When Roman "Barbarians" Met the Asian Enlightenment - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@writingben/when-roman-barbarians-met-the-asian-enlightenment-2be064d7af9b#.9vqi7x2z6 <comment><USER3> I greatly enjoyed reading this, although the author takes (more than) a few liberties when comparing the Roman and the various Asian empires:

> Imperial Rome was a dim backwater by comparison

This is a slippery claim, especially when you consider how long the Roman Empire lasted and how widely its relevance and regional dominance swayed over its lifetime. During its peak, Rome spanned dozens of cultures on two separate continents and liberally imported other peoples and norms into their own. That's not to say that the contemporaneous Chinese empires didn't do the same, only that the distinction between the two in this aspect is less stark than the author would have us believe.

> Rome's legions were fighting fiercely for control of Gaul (modern France and > Germany), Britain, Egypt, and various parts of the Balkans; while a > succession of (often unfairly maligned) emperors scrambled to hold Rome > together through an endless series of famines, wars with the East, coups > d'état, refugee crises, and revolts.

This is not strictly false, but it's again muddied by the extreme duration of the Roman Empire. The Pax Romana lasted for two centuries, spanned three major political dynasties, and is generally the period people think of when they think of the Roman Empire (or Rome in general). By the time the Chinese Empire(s) had begun trading silk with the Roman Empire, peace was already the norm in the Roman world.

The author is correct in his characterization of Rome as less artistically and creatively inclined than it perhaps ought to have been, considering its size and wealth during its peak. That being said, Rome's accomplishments in architecture and culture are visible (and audible) _everywhere_ in the Western world. I don't think that any one Eastern power of the same period can claim such cultural permanence to any comparable degree.

<comment><USER4> I flagged the article. The author exploited clickbait titles and western guilt to craft his own narrative. People are going to read this poor cluster of pop history and get a very wrong idea of the Roman Empire. The second part of the article was quite fascinating but how can I possibly trust the author after statements such as _Imperial Rome was a dim backwater by comparison_.

The premise of the article is flawed too, we don't know enough about the 'chinese' skeletons yet: [http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbe...](http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2016/09/23/chinese- skeletons-in-roman-britain-not-so- fast/&refURL=https://www.google.it/&referrer=https://www.google.it/)

" _The truth is, though, that Rome's Asian contemporaries completely dwarfed Rome in almost every respect: heritage, population, cultural diversity, technology, architecture, medicine, philosophy, poetry… I could go on, but you get the idea._ "

Read this article with a grain of salt.

<comment><USER3> I don't think that was necessary.

There's a few points where he exaggerates or otherwise overstates comparative claims about Rome, but his research into the antiquity cultures of Asia Minor/the Middle East is both accurate and refreshing considering how little recognition they get outside of anthropology and (specialized) classics. The comparison of contemporary Chinese and Roman power is also a valuable one - it's not often brought up in either one's respective historical studies.

It's worth keeping in mind that this is a Medium post by a blogger. It's not peer reviewed, and it should be read with the author's opinions and goals in mind.

<comment><USER5> Well, his "research" amounts to some quick reading of wikipedia articles... and that's it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Rome's Asian contemporaries completely dwarfed Rome in almost every respect: > heritage, population, cultural diversity, technology, architecture, > medicine, philosophy, poetry…

> it's always made me sad to think of the Romans being largely cut off from > the main action on the world stage.

This is incorrect because the Romans knew about Greece - in fact they ran the place.

The Romans _were_ barbarians, in a sense, I suppose, just compared to Greece. They didn't do anything that could compare to the Greeks in math or philosophy, for example. And by, say, the fall of the Roman Empire, India had far more interesting philosophy (sadly little known because not very accessible) than Rome, so sure, "Asia" had better philosophy than Rome (really India specifically). But it turns out that Indian philosophy was heavily inspired by Greek philosophy (highly recommend _The Shape of Ancient Thought_ for anyone interested in Greek-Indian intellectual exchange), and I wouldn't say it was better (though I wouldn't say it was worse either). Rome wasn't cut off from the best of philosophy - they were just too practical to care much about it - and they knew it and said as much.

Philosophy I know something about - I dropped out of the PhD program at Harvard after studying quite a bit of it. But some of the other parts seem dubious or of questionable importance. Architecture? The Romans look pretty good to me there, and I mean they even used concrete. Medicine? Let's be serious: almost all medicine before the 1800's was placebo. Population? So what?

<comment><USER7> > _The Romans were barbarians, in a sense, I suppose, just compared to Greece. > They didn 't do anything that could compare to the Greeks in math or > philosophy, for example._

The Greeks never had a lasting widespread empire, and warred amongst themselves a lot in their golden period. Yes, Alexander conquered all the way to the Indus, but as soon as he died, his empire splintered. The Romans, on the other hand, built an empire that lasted for centuries, and their culture as we see it is not defined by a mere handful of names.

Maybe the Romans didn't exceed the Greeks at philosophy, but they certainly and uncontestably exceeded them at statecraft, which is why it's odd to hear them called 'barbarians' in comparison.

<comment><USER8> >> The Greeks never had a lasting widespread empire

I am Greek so you can take the following with a big fat pinch of salt but, yes, yes we did have a "lasting widespread empire". We have it still: it's called the Western Civilisation. The Greeks conquered, not with swords and shields, but with philosophy, art and science.

The Romans carried Greek culture along with them wherever they conquered. In the East, Greek philosophy reached India [1]. Arab scholars transcribed Greek philosphers' works and carried them over to the Middle Ages where they were picked up by Christian monks, themselves followers of a religion built on holy scriptures written in Greek (the Evangels, or, Gospels [2]). Most of early Western science either confirmed or refuted the ideas of the Greek philosphers [3]. Greek mathematics still form the basis of mathematical knowledge today [4]. And who knows what else was lost to war, or natural disasters [5].

I am very well aware of the fact that I would have been equally proud of my history were I to be British, or a descendant of the Mongols, or even a modern citizen of the USA. However, I'm not- I'm Greek and I'm proud to be a distant relative of a people that has gone down in history not for having the vastest empire, or the most fierce warriors, or the most brutal war machine, but for having kickstarted civilisation.

Even today, you go to the capitals of the world and you see "Grecko-Roman" architecture built when people want to show the world that they dont' just have power, but brains also.

You can bet yer keister we damn well conquered an empire. We conquered _several_ of the things.

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

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

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

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

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

<comment><USER9> Thank you for saying this. I'm not Greek. I'm a typical U.S. mutt with somewhat unknown origins.

I'd like to add that the distinction we use now to indicate differences between Eastern and Western culture/art/and music are largely artifacts of how things evolved after a key point in time.

I know the most about Music, so I'll speak to that. What we speak of now as "Western Music" is largely tonal or functional harmony, and it has its origins in ancient Greece around the time of Pythagoras. But it was a mixture of the Eastern chant tradition with the applied Mathematical and logical rigor of Hellenistic Greeks that provided the foundation for what would eventually evolve to what we now know it as.

For about 1000 years, the early Christians mostly followed in the tradition of Eastern chant traditions with some additional codification and structure in what we now call Gregorian Chant. A guy named Boethius described texts by Pythagoras, Aristoxenus, and Plato, and was reprinted in Renaissance Italy and got some attention there.

And--just as that several generations tried to do by superimposing Greek Philosophy onto the Church doctrine of the time--misinterpreted/mistranslated those pieces of information onto what was at the time a developing, but still fairly primitive version of polyphony.

What happened from there happened pretty quickly and is well known. [1]Zarlino, Palestrina, Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Mahler, Schoenberg, etc. Pop music took over the mantle of tonal music right about the time that "classical" composers were getting funky and atonal in the mid-20th century, and has largely stuck with it.

Everything you hear on the radio that is popular is directly traceable to Bach (and unfortunately much less interesting). The work of Bach himself was the almost-inevitable evolution of what happened when Greek thought met Eastern chant.

[1] Before the Boethius reprint in Italy in the late 15th century, the chant style that originated in the Church was, in fact, evolving to certain types of polyphony . . . some of it quite beautiful, and instrumental music was also becoming its own separate thing rather than just an accompaniment to a singer. There was a weird time when a lot of mathematics were applied to the generation of music in the 14th century, and you can find examples of music from this period that are so odd, you could mistake them for mid-20th century art music. But this is a) mostly happening in France and the Netherlands, and b) well before Greek philosophical thought really took fire and spread across a more modern Europe.

Also, this is really broad, and I'm leaving a lot out. Bottom line is that we call it Western Music Theory or Wester Music because the mixture of central Asian and Greek traditions evolved in the way that it did and continues to be separate from purely Eastern musical traditions where Greek philosophy did _not_ take a strong hold.

It's a label of convenience to describe the result of a long process; it's not intended to reflect some kind of a pure origin.

<comment><USER10> The West - largely because of Greek influence - invented two ideas that were never invented elsewhere: abstraction, and universality.

Abstraction meant that instead of learning ad hoc practical recipes for art, science, culture, etc, the West has always had an interest in developing symbolic systems of representation that allow formal modelling, manipulation, and prediction.

Universality meant that truth was external to society, and independent of social status. It's the theoretical basis of much Western politics ("All people are equal") but it's also the foundation of much science, which combines abstraction with universality to find reliable invariants.

Asian cultures were very inventive in specifics - sometimes more so than Western culture. But they never aimed for abstraction and universality in the same way. The tendency was more to group knowledge into hierarchies of virtue, and to privilege subjective experiences over objective invariants.

In your example, Western music is what you get when you get both abstraction and universality applied to sound. There's abstraction in that the music is written before it's played, which makes it possible to create complex abstract structures on paper that can be built slowly and expertly for maximum effect.

And there's universality - less successfully, perhaps - in the sense that there's a belief in a primary set of invariant relationships between the elements of sound.

Eastern musics have some different attempts at universality, but so far as I know there was never an interest in abstraction in the same way. E.g. Indian classical music has systems, but they're more like rules for improvisation, not rules for building structures out of notes without actually playing any sounds at all.

The critical thing about abstraction is that it can be a huge amplifier of creativity, because you can prototype ideas, systems and experiences symbolically without having to build/generate/perform them in the real world first.

And the interesting thing is that we're only just getting started with it. Science has mostly been a success, but there's a lot mileage in other areas. Computers are one step along the way, but there's a lot more about abstraction still to be discovered and enjoyed.

<comment><USER7> > _It 's the theoretical basis of much Western politics ("All people are > equal")_

From the 18th century "enlightenment" period, you mean? Before the 18th century, this idea was pretty much absent from actual western politics. The 18th century is parted from the ancient Greek golden period by more than two thousand years.

Yes, ancient Greek philosophy was influential, but as fsloth says above, you can't just ignore the in-between time and its thinkers. Don't forget either that many of the advances in the Enlightenment came from _breaking_ with the teachings of classical Greece.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Author admits he wrote a spin-piece

"So why, then, would I write such an anti-Roman article? Because I'm trying to give people who've received a eurocentric education a different set of goggles to try on: the lenses of Roma's Asian contemporaries, some of whom genuinely did believe the Romans were "primitive" and "unclean." This is a perspective we almost never hear about in the West, and I think it's an interesting one to ponder. I do my best to keep my facts straight — but all the historical stories I write are colored heavily by my own interpretations and blind spots. My favorite history writers are Will Durant and Pierre Briant. I realize that this kind of "interpretive" historical writing is now considered obsolete — maybe even dangerously slanted and over-simplistic — but it's the stuff I enjoy reading, so it's what I write."

<comment><USER12> In other words, he's specifically trying to inflict an ideology on a group, making bigoted assumptions about their perception of the world because of their ethnicity.

"Dear White People, Since You Are Racist, So Here's How You Ought To Think About This Subject" kind of thing.

<comment><USER13> _> he's specifically trying to inflict an ideology on a group_

I think you should re-read the paragraph you're re-stating -- you don't seem to have understood the author's meaning, because you're replying to a straw man.

In fact, IMO, almost _all_ of the comments here seem to have missed the actual point of the article, which I don't think was _at all_ intended to be taken on face value...

Giving people "a different set of goggles to try on" is about as far as you can get from "inflict[ing] an ideology". The entire purpose of the former is to _explicitly_ recognize the contingency of a particular (or even _any_ particular) ideology.

 _> making bigoted assumptions about their perception of the world_

I don't think the assumption that most formal education in the west is pretty Eurocentric is anything less than accurate. E.g. look at the amount of time spent on various cultures in history courses and look at how they are discussed (in their own terms vs. comparatively.)

There isn't necessarily anything _wrong_ with that, either, because it's easier to learn about things that are familiar to you, and easier to learn about new things when they are compared to things you're already familiar with. However, it does motivate the need for popular writing that points out the ways in which such an education can lead you astray.

In that respect, all of the strongly negative reactions to this article were _exactly the point_ the author was making. The flaws in Asia-centric thinking are obvious to us, and the step that the author is hoping an educated reader will be able to make on their own (perhaps with the help of a footnote) is to realize that these same flaws are _also_ manifest in Euro-centric thinking. (Or, you know, just get pissed off and miss the point.)

<comment><USER12> He made an overt assumption that Westerners do not have a grasp of Rome vis-a- vis Asian cultures, and admittedly and deliberately applied 'spin' \- which is wrong.

I have a lot of interest in learning about historical issues that are not necessarily commonplace 'in the West' but zero interest in learning it from armchair hacks who 'spin' ideas and misrepresent facts.

"all of the strongly negative reactions to this article were exactly the point the author was making." \- no - this is false. The 'strong reactions' were against his misrepresentations and 'spin' \- underlying his bigoted assumption about Westerners perspectives and biases - not about the content itself. Medium readers in particular would be fond of reading up a bit on Asian antiquity.

<comment><USER13> _> I have a lot of interest in learning about historical issues that are not necessarily commonplace 'in the West' but zero interest in learning it from armchair hacks who 'spin' ideas and misrepresent facts._

Part of reading is understand the author's intent.

The purpose of this piece was _not_ to document historical fact, and the author explained as much in simple and up-front language. So if you're trying to "learn about historical issues" from this, aside from issues of historiography, that's your failure as a reader.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > _During the Roman period, the Asian continent was by far the wealthiest, > most advanced, most culturally diverse place on earth._

'The Asian continent' is not a nation, and as a bonus, it also includes Rome. How much does it include Rome? Well, the last thousand-odd years of Rome's run were basically in Asia (who we call the Byzantines, they called themselves Romans).

It's also weird to proclaim 'cultural diversity' as a symbol of power in that period, when it was those who could spread their core culture that were the most powerful. Weirdly, the article later expounds on the cultural homogeneity of the Chinese as their strength. So Rome is weak because of lack of cultural diversity, and China is strong because of lack of cultural diversity?

Ultimately the article doesn't even discuss what it suggests in the title - <USER2> expounds upon those wonderous exotic peoples, and then sadly shakes its head on how two travelers must have felt dying in the 'backwater' of the Roman empire (of course, we'll neatly ignore that they were also found in a _Roman backwater_ to begin with - Britannia wasn't exactly paved with marble). No real discussion on the meeting of the cultures.

China's historical culture and power is often overlooked by us westerners, sure, but the article is too much "gosh, those exotics!" for me.

</comment><comment><USER14> As others have pointed out, this article is riddled with errors. To give just one example, the picture he posts of a supposed "temple of the Qin dynasty, circa 200 BCE" appears to actually be the Nanqiao (south bridge) in Chengdu, which seems to have been built in 1878 AD. I can give a list of some of the other errors I noticed if anyone likes (and there are probably many I missed); either way, I wouldn't recommend anyone take any of this as fact.

Beyond the factual errors, there are numerous unsubstantiated claims. I don't know how one would come up with an objective way to measure philosophy and poetry. How much philosophy and poetry from (for example) the Kushan Empire has survived? What's the background for the claim that its philosophy and poetry dwarfed the Roman Empire's?

The idea that we should pay more attention to many of the other polities in history is a valid one. But I don't think an article filled with errors and baseless claims is terribly useful.

<comment><USER15> I just read a few paragraphs and gave up when it said Rome was left out of the civilized world (referring to the middle east blocking china).

I guess he forgot the greeks and hellenization. Oh but the greeks were barbarians too.

The tone also angered me.

<comment><USER16> > The tone also angered me

I Read the article and I understand that it's flawed in some parts. However, that's exactly how the non-western major world civilisations are called. Barbarians, mysticals and unscientific etc are the words used to describe them. I would urge you to look past the eurocenticism as I did and you'll discover that there's truth in the facts.

If we leave out the mislabeling of images, the fact remains that the eastern world was in fact more connected, advanced and globalised compared to Rome.

<comment><USER8> >> However, that's exactly how the non-western major world civilisations are called. Barbarians, mysticals and unscientific etc are the words used to describe them.

"Barbarian" though is a Greek word, used by Greeks to describe anyone speaking a language that wasn't the Greek language. I'm guessing the article either ignores this or uses "barbarian" as a translation of a similar term used in the Far Eastern world, and which I don't know. I'm pretty sure there must have been one.

<comment><USER17> May have been the origin of the term, but these days it is basically "any culture that have practices and norm we do not understand and deem inferior to our own".

<comment><USER18> > we do not understand and deem inferior to our own

Of course, those two things don't have to go together. It's perfectly reasonable to understand something and deem it inferior. And deeming it inferior isn't necessarily an indication that something isn't understood.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been enjoying the "History of the Ancient World" lecture series on Amazon streaming. (I also really enjoyed the "Decisive Battles" series by the same professor Greg Aldrete.)

The article claims that China dwarfed Rome, but the course actually claims that Rome and China under the Han dynasty were about equal in many ways (geographic size and population). There are several lectures comparing the two.

[http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/history-of-the- ancien...](http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/history-of-the-ancient- world-a-global-perspective.html)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Disclaimer: yes, there is some annoying, borderline clickbait-y language in this article, including in the title. And yes, it is badly overstating things to claim, as the author does, that the Roman empire was not a "dim backwater by comparison" to Asia. That said, lots of interesting information and imagery here that seemed worth a share.

<comment><USER20> > a philosopher and statesman known as Kung Fuzi ("Master Kung," known in the > West as "Confucius") codified the heavenly rules into a series of texts that > would form the backbone of Chinese culture for the next two thousand years. > Master Kung's intricate philosophy, _known as kung fu_ , utterly permeated > every area of Chinese existence, from statecraft to family life, from > etiquette to martial arts.

(emphasis mine, obscuring emphasis present in original)

This doesn't inspire much confidence. I can't read it except as trying to suggest that the english word "kung fu" (modern chinese: 功夫 gongfu, meaning skill, labor, or martial arts) is derived from the name of Confucius (modern Chinese: 孔夫子 kong fuzi, meaning, as advertised, "master Kong"). I am not aware of any support for that claim -- you'll note that the "kung" of "kung fu" is the character 功, and the "k'ung" of k'ung fu-tsu, Confucius, is 孔. There was (and of course still is) a word for Confucian philosophy: it is 儒 ru, not "kung fu".

<comment><USER21> It sounds so cool, it's almost worth the fake etymology. Who could deny that Jackie Chan is a worthy successor to Confucius?

<comment><USER22> I'm going to be that guy: me, their philosophies are almost completely incompatible^^

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > The Palace of Versailles is, in its way, one of the last dim shadows of the > Han court

Lots of arguments are a pretty big stretch in this article.

<comment><USER24> Yeah, this article is garbage. The only reason it got on the front page is because of the clickbait title.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> As many have noted, this piece does plenty of axe-grinding, conclusion- stretching, and fact-spinning, as well as simply getting a fair bit wrong. _But for all of that_ it does convey a fundamental truth: there was a _hell_ of a lot of established civilisation going on _outside_ the general scope of Western History -- principally the Mediterranian basin.

In particular, China was home to a huge, advanced, and highly active culture. I'm only slowly becoming aware of this myself through recent reading. As I've just commented, I only discovered in the past year the work of British biochemist-turned-sinologist Joseph Needham. His _Science and Civilisation in China_ , proposed as a brief 5-6 volume work in the early 1950s, _continues to be developed to this day_. Just reading the titles of the 24 completed volumes gives a sense of the scope of invention and discovery covered. There are at least two more volumes forthcoming.

[http://www.nri.cam.ac.uk/science.html](http://www.nri.cam.ac.uk/science.html)

Simon Winchester's _The Man who Loved China_ gives the background for this story, and is highly recommended.

Again: while the particulars here are distorted, the underlying truth isn't: there was a phenomenal civilisation in China during the time of the Roman empire, and it easily rivalled, and quite possibly surpassed, Rome.

</comment><comment><USER26> Many of the items the author claims China dwarfed Rome on seem pretty subjective. Philosophy and poetry?

I didn't read very far past this. I am under the impression that Rome was pretty technologically sophisticated, even beyond what we normally picture. Does the author go on to compare tech sophistication with examples?

<comment><USER27> Nope. Well, there's a claim that the Asian empires had the most advanced weaponry of their age. But no examples.

Such a claim is probably false, given that China historically lagged the Mediterranean in terms of adopting technologies like swords, iron-age weaponry, chariotry, Greek fire. The main exception to this rule (gunpowder) isn't really an exception, since the development of weapons that made effective use of gunpowder (namely, the arquebus) did not occur in China but in Western Europe.

The author also conveniently ignores that many of the large European powers tried to claim the right to be the successor to the Roman Empire--the Ottoman Empire, the Byzantine Empire (which always called themselves the Roman Empire), the Russian Empire, and the Holy Roman Empire. And the fact that Latin and Greek was the mark of learned scholars, that classical works like Aristotle and Euclid were the textbooks of learning, all the way through the 1800s is a pretty clear parallel to the way that Confucius' teachings were considered the mark of proper learning in China. It can be argued that viewing Chinese history through the lens of the Mandate of Heaven hurts understanding, not helps, since it downplays the (sometimes significant) periods of disunity in China.

<comment><USER25> It's worth keeping in mind that China's needs for military capability differed from the various Western empires.

Rome fought with Persia to the East, the Gauls and Vandals to the north, and Carthage to the south, as well as the colonised peoples of its own empire, pretty much constantly. As I understand history, China was buffered by land (north, west, and south), and sea (west) from any significant challengers. Most of its threats were internal, the notable exception being the Mongol invasions, but that wasn't until the 1200s BCE.

On the other hand, what China _did_ have in absolute spades and wheelbarrows full was technology (including, for the record, wheelbarrows). I've only learnt of the major study of this myself in the past year, British biochemist Joseph Needham's absolutely epic _Science and Civilisation in China_. Needham conceived of the work whilst in China on behalf of the British government during WWII, and proposed a 5-6 volume treatment in the 1950s. _Seven decades later_ the work continues, with the total volume count approaching 30. Author Simon Winchester tells the story of Needham in _The Man who Loved China_ (a single volume, should you fear to ask -- not a foregone conclusion as several digests of S&CIC run to multiple volumes themselves).

The breadth, scope, and _precociousness_ of China's explorations in science, maths, and technology are staggering. The volume listing of the work itself gives some sense of the scope and scale, this is given at Wikipedia: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China)

Scientific thought. Maths, astronomy, & geology. Physics. Mechanical engineering. Civil and nautical engineering. Paper and printing. Spagyrical discovery (alchemy and immortality). Military technology. Textiles. Ferrous metallurgy. Ceramics. Mining. Botany. Agriculture. Agroindustry & Forestry. Biology & botany. Fermentation & food science. Medicine. Language and logic. Two volumes, topics unspecified, are given as "work in progress", I suspect these would concern military and weaving technologies respectively.

[http://www.nri.cam.ac.uk/science.html](http://www.nri.cam.ac.uk/science.html)

<comment><USER27> My knowledge of ancient Chinese history is fuzzy, but the Jin dynasty, the Song dynasty, and the Ming dynasty were all ended by the conquest of what the Chinese considered barbarians, and I seem to recall that barbarian problems (or at least the cost of barbarian pacification efforts) fueled the fall of the Han and Tang dynasties as well.

It's worth first pointing out that the timeline of that series is slightly misleading; for proper comparisons, you're not comparing the Han dynasty against Rome but rather the various Chinese dynasties against Western tradition from ancient Greece and Rome, through the Islamic and medieval worlds up to perhaps the end of the Early Modern, which does reduce some of the impressiveness of the achievements. It's also interesting to look at what the Chinese don't invent--they invented gunpowder, but neither corned gunpowder nor the arquebus; they never appear to have been much interested in geodesy or cottoned on to the idea of the spherical Earth; they developed printing, movable type, and paper but never developed the printing press nor the literary industry of Western Europe.

<comment><USER25> My Chinese history ain't so sharp either, but checking, the three dynastic periods you're referencing start about 1115, or some 700 years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The barbarian invaders in each case are the Mongols, whom I'd mentioned (along with the timeframe) above. So this largely proves my poiont.

Whilst yes, there are multiple Chinese dynasties being considered here, there's pretty much a single cultural tradition, as opposed to the equivalent period of Western history which spans Egypt, the Phoenecians (or Phillistines, from which Palistine comes from), Minoans, Greeks, Macedonians, and Romans, as well as the Persian, Syrian, and several other cultures from what's now considered the Middle East.

The whole quesition of why China's progress stopped where, when, and how it did is a fascinating one. It's actually what Joseph Needham was getting at, and is termed "the Needham Question". It's strongly related to the parallel question: why did the Industrial Revolution emerge in 19th century England, and not elsewhere, or earlier, or later? I've been exploring that and could venture some suggestions.

In aaddition to Needham, there are Karl Polanyi ( _The Great Transformation_ ), Kenneth Boulding ( _The Meaning of the Twentieth Century_ ), Jared Diamond ( _Guns, Germs, and Steel_ ) and many of the titles in the series the Princeton economic history of the world ([http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=hotseries&q=se%3A"Princeto...](http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=hotseries&q=se%3A"Princeton+economic+history+of+the+Western+world.")).

Vaclav Smil's _Energy in World History_ explores the question somewhat, though I'd suggest mining the excellent bibliography for further reading (I've got a scanned copy that's not handy for extracting refs at the moment). [http://www.worldcat.org/title/energy-in-world- history/oclc/3...](http://www.worldcat.org/title/energy-in-world- history/oclc/30398523&referer=brief_results)

I can see a few influences, some of which are pretty well developed by others, some perhaps not. Geography, politics, trade, uniformity, writing system, philosophy and theology, population, and environment all quite probably play significant roles.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I would have enjoyed this more had it more nuance. Even if you don't know squat about history, its important to get of this single-dimension "who was greatest" \+ Western self-loathing (and ironic combo too).

</comment><comment>==

From what I learned in school and remember off the top of my head:

\- Rome was an ugly place, but they kind of knew it hence upper classes went Greek and the eastern empire became more prominent. Romans were great for trade, but their empire could only be held together by growth (plunder) and that's not sustainable

\- Greeks were more civilized, but clearly sucked at empire building (Alexander is Macedon). Hellenization shows that even if he messed up Persia, the culture was influential.

\- China couldn't really expand because it is so isolated geographically, so it is harder to for it to influence other places. But this had an effect that arguably they were less interested in conquest and influence (outside of uniting accessible areas) \- Confucianism raggin' on merchants, artisans, and whatever else might form a middle class \- Ming treasure fleet might have reached Africa, but no fucks given.

\- Mesopotamia did do great things back in the day, but by 1000 was past its peak (as was the Levant). Interesting how ethnic identity, especially among Semitic groups, seems quiet fluid, though invading armies + Islam explains a lot of that.

\- Persions were _not at all_ taught (before college). Seriously wtf, we covered everybody else said to be skipped in American education. But I later learned in college that perhaps they were more rural/feudal than eastern Mediterranean, (the article says more Urban than Rome, but then makes a bunch of medieval comparisons, so who knows?)

\- While we didn't cover it. I read about Kush/Bactria on Wikipedia (and the other Kush hah (south of Egypt not what you were thinking hah)). I can kind of understand that as an influenCED rather than influencING kingdom it was easy to gloss over (oh we talked about the silk road, but usually in the abstract). But I do like covering it as concrete evidence that those things which were said to be influential actually were.

Basically, even in fairly leftist history curricula, it was all about who does the most trade, most urbanization, and most interaction with neighbors. Any overly courtly civilization was suspect.

Arguably then the same things that made China so dominant early on and steady thereafter also lead to its eventual falling behind. Central Eurasia might have become the dominant world culture except the Europeans got a huge steroid injection with easiest access a humongous place you could depopulate by coughing.

</comment><comment>====

Author asked in a caption about better timelines. I inherited some company's Hammond's "Graphic History of Mankind" from the 1950s. Some things there should definitely be revised (though they kept on extending and publishing the timeline until at least 2000) but the concept is great.

Somebody should make some crazy SVG thing where as you zoom in more details would appear. Make it procedural generated and open source so non-technical history buffs can send you PRs (or figure out how to scrape Wikipedia). I'll be forever grateful.

<comment><USER13> _> its important to get [out] of this single-dimension "who was greatest"_

That was the _entire point of the article_. Read in particular the last few paragraphs, noting the wink-and-nod tone...

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Dear Medium engineers (if any of you happen to see this): why must localStorage and/or cookies be enabled in my browser for images to be displayed on your site?

</comment><comment><USER30> This really overstates things, there was regular contact between Europe and China back several thousand years before Rome. It's not actually that far on foot, and rumor can easially travel both ways even if few people make the trip.

</comment><comment><USER31> > Imagine if you could visit Rome today, and find it still populated by Latin- > speaking, toga-wearing Romans.

Maybe no more togas, but isn't this basically true? While for example Spanish is Basquified and French is Germanicified, modern Italian is basically the direct descendant of classical Latin just as Mandarin is a direct descendant of classical Chinese.

<comment><USER32> Uh, no?

The two broad categories are high Latin and low Latin. Put another way, classical Latin and vulgar Latin. Low Latin was the vernacular and already used by most by 270 AD, including poets, who greatly influenced the formation and unification of the new Latin language. The "Latin" that is generally studied at university these days comes from a mediaeval Latin that is a simplification of this old, vernacular form.

Actually, during the period of classical Latin, the vulgar form already existed and broke off into at least a dozen dialects, some of which include old forms of French, Spanish, Portuguese, and, of course Latin, of which there were many versions. It was a fight between the two, but nobody really used classical Latin in everyday speech. These days, there are I want to say probably a dozen dialects in Italy. But Italian is a simplification of Roman Latin with minor influences by other Romance languages and even less influences by other world languages such as Arabic.

My basic conclusion to what you say is, there is no way you can understand classical Latin if you speak modern Italian.

<comment><USER20> There is also no way to understand classical Chinese if you speak any modern Chinese language.

> The "Latin" that is generally studied at university these days comes from a > mediaeval Latin that is a simplification of this old, vernacular form.

This is certainly not the case in the US. That sounds more like studying church Latin, which will be mocked if you're studying Latin outside an explicit religious context. Where are you?

<comment><USER33> Not really. Ancient Chinese poems as far back as 3000 years ago are still required materials for recitation by Chinese school children. Any educated modern Chinese can read and understand ancient Chinese text.

<comment><USER20> > Ancient Chinese poems as far back as 3000 years ago are still required > materials for recitation by Chinese school children.

This is true.

> Any educated modern Chinese can read and understand ancient Chinese text.

This is false. Try them on something they haven't seen before.

Furthermore, just as modern Chinese who have studied ancient Chinese can read it, modern Italians who have studied Latin can read that, too. In fact, modern Italians who have studied ancient Chinese can even read that! That doesn't mean their knowledge of Italian is helpful; it isn't.

<comment><USER33> I was merely questioning the claim that modern Chinese cannot read ancient Chinese. I made no claim whatsoever on Italian as I have no knowledge on that matter.

However, I have first hand knowledge that modern educated Chinese can read ancient Chinese text, which by definition means reading text they have not seen before.

The Chinese writing system changed very little since Han dynasty. Even with the mainland Chinese's simplified Chinese system, most mainland Chinese can still read traditional Chinese without special training. Because the simplification was mostly codifying the existent shortcuts in ordinary people's hand-writings.

<comment><USER34> Sinologist Victor Mair reports: " On Thursday we had our Spring mid-term examination. I always test the students on a seen portion and an unseen passage. Because we go over the text in class together so very carefully, they usually do well on the seen passage, but often the unseen passage — for which I try to pick a text that is at about the same level of difficulty as the stage we're at in class at the time — completely throws the students for a loop. This time it happened that the students (2 from China, 2 with a Japanese background, 2 from the United States, 1 from Hong Kong, 1 from Vietnam, and 1 from Ghana) were stymied by the unseen passage that I gave them. They could understand all of the characters singly, and I even gave them additional vocabulary notes and explanations. But they just couldn't make sense of the passage as a whole nor even of its constituent sentences. Among the 9 students, only 2 could roughly figure out what was happening in the unseen passage. Of course, this is terribly frustrating for the students, but it is also good practice to push them to their limits to see what they can do unaided (like letting a child try to ride a bike without training wheels after a period of using them). In cases like what happened on Thursday, I tell the students that I will be lenient, so I'll add on 20 or 30 points to their grade because I fully realize how hard the test is. If they can get any part of it, I'm proud of them."

( [http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=24459](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=24459) ) and also a detailed answer from an otherwise-anonymous stackoverflow user: [http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/15452/can- chines...](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/15452/can-chinese- people-read-the-literature-of-2-500-years-ago-as-easily-as-yesterday)

<comment><USER33> These students are college aged people in US. They are not what I call "educated Chinese people".

The way the classic Chinese was written has always been different from everyday vernacular Chinese. This has been true for every generation of Chinese learners since ancient times.

How people spoke Chinese have changed over the years dramatically. I don't think the ancient ways of speaking Chinese is understandable by modern Chinese. However, the way the language is written in formal setting has changed little up to the end of Qing dynasty in 1912.

An education in Chinese means to learn how to read these traditional Chinese writings. This education is still enforced today in modern China, hence my claim that an educated modern Chinese person can still read them and understand them. For example, a part of the Chinese college entrance exam requires the students to read an unseen piece of traditional Chinese text, and answer questions about it. During the exam, some enterprising students could even write their essays entirely in classic Chinese, garnering wide circulations on the internet.

<comment><USER20> > An education in Chinese means to learn how to read these traditional Chinese > writings. This education is still enforced today in modern China, hence my > claim that an educated modern Chinese person can still read them and > understand them. For example, a part of the Chinese college entrance exam > requires the students to read an unseen piece of traditional Chinese text, > and answer questions about it.

There's a serious conflict here with your simultaneous claim that college graduates aren't yet "educated".

<comment><USER33> What's the conflict? College graduates from where? A college graduate who has gone through the entire Chinese education system would be required to learn reading comprehension of classic Chinese.

Granted, there are always students for one reason or another claimed that they have leaned nothing from school. It's either a false claim, or if that's true, calling them educated would be a stretch, isn't it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> What irks me it that the article makes its comparison by picking the best aspects of non-Roman civilizations spread all over Asia and from there draws the conclusion that those "born into the light" Chinese who ended up in Britannia must have felt like being in wilderness. It actively ignored the aspects that people outside the Roman empire would most likely considered impressive compared to other Asian empires. For one, the civilizations around Mediterranean were sea-faring types, and even more so for the Roman Empire which relied on sea transport for much of its normal functioning. That is not something one could see in any of the Asian empires, not nowhere near that scale. Law. Rome had a law system that was so good that it was willingly adopted by most of the civilizations coming after, regardless of the fact that the said civilizations might have had their own distinct cultural heritage that included law. The individual liberties and the personal property rights seem to be timeless attractions, going back since the Roman era. (By the way, the Chinese really appreciate that to this day, Vancouver real estate prices speak for themselves.) Constructions. Although concrete was older than Romans, they were the ones to take it seriously and made extensive research on it. That allowed them to build things that were simply impossible without concrete. There's only so much complexity you can get just by piling up blocks of stone, or there can be only so much heightened weight using just softer binders. Don't get me started on jewelry and complex works like ones that involved developing glass with layers of metal inside it, or other such things that weren't developed nowhere else. Yeah, that must have been underwhelming, that is how darkness must have been perceived like!

</comment><comment><USER36> One interesting bit from the article

"But we don't still identify as "citizens of the Roman Empire," and we certainly aren't ruled by emperors who derive their authority from the gods of Mt. Olympus."

Interesting because many Americans do consider themselves as the spiritual successors of the Roman empire leading to things like having american "Senators" meeting in the "Senate". Also possibly why some of the commentators here seem so put off by the article.

<comment><USER37> > Interesting because many Americans do consider themselves as the spiritual > successors of the Roman empire

I'm sorry, what? I'm not an American so this is the first time I'm hearing this. Can someone recommend some reading on this topic? Seems pretty interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The reading of history of ancient civilisations in the article is kinda cool, if a bit naive.

I would not mind reading a historical novel based on it (I understand that's what the article is really a plug for). I would certainly welcome a _game_ based on the historical periods and geographic areas covered. It's a bit sad that so many games are set in the European middle ages when there are so many more colourful periods of history to conquer or loot in (hey- you can play the Sassanids in Rome: Total War, at least; and yeah, cataphracts do tear a new one to legionnaires).

The big problem of the article however, and one that puts an obvious hole smack in the middle of its claim that "westerners were the true barbarians" is, as others have pointed out, that it avoids pretty much any discussion of the intellectual activity that went on between the shores of the Middle East and the Adriatic Sea:

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

Not to mention: everything started in Babylon, and ancient Sumer, and Aegypt, but then it got carried over to the western world through the Greeks and lives on to this day.

So it's a bit silly to separate the achievements of different peoples according to geography when they obviously and clearly were smart enough to learn from each other. It's much better to speak of a human civilisation that covered the globe and survives to this day, thank the gods.

A barbarian, in the end, is just a person who can't see beyond the borders of his or her own country.

</comment><comment><USER5> This article does not get the main difference between the Roman Empire and all these other great states. Most notably, the fact that we are still living in the Roman Empire.

Property Law? Check. Marriage and Divorce? Check. Democracy and Public Life processes? Check.

Well it evolved of course. But hey... Republic comes from Res Publica not Kushan Whatever.

<comment><USER38> > But hey... Republic comes from Res Publica not Kushan Whatever.

Is HN really a place for such uneducated snarky comments? The reason we use Republic and English is due to the barbaric colonization by European powers in the past.

There were democracies in Ancient East too, and if you read the laws of Ashoka/Gupta etc, you'll find they were much more advanced than most of their contemporaries. We don't need to stoop so low to discredit other cultures just because we can't overcome our bias.

<comment><USER37> > The reason we use Republic and English is due to the barbaric colonization > by European powers in the past.

The amount of self-loathing in the West is reaching critical levels.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Medium is becoming a pamphlet...

</comment><comment><USER5> If you want a serious update on the current level of research on Roman and antiquities studies - including the place of the roman empire in the world, you'd better go there: [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6297739-the- inheritance-...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6297739-the-inheritance- of-rome)

</comment><comment><USER40> Medium is becoming the Social Justice Warrior de facto pamphlet. With absolutely no regard to facts as long as it fits their narrative.

Like many already pointed this "article" is totally fantasious.

</comment><comment><USER41> Not sure about the historical narrative. But the work of the visual artist, Dmitry Zaviyalov, featured at the top is quite impressive, at least.

</comment><comment><USER42> I'm suspicious of any article that's widely slated by a community yet still trending.

I feel there's a market need for a browser plugin that lets you filter out clickbait factories like his employers and all the dirty tricks they use to hijack our attention. There's no way we can keep up with them without computer assistance.

</comment><comment><USER33> Don't know why this is down voted. Why is it so hard to learn some fact that may be contrary to your imagination?

<comment><USER32> I don't know if what you said is right, but I have been basically relaying what my Latin professors have taught me and what I, as an A-student in Latin, have learnt, yet I am being downvoted. A similar thing happened to me when I started talking about Latin American literature and history.

I'm assuming most people here have gotten their information off the Web and have a very one-sided view of whatever they have decided they have attained "knowledge" on.

<comment><USER20> I downvoted you for this line:

> The "Latin" that is generally studied at university these days comes from a > mediaeval Latin that is a simplification of this old, vernacular form.

You're on solid ground to say that in the classical period there were several registers of Latin, that the lower registers gave rise to vulgar and late latin, and that those gave rise to church latin. (I can only really interpret "medieval Latin" as referring to church latin.) You're certainly on solid ground to say that speaking Italian won't let you understand Latin.

But the Latin you study in a normal Latin course is the high register of the classical period, Classical Latin. It doesn't derive from medieval Latin, it predates it by many hundreds of years.</comment></comment></comment>


Buffett assails Wells Fargo, defends 3G at wide-ranging meeting - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/us-berkshire-buffett-idUSKBN1820J4 <comment><AUTHOR>
        This "incentivized the wrong type of behavior," and
        former Chief Executive John Stumpf, who lost his job
        over the scandal, was too slow to fix the problem,
        Buffett said.

At least Buffett said _something_ , but Stumpf still rode off into the sunset with a nine-figure take.

        Still, Buffett's support of current management and board
        was key to ensuring the re-election of the entire board
        last month.

What a joke.

</comment><comment><USER2> Indeed</comment>


Top tech start-up logos - <AUTHOR> http://www.startupsmart.com.au/marketing/top-10-start-up-logos/201201125053.html

<comment><USER2> Great article. You never get a second chance to make a first impression, and a logo is often exactly that.

Love the any.do logo... I'm a sucker for simple typography <http://any.do>

<comment><USER3> Haven't heard of it, I'm testing this app right now, looks really sleek. Starting to love it.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you track your metrics? - <AUTHOR>

I am currently exploring solutions to track metrics for my startup. KissMetrics and Mixpanel are doing good jobs, but they are quite expansive and not very customizable for an early-stage startup. I am looking more for a tool that aggregates the data and syncs metrics from various sources. <comment><USER2> What's the startup?

Without thinking of what is available through Google Analytics, Kissmetrics, Mixpanel etc .- what are the single most important factor of your startups success?

<comment><AUTHOR> SaaS. It's more about aggregating the various services like Analytics, KissMetrics, etc.</comment></comment>


Meta HN: Why is this account banned? (access_denied) - <AUTHOR>

http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=access_denied
I looked through the submissions and comments history, and saw no reason why this person would be banned.
I'm a little disturbed by how opaque the process is. Someone tell the poor guy nobody can see his comments/submissions. <comment><USER2> Try turning showdead on.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do have it on, that's how I found access_denied. Otherwise, I would have never seen him/her.

Once I saw a perfectly reasonable comment dead, I digged into the comments and submissions, to the point where the ban occurred. I saw nothing notable whatsoever, access_denied's comments all seem fine to me. And yet he's been unheard an unreplied to for quite a long time. It's not a crime against humanity, but it isn't quite right.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You wouldnt happen to be access_denied would you? What with your recently created account and low karma.

<comment><AUTHOR> Nope, I'm not access_denied. As you can see, access_denied has been making comments even after I had created my account.</comment></comment>


U.S. Losing the World's Biggest Manufacturing Race: Electric Vehicles - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulbledsoe/2019/04/08/america-is-losing-the-worlds-biggest-manufacturing-and-climate-race-electric-vehicles/#3d9a2da111e1 <comment><USER2> This article has it exactly right. The EV revolution is about to happen. That is because plunging battery prices mean that in another two or three years EV sticker prices for larger cars will match that of ICE's, and in following years will match for smaller ones. [https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/17/bnef- shocker-electric-c...](https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/17/bnef-shocker- electric-cars-price-competitive-in-2020-as-battery-costs-plummet/)

Given that operating expenses for EV's are much lower, market demand will suddenly swing over to EV's. The only limit to growth will be how fast battery production and EV production will be able to expand. And this will turn the auto industry, and everything associated with it, on its head.

What past history shows is that when there is a radical technical revolution like this, many if not all of the incumbents will go out of business, and many if not all of the new market leaders will be startups. And the transition is not an easy one, it is not like and ICE manufacturer can just decide one day to start making EV's and be doing so a year later. It takes years to develop the expertise and supply chain.

So the companies that are not pushing hard today are going to be in very serious trouble in a few years. And at present that includes most American manufacturers. Only GM seems semi-serious. And that in turn means the government should be doing everything right now to encourage them to get to work on EV's.

One final point. There is endless coverage about Tesla, and it certainly deserves a great deal of attention. But the press is largely missing the important story, which is that the EV revolution is starting to get going all around the world.</comment>


Building AI systems that work is still hard - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/01/building-ai-systems-that-work-is-still-hard/ <comment><AUTHOR> Experienced multiple times working on applied AI projects. Real-world datasets are messy and labeling them is an expensive task.

Enterprises are also not sure how to measure the RoI of their AI projects, especially since the accuracy is the mid-80s at best and someone needs to take ownership to teach the machine and improve the accuracy continuously.</comment>


Slot Flaw Scofflaws - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/05/24/529865107/episode-773-slot-flaw-scofflaws <comment><USER2> For most slot machines, this is a non-issue. The RNGs used isn't necessarily a secret (most companies use known good algorithms), and there is plenty to seed them, including player/coin input, network traffic, and plain old run-the-RNG- really-fast-continually-so-it's-tough-to-time.

However, this particular hack was with old Novomatic games, a small company at the time that didn't do a very good job here. This is a long solved problem with most other vendors. Bugs do happen, and they're generally covered under the "Malfunctions void all pays and plays" on every machine, and software updates that casinos may or may-not update the floor. Sometimes the news reports on some underflow error, but anybody with internal knowledge realizes the credit meter just went to 2^24-1, or something like that. These are really non-stories internally.

Source: Slot machine developer in previous life.

</comment><comment><USER3> Kevin Mitnick, "The Art Of intrusion", ch 1: "Hacking The Casinos For A Million Bucks" \- weak RNG in video poker machines, hilarity ensues.

Can expound on the hack if anyone cares. It definitely worked (this was 1990's, presumably harder now)

[https://archive.org/stream/pdfy- xiVfICtkDwD1k90A/Kevin%20Mit...](https://archive.org/stream/pdfy- xiVfICtkDwD1k90A/Kevin%20Mitnick%20-%20The%20Art%20of%20Intrusion_djvu.txt)

</comment><comment><USER4> The linked article in Wired: [https://www.wired.com/2017/02/russians-engineer- brilliant-sl...](https://www.wired.com/2017/02/russians-engineer-brilliant- slot-machine-cheat-casinos-no-fix/)

<comment><USER5> And the previous HN discussion of that article:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13579353](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13579353)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The cheating method is very interesting, but even the WIRED article leaves a lot of unanswered questions. Even if one knows what PRNG is used (the Mersenne Twister, for example), how in the world do they know _how_ the PRNG is used? Are we generating integers, bits, bytes, do these numbers correspond to probabilities? To specific slots? Etc.

It just seems very unlikely to me that this kind of operation is possible without some kind of inside man that gives the cheaters a look at the source code (or at least an idea of how the slot machines work).

<comment><USER3> > inside man that gives the cheaters a look at the source code

Not necessary; slots are legal to buy in many states, including Nevada. Same machines as the casinos use. Read the ROM's, disassemble the algorithms...

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> How on earth is this a crime?

<comment><USER8> Using a "device" to help you gamble at a casino is usually illegal, yes. From the Wired article:

 _the operatives use their phones to record about two dozen spins on a game they aim to cheat. They upload that footage to a technical staff in St. Petersburg, who analyze the video and calculate the machine's pattern based on what they know about the model's pseudorandom number generator. Finally, the St. Petersburg team transmits a list of timing markers to a custom app on the operative's phone; those markers cause the handset to vibrate roughly 0.25 seconds before the operative should press the spin button._

Wired says they were arrested under a federal fraud charge. I don't know how that part works, but it's definitely illegal under state laws, e.g. Nevada: _It is unlawful for any person to use, possess with the intent to use or assist another person in using or possessing with the intent to use any computerized, electronic, electrical or mechanical device, or any software or hardware, or any combination thereof, which is designed, constructed, altered or programmed to obtain an advantage at playing any game in a licensed gaming establishment..._ [1]

Applies to anything at the casino -- it's not illegal to count cards at blackjack in your head, but you can't use your phone to do it.

[1] [https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-465.html#NRS465Sec075](https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-465.html#NRS465Sec075)

<comment><USER7> to obtain an advantage?

So any device the casinos use is illegal.

<comment><USER9> The casino is covering a bet that is mathematically advantageous already, so no device is needed on their part.

<comment><USER7> No they aren't. Plenty of casino technology exists to prevent gamblers from having an advantage with perfect, unassisted play. Dealers use automatic shufflers, for instance.

<comment><USER9> There is a difference between "perfect" blackjack play, and card counting. If a casino is willing to put themselves in a situation where a counter can succeed they deserve to lose every dollar they have, but using a continuous shuffle machine doesn't confer a greater mathematical advantage in a single hand than the casino would already have.

<comment><USER7> If I was willing to play the slot machines without algorithmic assistance, I deserve to lose.

<comment><USER9> No arguments there

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I had to read this title 3 times

<comment><USER11> You'd enjoy Bob Loblaw's Law Blog</comment></comment>


Tactical Haptics Raises $2.2M to Build Haptic VR Controller Dev Kit - <AUTHOR> http://www.roadtovr.com/tactical-haptics-2-2-million-seed-investment-grant-haptic-vr-controller/ <comment><AUTHOR> The tech of Tactical Haptics is difficult to understand without trying it. I've tried it several times at various meetups and I'll vouch that it is very impressive once you warm up to it.

When it was presented three years ago, it was way ahead of the then- nonexistent VR controller market. The team has been scraping by for three years waiting for an investor to recognize the value their haptic grip adds. I'm very happy to see them finally get the funding they need to move forward. :)</comment>


Leasing an Apple Watch Better Than Owning? - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/14/technology/rent-apple-watch-lease/index.html?iid=HP_LN

<comment><AUTHOR> Our thinking (applewatchlease.com) about why leasing will be a good option. . .

"But we think the Apple Watch will be different, especially during the first couple generations. The type and magnitude of features that will likely be added over the next generations will render previous models nearly obsolete. In some senses, this is true for a lot of other Apple products. The first couple generations account for important missing functionality, and then further generations embark on a path towards refinement. But even conflated to other apple product developments, we think the apple watch will have a sharper risk becoming irrelevant as newer models launch."</comment>


Bill of Rights largely embodied uncontroversial traditional rights of Englishmen - <AUTHOR> https://reason.com/archives/2016/01/31/the-bill-of-rights-revisited <comment><USER2> Single page link: [https://reason.com/archives/2016/01/31/the-bill-of-rights- re...](https://reason.com/archives/2016/01/31/the-bill-of-rights- revisited/print)

For those who prefer to read the article whole, instead of arbitrarily split into two pages.</comment>


Gwynne Shotwell Is Steadying Force at SpaceX - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-right-hand-woman-is-steadying-force-at-spacex-1538233204 <comment><USER3> How to usefully say this briefly? The article has some interesting context. The byline is Andy Pasztor, who is known for anti-SpaceX low-quality journalism. This article was relatively tame for him. There's been a long-term press campaign against SpaceX. Apparently coming from old-aerospace. Its narratives have been... unconstrained by reality. And seemingly overlap with parts of the article. Long-term, the press campaign seems to be ramping up. Modulo intense tactical campaigns like Northrop's around loss of Zuma, which lasted only a few days. The many-$B "Senate"LaunchSystem appears in increasing trouble, both internally, and threatened by SpaceX's BFR. So odds are we'll enjoy a lot more of these.

> In August, reporters asked Ms. Shotwell how confident she was about the > latest timetable. Such difficult predictions "can make a liar out of the > best of us," she said, adding: "I hope I am not proven to be a liar."

This last paragraph... ick. Not worrying about the mischaracterization of delay, that's just Pasztor. But the association of Shotwell and "liar"... Shotwell is known for her honesty. Boeing leadership... very not so much. I do hope this isn't a new meme - that would be remarkably slimy.

Meta: There's the idea that knowing some topic, and seeing the press repeatedly get it wrong, causes one to doubt their reporting of everything else. Watching press coverage of SpaceX has introduced me to an unhappy variant. Knowing some political background for a topic, and finding it essential to even "read" press articles, leaves me wondering if I've been unknowingly failing to adequately "read" press coverage of everything else. :/

<comment><USER4> > _There 's the idea that knowing some topic, and seeing the press repeatedly > get it wrong, causes one to doubt their reporting of everything else._

Typically, this is presented as the opposite, where most people seem to mysteriously forget how poorly the media treats their own area of expertise when they turn around to trust it in other areas[0].

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell- Mann_amnesia_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect)

<comment><USER5> It goes both ways. Some people have a Gell-Mann revelation, some suffer from the amnesia.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is almost always the case with consistently successful companies - <USER2> CEOs get the coverage and the glory, but scratch the surface and you'll find a stellar COO who makes the whole thing actually work.

<comment><USER7> It isn't just the COO. An organization is successful because of a lot of great people. The CEO or COO are inconsequential.

It's the organization that succeeds, not the CEO or COO or any individual.

It's like a few years ago when steve jobs died, some people were claiming Apple was doomed. The "great man or woman" theory has been debunked enough that we know it is nonsense.

But as you noted, a successful company needs a stellar COO. So why is this news?

<comment><USER8> When you say "The CEO or COO are inconsequential." and "But as you noted, a successful company needs a stellar COO." in the same paragraph, the obvious contradiction really weakens your argument.

<comment><USER7> > When you say "The CEO or COO are inconsequential."

That was in reference to a particular CEO ro COO. It doesn't matter if Steve Jobs or Tim Cook is running Apple as long as they are competent and the organization is solid. As I said, I was referring to the "great man or woman" theory. Of course a successful organization requires "stellar" employees at every level.

> "But as you noted, a successful company needs a stellar COO." in the same > paragraph, the obvious contradiction really weakens your argument.

That remark was in reference to the "news" cycle. If every successful company has a stellar COO ( just like they have stellar janitors, mid level managers, etc ), why is it news? Could it be just because she is a woman? That was what I was implying.

The only reason this is a story is because the media had to push out another woman story.

As he noted, every successful company has a stellar COO. Wonder why they aren't getting articles in large newspapers?

<comment><USER9> > _It doesn 't matter if Steve Jobs or Tim Cook is running Apple as long as > they are competent and the organization is solid._

But, at least at a smaller/newer company, the CEO/COO has _created_ the organization. It's not some thing that exists independently of the CEO/COO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Highly recommended TED talk: [https://www.ted.com/talks/gwynne_shotwell_spacex_s_plan_to_f...](https://www.ted.com/talks/gwynne_shotwell_spacex_s_plan_to_fly_you_across_the_globe_in_30_minutes)

</comment><comment><USER11> Perhaps Elon needs such a COO at Tesla, too.

<comment><USER12> This seems to be a pretty common sentiment in the Tesla/SpaceX fan community.

<comment><USER13> It may be difficult to find someone Musk trusts as much as Shotwell, given her lengthy, loyal tenure alongside him.

<comment><USER14> It might already have happened - Jerome just became president of Tesla automotive. Sounds to me that this means one of the long-time Tesla VPs moved into a position to take over a lot of the direct management duties from Elon and also be a steadying force.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I didn't read the article because of the paywall.

Gwynne Shotwell is much, much more than a steadying force at SpaceX. She is brilliant and an amazing leader and has been pivotal in the success of SpaceX... as in: if you replaced her with someone else, I doubt SpaceX would be where they are today.

It is sad that her amazing accomplishments are often glossed over and/or overshadowed. I hope she is properly recognized in time. I think she is adversely affected by bias in the press (gender, etc.)

I don't work at SpaceX (used to work for JPL)... so this is just an outsider's opinion. I'm also male, FWIW.

</comment><comment><USER16> [http://archive.is/F7KnL](http://archive.is/F7KnL)

</comment><comment><USER17> Alternate title: Lady does a job.

</comment><comment><USER18> Tesla needs a COO that can keep Musk in check

</comment><comment><USER19> Her name (why is it not in the headline WSJ!) is Gwynne Shotwell

<comment><USER20> Now we know where the inspiration for Pepper Potts came from.

<comment><USER21> I understand where you're coming from with the parallel, but for the sake of understanding what's going on here, it's worth bearing in mind that they are not really equivalent.

Potts (at least as far as I can tell from the movies; I haven't read the comics; please let me know if they take a different approach) is personal assistant to the cranky genius; her job is to go with him and help him do his next great project.

Shotwell is operations; her job is to take over the company the cranky genius built, keep it running smoothly and profitably, and let him go off and do his next great project.

Different jobs, both important. (It's a pity Musk doesn't seem to have a Pepper Potts, who might have talked him into giving up his Twitter account.)

<comment><USER22> > ... her job is to take over the company the cranky genius built, keep it > running smoothly and profitably, and let him go off and do his next great > project.

I think this is precisely what Pepper Potts ends up doing in the movies. Tony Stark stops running the company. Not to condone the comparison or anything, just clarifying what happens in the movies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Paywall.Paste it somewhere maybe?

<comment><USER24> [https://outline.com/RAr4c6](https://outline.com/RAr4c6)</comment></comment>


IBM announces the first ThinkPad with Linux (2000-06-12) - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/12/business/microsoft-tries-another-court-public-opinion.html <comment><AUTHOR> Reading news from two decades ago has something special about it — one: it gives meaning to the present — two: it shows that things to change eventually.

That's why I've launched this — decades.tech</comment>


Can You Use FreeBSD for a Developer Machine in 2020? – By Jeremymorgan - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/can-you-use-freebsd-for-a-developer-machine-in-2020-fc653bk5 <comment><USER2> The most powerful machine in my home happens to be a second-hand server running FreeNAS, which is based on FreeBSD. So I have a couple of Xeons that only have to manage 4 disks in RAIDZ1. There's plenty left over to also be my primary development machine. I have my development tools installed in a big jail and I access it via SSH from my Windows machine.

In general it works, but I run into various issues trying to get tools and libraries installed pretty much every time I start a new project. Overall, I wouldn't recommend it.</comment>


Does America Have a Long-Term Strategic Plan? - <AUTHOR> http://peterturchin.com/cliodynamica/america-long-term-strategic-plan/ <comment><USER2> It's not clear to me that a long-term strategy is possible in heterogeneous democracies. The back-and-forth swings in power between highly opposed ideological groups disincentives long-term planning and big thinking.

Why plan for the next 100 years of climate change when the next guy voted in will throw your work out the window and claim it's a conspiracy?

</comment><comment><USER3> Perhaps America still views itself as needing the world's most powerful military indefinitely. We continue to push the American capitalistic model everywhere possible. We may have the most diversified economy on the planet. In other words, we want the status quo extended.

Maybe this lack of planning stems from our faith in markets vs central planning.

<comment><USER4> It worked reasonable well until now, didn't it? But the communist juggernaut has more momentum now, and maybe in the decades to come.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think the author does not understand capitalism. A fundamental aspect of what the US is about is Liberty.

That means that people are free to pursue whatever they want. If they change their minds, that's part of the system. People generate demand, and people work to meet supply.

The concept of a plan for production to meet demand is the concept that belongs to a planned economy (e.g. communist or fascist) government where production is controlled (or at least managed) by a government bureaucracy.

So not, we do not have a "strategic plan". And hopefully we never will.

</comment><comment><USER6> There are probably many strategic objectives that do not rely upon political / economic models, e.g. maintain a basic level of self-sufficiency in agriculture.</comment>


MetaChi: Task Management and Collaboration for Teams - <AUTHOR> http://beta.metachi.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey! I'm launching the beta of my startup HTTP://beta.metachi.com and would like to share it with you. WHAT WE DO: Task management and collaboration for teams HOW WE DO IT: Results driven collaboration WHY WE'RE DIFFERENT (better): a focus on facilitating results and quantified self and team data – MetaChi enables increased team efficacy. MY ASK OF YOU? Go to the site HTTP://beta.metachi.com and sign up. Experiment with your teams or committee's and let us know how we can improve your experience – your feedback is important. During the beta period it's important that we learn more about how we can improve your experience. Thanks in advance for your support DS Benbow, Founder & CEO www.metachi.com HTTP://beta.metachi.com MetaChi: Where effective task management & collaboration meet The problem and how MetaChi solves it [https://www.dropbox.com/s/c4tujpj4n6y88i4/MetaChi%20the%20%2...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/c4tujpj4n6y88i4/MetaChi%20the%20%20problem%20we%20solve%20III.pdf?dl=0) Our Explainer video (we make all of our videos inhouse…and it shows :-]) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TOGp8qH_WQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TOGp8qH_WQ) Fun MetaChi video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAX79DLJOig](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAX79DLJOig)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The #1 problem cited by distributed teams is task management – the #2 problem cited is long threads. Email is an inefficient tool for task management and effective collaboration – that's why we created MetaChi. MetaChi is the most effective task management tool for distributed teams. An added benefit is that MetaChi offers real-time quantified team and self-analytics that helps users understand how they collaborate with others</comment>


What you can buy with $8 billion - <AUTHOR> http://nooneisreadingmy.blogspot.com/2011/02/to-nasa-from-me-re-what-you-can-buy-for.html

<comment><USER2> Hmmm, let me guess. For $8 Billion you can buy enough coke to keep Sean Parker from being portrayed in any major motion pictures for the rest of the century?

</comment><comment><USER3> and to that NASA will respond, "$8 billion isn't cool. You know what's cool? $1 trillion." Ugh, where are the flying cars I was promised, by 2000...?</comment>


Notes on "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely - <AUTHOR> http://blog.kiwitobes.com/?p=49 I found this particularly interesting because while the central theme appears to be about market economies, there are a lot of parallels to startup theory and practice that permeates financing and money.  I actually learned a few things about how to develop my startup and steer potential customers in the right direction by understanding how they see what's readily available.
In the blog entry, much less the book which after looking at the first chapter, I think I need to read. <comment><AUTHOR> I found this to be a very interesting read (the blog entry that is); have not yet read the book but so far I'm seeing good notes in the author's explication that have decent parallels to startup theory, not just market economies</comment>


The Subtle Tricks Shopping Sites Use to Make You Spend More - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-online-retail-dark-patterns/ <comment><USER2> I don't see Amazon's bought-together thing as a dark pattern assuming the data is legitimate. While most of the time it's irrelevant I find it useful on occasion when it does things like point out a suitable case for the item I'm looking at.

It also can be stupid at times--just because A is bought with B doesn't mean B is bought with A. (Ink for your printer, sensible. Printer for your ink???)

</comment><comment><USER3> It's funny to me that there are a bunch of dark patterns on the Wired site. Is it willful ignorance, or lack of self-awareness?

<comment><USER4> The Blatant Shock-Journalism Wired Uses To Make You Click More</comment></comment>


Your So-Called Education - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/opinion/15arum.html?_r=1

<comment><USER2> Once again, government funding changes the cost/benefit equation for the worse. Education is no longer about getting the most education for the time and money invested.

Its not that amenities are bad. Its that the heavy thumb of government is on the scale, obscuring the actual cost of things. So we don't make the decisions we would have made.

And those ultimately paying the bills for government programs have very little input on what investments are made in "education". Mostly because they haven't been born yet.</comment>


America's Cup: How Emirates New Zealand Was Able to Rout Oracle Team USA - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/sports/sailing/americas-cup-new-zealand-beats-oracle-team-usa.html <comment><USER2> Well, the article doesn't say much about how. For that you should check Sailing Anarchy's AC Forum which would have been even better if Oracle had granted SA a media pass.

[http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/forum/23-america...](http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/forum/23-americas- cup-anarchy/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Better explanations of the rigs, specifically the foil design:

[http://www.sail-world.com/NZ/Kiwi-Americas-Cup- domination---...](http://www.sail-world.com/NZ/Kiwi-Americas-Cup-domination--- What-can-Oracle-Team-USA-do-about-it/154777)</comment></comment>


Why playing peekaboo with babies is a very serious matter - <AUTHOR> https://aeon.co/ideas/why-playing-peekaboo-with-babies-is-a-very-serious-matter <comment><USER2> It's also one of the most fun things an adult can do.

</comment><comment><USER3> Doesn't that Jordan Peterson guy make a claim that roughhousing with kids is required or else (Bad Things)?</comment>


Coronavirus 3 Day Prediction - <AUTHOR> https://www.coronaviruschart.com/ <comment><USER2> In gawk, as of 28 Jan, daily for 2 weeks, weekly for 100 days:

        #!/usr/bin/gawk -f

        BEGIN {
            # Data as of 2020-1-28
            doublerate = 1.71
            dailyrate = 2/doublerate
            cases = 6063
            deaths = 132

            now = mktime( "2020 01 28 00 00 00" )

            maxdays = 14
            interval = 1

            printf( "| %3s | %-12s | %12s | %14s |\n", "day", "date", "deaths", "cases" )
            printf( "|%-5s|%14s|%14s|%16s|\n", ":---", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>:", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>:", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>-:" )
            for(day=1; day<=maxdays; day+=interval ) {
         date = strftime( "%b %d, %Y", now + day * 86400 )
         printf( "| %3i | %-12s | %'12i | %'14i |\n", day, date, deaths * (dailyrate^day), cases * (dailyrate^day) )
            }

            printf( "\n\n" )

            maxdays = 100
            interval = 7

            printf( "| %3s | %-12s | %12s | %14s |\n", "day", "date", "deaths", "cases" )
            printf( "|%-5s|%14s|%14s|%16s|\n", ":---", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>:", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>:", "</comment><comment></comment><comment>-:" )
            for(day=1; day<=maxdays; day+=interval ) {
         date = strftime( "%b %d, %Y", now + day * 86400 )
         printf( "| %3i | %-12s | %'12i | %'14i |\n", day, date, deaths * (dailyrate^day), cases * (dailyrate^day) )
            }

            printf( "\n" )

        }

<comment><USER2> Output. Keep in mind that _low-side deviation is anticipated_ and is a measure of containment success.

        | day | date         |       deaths |          cases |
        |:--- | </comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>:| </comment><comment></comment><comment>:|  </comment><comment></comment><comment>-:|
        |   1 | Jan 29, 2020 |          154 |          7,091 |
        |   2 | Jan 30, 2020 |          180 |          8,293 |
        |   3 | Jan 31, 2020 |          211 |          9,700 |
        |   4 | Feb 01, 2020 |          247 |         11,345 |
        |   5 | Feb 02, 2020 |          288 |         13,269 |
        |   6 | Feb 03, 2020 |          337 |         15,519 |
        |   7 | Feb 04, 2020 |          395 |         18,152 |
        |   8 | Feb 05, 2020 |          462 |         21,230 |
        |   9 | Feb 06, 2020 |          540 |         24,830 |
        |  10 | Feb 07, 2020 |          632 |         29,041 |
        |  11 | Feb 08, 2020 |          739 |         33,967 |
        |  12 | Feb 09, 2020 |          864 |         39,727 |
        |  13 | Feb 10, 2020 |        1,011 |         46,465 |
        |  14 | Feb 11, 2020 |        1,183 |         54,345 |

        | day | date         |       deaths |          cases |
        |:--- | </comment><comment></comment><comment>:| </comment><comment></comment><comment>:|  </comment><comment></comment><comment>-:|
        |   1 | Jan 29, 2020 |          154 |          7,091 |
        |   8 | Feb 05, 2020 |          462 |         21,230 |
        |  15 | Feb 12, 2020 |        1,383 |         63,561 |
        |  22 | Feb 19, 2020 |        4,143 |        190,297 |
        |  29 | Feb 26, 2020 |       12,403 |        569,731 |
        |  36 | Mar 04, 2020 |       37,135 |      1,705,718 |
        |  43 | Mar 11, 2020 |      111,181 |      5,106,750 |
        |  50 | Mar 18, 2020 |      332,865 |     15,289,096 |
        |  57 | Mar 25, 2020 |      996,564 |     45,774,017 |
        |  64 | Apr 01, 2020 |    2,983,613 |    137,042,800 |
        |  71 | Apr 08, 2020 |    8,932,639 |    410,292,352 |
        |  78 | Apr 15, 2020 |   26,743,422 |  1,228,374,011 |
        |  85 | Apr 22, 2020 |   80,067,114 |  3,677,628,161 |
        |  92 | Apr 29, 2020 |  239,712,883 | 11,010,448,584 |
        |  99 | May 06, 2020 |  717,676,247 | 32,964,174,931 |

<comment><USER3> Extend the model out just a bit farther and you discover the true threat of coronavirus that we need to be worried about is when the infected and dead are sufficiently numerous that we need to start worrying about their Schwarzchild radius. Truly... dark times.

<comment><USER4> I like to put upper bounds on the worst case, so I checked out the Wikipedia page on the 1918 flu, and it appears that this virus is only about 1/5th as lethal, and lacking a world war, shouldn't spread as easily.

<comment><USER5> No world war however we now have airlines and modern travel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "The prediction is based on a very simple assumption that the counts will follow an exponential curve"

This reminds me of news reports from the 90s, where the big fear was that Chinese companies would totally take over Europe. The big Chinese breakthrough would happen 'next week', 'next year', 'next some arbitrary buffer that puts us just outside of the data'.

Corona might go exponential, but with the amount of effort being put into containment, I doubt it.

<comment> semi-extrinsic On the contrary, isn't the expected behaviour for most types of growth that it will be exponential in the initial phase, then transition to an S-shaped curve?

Whether it be expansion into a new market or spread of a virus, in the early days there is little resistance. Then when (competitors|health services) start noticing and working against it, the spread slows and plateaus. How quickly that happens and what level of spread the plateau is at depends on the speed and efficiency of the countermeasures.

<comment><USER7> At some point everyone an infected person comes into contact with is either already infected or has previously been infected( and potentially immune). So I would think you would be exactly correct, at some point the number of infected people will peak and begin to fall. The number of dead and the number of recovered will form an sigmoid curve.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I appreciate the text below the graph was probably written by a non native English speaker but can someone please decipher this..

Question 2

However, as a reminder, CDC always recommends everyday preventive actions to help prevent the spread of respiratory viruses, including: Wash your {{ ... }}.

(a) hands, give every bite a chance to keep your nose open

Question 3 Use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains {{ ... }}.

(a) antifungal immunoprecipients, not salt; run an inflatable swimming pool

Question 4 Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and {{ ... }}.

(b) neck, especially when wearing your shoes

Question 7 Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw {{ ... }}.

(a) your hands up, arms, hands, face

Question 8 Clean and disinfect frequently touched {{ ... }}.

(c) tissues with dental iron

<comment><USER3> If I am reading the tea leaves correctly, based on the fact that quizrecall.com was registered December 30th, 2019, and my ( _adjusts monocle, clears throat ostentatiously_ ) extensive experience reading /r/SubSimulatorGPT2, it appears to be a new website that tries to automatically create quizzes from given material by blanking out portions of sentences and using the (probably stock, probably the smaller model) GPT-2 text generator to fill in the "wrong" answers.

Neat idea. Not sure it's quite useful yet, but neat idea.

<comment><USER9> Given the topic, might be better to choose something written by a human to avoid giving incorrect advice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Despite the text implying it's all an exponential curve forecast model, the wiggles seem to point to actual data being plotted too.

I wish they differentiated data points from forecast points in the actual chart. Text says 1/29 update, but I think only the 1/28 point seems to match news reports.

<comment><USER11> And cited sources for their data. And had error bars on the prediction. And gave you access to historical predictions.

<comment><USER12> Historical case counts don't really have error bars... and it's difficult to come up with meaningful error bars based on goodness of fit of a function.

<comment><USER11> But the graph is also looking three days into the future, presumably based on fitting some model to the historical data. The output of any worthwhile model is a probability distribution over possible future infection and death counts. As a consumer of that graph, I should be able to see not just the value just a model thinks is most likely, but at least some indication of how tight a bound the model is placing on those values.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why do this when there are strong models from epidemiology and spreading processes? Like SEIRS?

<comment><USER14> Can you provide any links to sites that take current data and use better models to forecast? This site strikes me as a useful first step. But clearly there are better approaches, I have only seen predictions in papers, not in an equivalent site.

<comment><USER13> There are a few around. Try this one [https://www.buyupside.com/calculators/sir.php](https://www.buyupside.com/calculators/sir.php)

<comment><USER14> I think the current forecast is a reasonable first approximation for a three day forecast. The model you propose is more accurate but requires many more parameters, each with their own error bands. I think you are looking at a very complex rapidly evolving situation characterized by an eventual transition between exponential growth and S-curve transition that is very hard to predict. The chart now indicates the forecast points and assumes 3 days of exponential growth, which until the virus is contained is a reasonable three day forecast.

I have no affiliation with the author of the chart but appreciate the thought and effort that went into it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This would be more informative if it had historical predictions. E.g, [https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/evlmqr/oc_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/evlmqr/oc_update_on_timelapse_of_wuhan_coronavirus/)

</comment><comment><USER16> can someone please run this again, it's been so accurate!

</comment><comment><USER17> What TZ is being used for day cut-off? Details like that are important.

More so if you want a comparison with actualities like :- [https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.h...](https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6) (which is EST as you can see - bottom right).

</comment><comment><USER18> WHO provides status report here: [https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel- coronavirus-2...](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel- coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/)

Seems to provide some useful data

</comment><comment><USER19> This page layout is messed up. Too wide for my window, and somehow it defeats horizontal scrollbar. Things are cut off along both the left and right sides, and there's no way (short of making the window bigger) to see them.

(xwininfo says my Chrome window is 1114 pixels wide.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the bug report. I on mine Firefox and Chromium is seems fine. I will try to fix it. If you have any tips let me know.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is crap. Data is outdated and off, the assumption of an exponential curve is way too simplistic.

</comment><comment><USER21> Relevant xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/605/](https://xkcd.com/605/)

</comment><comment><USER22> I think the only question at this point is will Coronavirus kill all of us or just most of us.

<comment><USER23> At worst, based on current stats it will kill around the weakest 1% of us. That's still a massive problem, and awful tragedy, but nowhere near killing "most" of us.

<comment><USER22> Is there any demographic data on that 1%?</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Ideas for a Robotics/ECE capstone project? - <AUTHOR> I'll be entering my final year of engineering in September and I need an idea for a capstone project. We'll have a team of 3-5 smart, hard-working people and around 6 months to complete it. I would like to tap into the wealth of knowledge of HN readers and hopefully find a suitable idea.
Some thoughts I have so far:
1. Whatever the project is, it has to be something we'd be able to quickly iterate on (build-test-evaluate)
2. If there are types of sensors that are just now getting increasingly cheaper, we could probably use them (e.g. IMUs got cheaper when smartphones became popular). Same goes for types of data (e.g. high-res geospatial/satellite imagery).
3. High-impact projects revolving around energy, clean water access, food production, resource utilization and other humanity-level problems would be awesome. However, making something just for the sake of cool tech would work too.
Please feel free to share any thoughts/ideas you might have. Thank you! <comment><USER2> did a quick google search and came up with this -> [http://www.electronicshub.org/robotics-projects- ideas/](http://www.electronicshub.org/robotics-projects-ideas/) any one of these look interesting and could be worked through with your advisor(s) to make it more your own</comment>