corporate ladder is how to work your way up the corporate ladder. The stuff about learning _how to work hard_ is BS. If you want to do a startup and hope things will happen for you, you probably believe in an all-powerful being that has a plan for you.

</comment><comment><USER30> Wow, what a de-empowering article. Good luck guys.</comment>


IBM building IRL version of SAO - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/23/11098820/sword-art-online-virtual-reality-mmo-ibm <comment><AUTHOR> Did anyone from IBM actually WATCH SAO? I mean, it ended so well the last time...</comment>


Ask HN: Has anyone visited 8-3-11.info? - <AUTHOR>

I was recently made aware of a website, http://8-3-11.info, that is very mysterious.
They are taking questions, http://www.formspring.me/8X3X11 , but not giving away too much information.
Has anyone in the HN community come across this yet?
WARNING: There is an odd audio file that auto-plays in the background. <comment><USER2> The audio sounds like a recording of a Numbers Station.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_station>

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tcp_d1_4_phonetic_alphabet...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tcp_d1_4_phonetic_alphabet_nato_irdial.ogg)</comment>


Photophone - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photophone

<comment><USER2> When I was a kid I had a a kit for doing this.

This also the principal behind spying on someone in a room by watching the wobble of reflected light on a window.

<comment><USER3> I also had this as a kit when I was a kid - it was one of the experiments one could perform with the home-built laser I constructed. I built the receiver, gave it to my little sister, and off she went over the dunes .. we confirmed the experiment, and she subsequently lost the receiver in the dunes. Always wished I'd been the one to go out that day ..

There was another experiment where you could shine the laser on a window, and pick up its reflection and using that, listen in on the room. It required a more complicated circuit to be built, so I never did it, but its fascinating that such technologies were, in the 70's and 80's, available to inquiring teenage minds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great example in the long, varied history of communication devices going back to the ancients, but really picking up speed in the Renaissance. For more example of interesting optical communication devices I recommend Deep Time of the Media by Zielinski (it includes lots of pictures too!):[http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/deep-time- media](http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/deep-time-media)

</comment><comment><USER5> A few groups of HAM Radio operators have been experimenting with what they call terahertz communication for quite some time now.

The transceivers got pretty sophisticated, with very complex optics. There are reports of successful conversations over distances of >150km.

Apparently, many of them are in Germany so quite a few of the sources are in German.

[http://modulatedlight.org/optical_comms/optical_index.html](http://modulatedlight.org/optical_comms/optical_index.html)

[http://www.db6nt.de/laser.html](http://www.db6nt.de/laser.html)

[http://modulatedlight.org/optical_comms/SDIM8379h.jpg](http://modulatedlight.org/optical_comms/SDIM8379h.jpg)

[http://www.dd1wks.de/laser.html](http://www.dd1wks.de/laser.html)

[http://www.dl2dr.de/6.html](http://www.dl2dr.de/6.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> In 1972, Gary Starkweather (inventor of the laser printer) rigged up a laser- based data link with 35 megapixels/second bandwidth because Xerox Parc was split across two buildings: one with the controller and one with the marking engine for his printer. See page 42 of [http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102702465](http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102702465) .

</comment><comment><USER7> Bell invented this too?! Was this before or after the telephone?</comment>


YourSetup: Share your setup and get paid for it - <AUTHOR> http://www.yoursetup.io/ <comment><USER2> Interesting concept.</comment>


Dell executive says HP's new Machine architecture is 'laughable' - <AUTHOR> http://www.itworld.com/hardware/422872/dell-executive-says-hps-new-machine-architecture-laughable <comment><USER2> Balmer thought that the iPhone was laughable... demonstrably laughable.

</comment><comment><USER3> I for one think it's laughable that Dell has the nerve to laugh about any company at all. Ignorance must be bliss indeed, over at Dell.

<comment><USER4> Agree. If I were Dell I'd be spending my R&D dollars on preventing laptop fires.</comment></comment>


Joining a modern software development team - <AUTHOR> https://www.programming-decoded.com/blog/joining-a-modern-software-development-team/ <comment><USER2> I like the optimism in this article. It will be interesting to read follow-up entries as he progresses in the role</comment>


Democoin: A Publicly Verifiable and Jointly Serviced Cryptocurrency [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://eprint.iacr.org/2015/521.pdf <comment><USER2> Proof of work is replaced with lottery which determines a set of verifiers.

Choosing verifiers is based on external oracle (e.g. average temperature for group of cities).

Prevention of sybil attacks is proposed in three forms:

* annual fee enforced by the system

* proof of stake

* external authority

Paper itself is full of weasel words. "Very", "efficient" etc are repeated over and over. Also, 3 patent applications.

At first glance it does not look like an improvement over Bitcoin, because it does not work.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not improvement, but the replacement. Could be useful for some use cases at least. Also, there are different implementations possible, so it's pretty reckless to say it "does not work".

It's the most innovative proposal in the blockchain tech for last months, but more investigation is needed definitely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Anyone care to tl;dr this or give a comparison with bitcoin?

Most of this stuff is way over my head.

I'm about to go to bed, but I'll definitely give it a read in the morning.

<comment><USER4> No multi GB blockchain and capable of supporting more than a pitiful 650 transactions a minute. Basically works by randomly electing verifiers and assuming that the majority elected are going to be honest enough.

<comment><USER5> So how is that supposed to work?

If some percent of the nodes are malicious, that means sometimes an election will include a majority of them and they will create a false transaction.

This means only some transactions are trustworthy, not all.</comment></comment></comment>


Introducing Nook, the most advanced ebook reader - <AUTHOR> http://www.barnesandnoble.com/nook/index.asp?r=1&cm_mmc=Member-_-Merch-_-091020_MM01_Device1-_-na

<comment><USER2> I bought a refurb Kindle 2 29 days ago and am a click away from returning it and pre-ordering a Nook. I haven't bought any books on the Kindle yet (I'm working through a copy of Atlas Shrugged I downloaded, a book I own and isn't available in Kindle format), but it struck me that if I had, those books would be completely useless on the new reader and not only that, I can't sell them or give them away.

The publishers are going to go through the same process the music industry went through for 7-10 years and hopefully we'll eventually have DRM free books. The difference between books and music is that while someone might want to listen to a particular song out of their thousand song library at any given time, it's much more unlikely that someone would like that kind of random access to their books. I just hope DRM will only be an annoyance and won't sabotage eBook reader adoption.

<comment><USER3> To me that random access is the killer feature itself. What other benefit would I have from using an ebook reader if not to carry around my whole library instead of just the book I am currently mainly reading.

<comment><USER2> * Size * Ease of transition between books (you can carry 2-3 books so you won't ever be without a book). * Search

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The responsive color screen has a lot of potential. If one could have a "Cover Flow" style browsing mode, this would make the Nook a 10X better device for browsing reference material and other kinds of not-purely-linear reading. Others on HN have lamented the lack of "flippability" in other e-readers. This could be used to provide exactly that!

(The other thing: will B&N allow it to happen?)

<comment><USER5> Do you mean having the nearby pages in your current book show at the bottom of the screen? That would be nice, since e-ink is a bit slow to refresh. I don't see much in point in the way it's pictured on the site though and in the video, shopping for books by flipping through book covers is highly inefficient! Overall, I lament the lack of a keyboard. Searching for books using the Kindle is probably better.

<comment><USER6> That's silly... it would use up lots of battery, defeating half the point of eInk.

<comment><USER4> When I'm using the thing for reference, having only 1/10th or even 1/20th of the battery power is just fine! When I'm at my desk programming, I can probably have the thing plugged in. Even if I'm being a musician and using it as a "starter" or a fake book, I can probably have it plugged in. In that context, 4 hours of battery is usually plenty, anyhow.

Also, in this "reference" mode, the system could turn off the 2nd display until it's actually touched.

The way this flip thing would work, is that you would fade from the "cover- flow" animation to a larger, scrollable image of the text. Flicking to the side would fade you back into the cover-flow animation. It would be better if the whole display were used, but the smaller horizontal slice of a page would work too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> compared to the kindle, pros: \+ native PDF support (how dumb are you, amazon?) \+ micro SD slot \+ ebook lending (probably DRM'd) \+ wifi \+ based on android cons: \- amazon likely has a larger selection of books than BN. \- no browser -> no free wikipedia, gmail. maybe hacking one on works? \- no keyboard. on screen one maybe? This makes sense from the initial design perspective though, people don't often use keyboards while reading. \- 10 days vs 14 days of power, which is not that big an issue.

I think the two separate screens idea is brilliant. I wonder if they'll release the source code for the software like amazon did. Though I still applaud the kindle for good effort, the Kindle 2 / DX should have been as good as this. This looks like a much more well thought out and complete product. They even have different covers and rechargeable batteries for it. Damnit, I was about to get the kindle with the newer reduced price (with international wireless) but now I have to wait and decide. If there is a browser and is usable, I'd go for it without thinking further.

<comment><USER8> According to the comparison page on BN (<http://www.barnesandnoble.com/nook/compare/>)

BN have a larger selection of ebooks 1m+ titles and more free ebooks 500k+ than Amazon.

Main downside for me is I want something like the DX to read technical books on as well. BN aren't even suggesting they'll compete there and I haven't heard any rumours of Amazon reving the DX yet. :(

<comment><USER9> What is DX? Just a larger screen than standard Kindle?

<comment><USER10> Also it has hardware pdf support.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The color screen on the bottom looks ridiculous to me. What's its purpose? Only to show other e-books covers? It feels like they just wanted to make it look different than the Kindle.

<comment><USER9> It is a touch screen. It is used for user interaction. You can swipe it to scroll through your books, but I'm sure it can be/is used for other things. Display keyboard to enter search terms, etc.

Apple detailed the many benefits of this when people complained about the iphone not having actual keys. It makes the device more flexible. Want to use the device in English and Korean? No need for a different device, just display the different keyboard.

My only negative thought about it is that the color screen has got to be a bigger eater of battery than if they had gone all hardware, ala kindle, but I don't know if it is really an issue or not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> The touchscreen on the bottom and the book sharing are huge advantages. This is the first eBook reader that I actually would consider buying because of those two things.

I'm not sure why no one's done free book sharing. It's the ultimate way to encourage people to tell their friends about the product.

What I'm curious about is the book buying. Based on the video, you have to use that tiny screen at the bottom to buy books. Hope I'm wrong..

<comment><USER13> >I'm not sure why no one's done free book sharing.

Because sharing things you have bought is the same as terrorism or murdering kittens - the ad at the beginning of the DVD told me that

Remember before reading Goldilocks and the three bears to your kid from your ebook you need to buy an extra client access license and a public performance license

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I assume those of us living in the ice covered wasteland to the North will never get this.

<comment><USER14> I don't see a lot of Barnes and Nobles in my neighbourhood.. so I'm guessing that would be a "yes".

<comment><USER13> True - if only the internet was international.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> To me this whole Nook thing feels like a "shock and awe" campaign from B&N to take steam away from the Kindle and to their credit it seems to be working.

Personally, I'm skeptical they will be able to pull it off. They have a feature list a mile long (touch screen, eink display, wireless, wifi, etc) and I'd be shocked if things worked even 1/3 as well as they are advertising in their press releases, but I will reserve judgment for when it is finally released in November.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, I'm slightly skeptical as well, but at the same time excited, because a little competition never hurt the consumer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Definitely a great entrant into the market, and I'm hopeful that Amazon will step it up in response. Two things in particular that I'd like to see from Amazon are integrated access to public domain works (perhaps via a deal with Gutenberg or Google), and the ability to lend books to a friend. What's nice is that neither of these would require anything other than a free over-the-air update.

</comment><comment><USER17> Wow. Good job BN. The thing looks well designed and fairly solid.

-1 on the ATT 3G but you can't have the best of everything.

</comment><comment><USER18> According to <http://mashable.com/2009/10/20/nook-official/>, wifi only works in B&N stores. If that is the case, it can't compete with Kindle 2 internationally.

Can anyone confirm this?

<comment><USER19> That seems to contradict the wording on B&N.

"Browse eBooks, magazines and newspapers on AT&T's 3G Wireless Network or on Wi-Fi. And every Barnes & Noble has free Wi-Fi, so you can connect at lightning fast speeds."

Sounds like B&N is just marketing their Wi-Fi hotspots as a convenience, but it doesn't _need_ to be their hotspots; any Wi-Fi connection should do.

<comment><USER13> Yes they even sell this as an advantage over the Kindle - you can connect anywhere in the world that has wifi.

It doesn't seem to do WEP/WPA so you are a bit limited to connect everywhere

<comment><USER8> If it's built on Android it would be surprising if it doesn't handle WEP/WPA

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> While they've got a really great opportunity to beat Amazon by being more open with their content, something tells me they're going to screw it up royally with DRM.

<comment><USER21> Both Amazon and B&N are distributors. That means publishers are their customers too, and they're a hell of a lot more fickle about DRM/no-DRM than those who buy books... hence, B&N has a lot of publishers to lose by including weaker DRM than the Kindle.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> _nook retains important reading rituals like bookmarking, making notes, and highlighting passages._

Bookmarkings seems easy enough.

Even highlighting I can imagine an approach.

But note taking? How are they planning to do this? Notes in books are usually in the margins and have a line drawn to where the person is taking notes. I'm really curious to see how this works.

Edit: Spelling

<comment><USER23> with sony's prs600 which seems similar you have a stylus with which you can draw on top of the text.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Do you know whether plain text and html files are supported? I'm thinking Project Gutenberg...

<comment><USER25> Afaict, Nook has access to Google Books, which should have a good number of public domain ebooks including the ones on Project Gutenberg.

<comment><USER9> Source?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Nooke eReader... Nookie Reader...

Call me immature, but isn't it rather silly?</comment>