ProcMon for Linux - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for-Linux <comment><USER2> I'm just waiting for Microsoft to invert WSL into LSW.

Specifically, I hope they release their own branded Linux distro, built on Ubuntu/Debian, with an optional KVM-hosted NT kernel for Windows syscall support. Maybe call it Windows NC (for Next Century).

I'll probably leave MacOS behind at that point on my work machine, especially if they create a display-PS compositing window manager that's anywhere as good as MacOS's.

<comment><USER3> First we'd need a FOSS window/desktop manager replicating the Windows experience. It would gobble down the market share of existing FOSS WMs/DMs in an instant. Basically _any_ decent Windows experience — 2000, XP, 7 or 10 — would be far ahead of the current big players for the 99% use case. For example, it's 2020 and I could list at least half a dozen graphics glitches I've had on Ubuntu 20.04 so far. On recent Windows installations, no graphics glitches I can think of, certainly none that persisted.

Second, MS would need to port some sort of compatibility layer, which would probably be 10000 person-years to achieve anything like the backward compatibility they currently support.

Third … well, that would be it. The vast majority of non-techies would be ecstatic to find they can upgrade for free for ever, their software would just keep running, and hardware would work basically from day one (because the companies developing cutting edge hardware Windows would pivot their driver development) until the end of time (because FOSS drivers, while slower to appear for most hardware, are supported essentially forever).

<comment><USER4> > Basically any decent Windows experience — 2000, XP, 7 or 10 — would be far > ahead of the current big players for the 99% use case.

I see more and more people - and not just hardcore devs - using Linux.

For me, Linux has been a better desktop experience since around 2005 sometime: faster, easier to configure to my exact liking, easier to install, less hassle to maintain. (Except the time when KDE 4 was new and Ubuntu changed to Unity.)

For a long time I even though it was just a matter of time before everyone would realize but now I have realized that people are just different. Some people actually like Mac and Windows. Some people are driven mad by inconsistencies in my favorite DE (KDE) that I cannot even spot after someone tried to point them out. I however can't stand CMD-tab on Mac but Mac users - like me with the alignment issues on KDE - cannot see how it can be a problem.

Summary: it is not like any of them are way ahead in general. I see more and more people using Linux and expect numbers to rise a few percentage points more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Does it have telemetry built in?

[https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for- Linux/search?q=tele...](https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for- Linux/search?q=telemetry&unscoped_q=telemetry)

<comment><USER6> I felt the same as you, but that doesn't look like "phoning home" telemetry, but rather the events returned by the OS.

[https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for- Linux/blob/70d5196e...](https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for- Linux/blob/70d5196efce7e4e625912ceadccadbcc42f83af4/src/common/telemetry.h)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Don't we use Sysdig for this? (Watching system call activity on system or by Pid)

Is there anything this gives us that sysdig doesn't?

</comment><comment><USER8> I am continually impressed with the changes Microsoft has made since Satya Nadella took over :)

</comment><comment><USER9> Looking forward to the first EEE comment. :)

<comment><USER10> That's literally what Windows Subsystem for Linux is. Trying to integrate Linux into Windows.

<comment><USER11> Where's the extinguish? Get everyone so addicted to procmon for Linux that they stop paying for strace?

<comment><USER12> Embrace linux by offering WSL.

Extend by offering stuff exclusive to WSL, e.g. their directX and cuda stuff.

Embrace by releasing procmon, powershell, ... . <\-- You are here.

Then offer nice additional features that happen to only be available on some blessed config/integration with AD/...

<comment><USER13> Embrace linux by offering NDK

Extend by offering stuff exclusive to Android, e.g. their Java and NDK Native APIs stuff.

Embrace by releasing Play Store only APIs, ... . <\-- You are here.

Then close down NDK to anything that isn't Android relevant.

<comment><USER12> So your argument is "but, but google is doing it, too!"?

... and that makes it better/worse/look a three-headed monkey is behind you?

<comment><USER13> Yes, because apparently for the MS hating crowd everything is fine when Google and others are is doing it.

How are you enjoying the BSD upstream updates done by Sony?

<comment><USER12> So monkey and some "crowd" supposedly is doing something, okay.

<comment><USER13> Luckily I don't have a FOSS agenda that pretends that some corporations are better than others with human characteristics.

The time of rainbow colours and cheerful music is long gone for me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> WSL is becoming more attractive as a development environment by the day. Maybe my next computer in 4-5 years won't be a Mac.

I miss having access to Windows games.

<comment><USER15> Recently switched from mac to windows (wsl2). My previous attempts (switching to linux or wsl1) all failed miserably but the wsl2 is pretty good.

And I could build a PC as I wish. Weird times.

<comment><USER16> What makes WSL2 work for you, where WSL1 failed?

<comment><USER15> WSL1 had / has really bad filesystem performance. Git commands would take ages on large repos as a example.

WSL2 has a linux fs which is fast and a bridge to windows fs which is still slow but I just live on the linux fs. WSL2 also runs native docker (and windows docker client and leverage the docker daemon in wsl).

It is not completely seamless but pretty good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> the error log after installing this "tool" pretty much sums it up for me

stopping now [-ferror-limit=] 20 errors generated.

</comment><comment> kalium-xyz Advanced tracing like BPF is amazing and the slow but steady adaption of these tools in one form of another will bring us closer to a sane and comfortable future of transparency and reduced complexity. Glad microsoft is also on the train with WSL.

</comment><comment><USER18> need root permission. Can we have normal permission ProcMon with less feature?

<comment><USER19> Great idea. I would start by filing an issue here:

[https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for- Linux/issues](https://github.com/microsoft/ProcMon-for-Linux/issues)

There would have to be some limitations when not running as root, but it would still be useful for looking at your own processes. I always like it when an app can be installed "per-user" as an alternative to a systemwide install.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is pretty sweet. Hoping someone makes an Arch AUR package for it

</comment><comment><USER21> Neat, I already use fatrace on Linux but hurray for more tools.

</comment><comment><USER22> In src/common/cancellable_queue.h

        std::size_t calculateBackpressure()
        {
            return currentReadQueue->size() + currentWriteQueue->size();
        }

Not thread-safe. Shared queues are accessed without a lock. So this will eventually blow up as the queues are swapped in a different thread, or due to inconsistent reads on un-synchronized variables.

Recommendation to MS folks: find someone at MS who knows C++. Barring that, at least run ASAN and TSAN on your stuff before you release it.

<comment><USER23> Have you considered posting an issue on GH? Bug reports like these are unlikely to be seen here by the authors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'll laugh when they get to the third e. It's the same tricks that they've played before, but everyone is too young to remember it on their own skin and the older ones who remember are ridiculed. They're moving just like the frog stays comfortable in the slowly boiling pot, with a slow and steady embrace. Their target audience is unsuspecting as if Microsoft has become some kind of altruistic force. But no monster of that size is altruistic, they're hungry for fresh souls:) And they'll have 'em it seems. It won't hurt, the denial will mitigate the pain.

<comment><USER25> OK, I am one of the young ones :) What are you talking about ? Thank you!

<comment><USER26> "Embrace and extend" I think - appear to adopt or support a technology only to attempt to influence, limit and block later developments. Other examples: J#, the Office XML standards etc etc

<comment><USER25> Aaaa... yes I understand! Thank you

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> this headline is absolutely misleading and a lie - the tool does in fact not run on linux

<comment><USER27> Were you unable to get it to work? Looks like it should work fine with a kernel >= 4.18

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Umm... wut?!

</comment><comment><USER29> May be a side topic, but I always wonder even after so many decades why does everything on Linux look so ugly?

<comment><USER30> I prefer the look of terminal applications. Additionally I get more control over the fonts and colors. Unlike most Windows applications, which have no customization (generally) and no consistency.

<comment><USER29> Some would definitely like terminal applications more, but the fact that on Linux by default it comes up to be terminal apps says a lot about the platform. One can just go and compare the ProcMon on Linux and Windows. Probably over the years people have figured out that there are so many hurdles in making basic GUI applications work on it? Some random Linux distribution would always complain about missing some random dependency, and the users would get totally confused, so developers are like let's not even go that way. Half the times Anti-aliasing wouldn't work on text fonts and mouse cursors and what not.

I agree Windows applications don't have a lot of consistency as well, but it's at least better than Linux where half are on terminal only, and half have some kind of casually created GUI.

<comment><USER30> Terminal applications are more open to automation - something that Linux excels in. GUI applications are far harder to automate. In the case of ProcMon I'm not sure there's a case for automation, although happy to be proven wrong.

Agreed about the casually created GUIs on Linux, but I'm happy someone has put the effort into them.

<comment><USER29> Actually, our company's product supports both GUI and a text user interface so everything can be automated as well as used via GUI (and that's on both Windows and Linux versions). I'm not sure why more people don't do that.

<comment><USER31> Linux servers don't (and shouldn't) have GUI libraries installed. A procmon- like tool would then be a server component, that'd be invoked over, maybe, a ssh session, and a client component that'd expose that functionality over a GUI or a web page.

That's a lot of work for a simple tool when a text-based terminal interface solves the problem very neatly. Personally, I'd do it with strace, sysdig or something else that would spit a long text file I could parse rather than updating a terminal screen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Fantastic. This is going to completely overhaul how anomaly detection engineering is done in Linux.

<comment><USER33> This is just a UI. eBPF was the big innovation in Linux tracing and it's been around for years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> This seems to use eBPF. As far as I know, WSL2 doesn't support eBPF. I don't understand how this can be seen as the _Extend_ part of EEE. People really need to calm down.

<comment><USER35> I don't understand why WSL2 wouldn't support eBPF. It is a mostly vanilla[1] Linux kernel running under a hypervisor, so why couldn't a kernel with eBPF support be used? Indeed, Microsoft's WSL2 kernel has eBPF JIT support turned on – [https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux- Kernel/blob/master/M...](https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux- Kernel/blob/master/Microsoft/config-wsl#L1352)

WSL1 yes I agree, it is just a translation layer between Linux and NT syscalls, and features such as eBPF would not be implemented in such a layer.

[1] there may at times be various enhancements to HyperV paravirt drivers that haven't been upstreamed yet

<comment><USER34> I didn't realise WSL2 ran a real Linux kernel. TIL!</comment></comment></comment>


Edward Snowden: Saudis Used Israeli Spyware to Target Khashoggi - <AUTHOR> https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181107-edward-snowden-saudi-used-israel-spyware-to-target-khashoggi/ <comment><USER2> Is there any reason Snowden would be in a position to know this? The article doesn't give any evidence, but merely an accusation. Snowden was privy to intelligence info in 2013, but it's been 5 years since then and I imagine that his knowledge would be too dated to know what's going on here.

<comment><USER3> I think Edward Snowden now is a lot more like John McAfee than Edward R. Murrow. Snowden is trading on his personality and celebrity moreso than journalistic integrity or technical credentials.

Snowden _might_ have sources leaking to him, or he _might_ be acting as a front for someone else, but it doesn't matter either way. People will believe him because he says it and it sounds plausible.

In a few years he'll probably be shilling gold coins or prepper tools.

<comment><USER4> That's an interesting prediction to make of a guy who became famous because his personal sense of ethics overpowered every other concern in his life. It's hard to imagine him trying to cash in on that fame.

<comment><USER3> What else does he have to cash in on? He's not a saint.

<comment><USER5> There's been more evidence that he's selfless rather than selfish, though. So the insinuation that he's playing the self-gain game is a bit more of a stretch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Regarding 'Pegasus' spyware, does anyone have more information on that? Could it target any phone remotely like MINIX does for any PC? Serious question

</comment><comment><USER7> The comments on this article are nuts.

</comment><comment><USER8> If this is true, then it could further implicate MBS, as he's one of the few pro-Israeli Saudis.

</comment><comment><USER9> You won't see this story in the US mainstream media.</comment>


Working at Google vs Microsoft as Proxy for New vs. Old - <AUTHOR> http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/12/google_vs_microsoft_as_viewed_by_a_guy_who_worked_for_both.html

<comment><USER2> I typically don't comment on threads on MSFT since I work there but I'll make an exception (disclaimer - my own opinion, etc, etc).

I was there in person for this talk and quite disappointed. At first I thought it was because the talk was so critical of MSFT but on thinking further, I decided it was really because the talk was shallow and I expected something better from someone with such credentials (the fact that the talks leading up to this were great probably played a part too). I really expected a 'deeper' talk with some insights. I think the talk slots the two companies into a false dichotomy and regurgitates the 'good vs evil' metaphor, which frankly, is a bit old and not very accurate.

I spent the last 2 minutes of the talk wondering whether I could do a Wilson- style "You lie" at Ignite :)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is really a poor article. I can't claim to be 100% objective (worked at Microsoft last summer) but negative phrases like "doing unnatural actions to compete" and "suck the value" do seem to indicate bias.

That aside, the speaker makes no new or interesting points.

</comment><comment><USER4> Biased nonsense.

Just look at the wording:

> Google believes the amount of money they make is proportionate to the number > of people online. Google believes it can monetize that traffic better than > anyone else. They're great at leveraging the community.

> Microsoft believes in developing and "restrictively licensing" a platform to > generate revenue. Believes in "devaluing their partners." Builds an > ecosystem instead of a community, "which means they get a bunch of people > around them, and then they kind of suck the value to them from the work > those people do."

<comment><USER5> Biased nonsense???

* Google makes money from ads. The more people that are online (and using its "properties"), the more money it makes. They appear to be "monetizing" web-based traffic extremely well.

* Microsoft has a long history of sucking the life out of its "partners" (Quarterdeck/DESQview, Stacker, Spyglass, WordPerfect, and OS/2 off the top of my head). See also <http://grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty_Tricks_history>.

Obvious, maybe. Nonsense, no.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Comparing the two is already old.

</comment><comment><USER7> There is nothing new about Google.</comment>


Bugsnag API Launch - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bugsnag.com/2013/08/20/bugsnag-api-launch/

<comment><USER2> Here's a script I whipped up to dump Bugsnag exceptions endlessly for easy grepping:

[https://gist.github.com/pshc/6289579](https://gist.github.com/pshc/6289579)

</comment><comment><USER3> I was about to set up Sentry for a new site, but I'll give this a whirl.

</comment><comment><USER4> Bugsnag co-founder here. Let me know if you guys have any suggestions or feedback for the API.</comment>


SXSW 2011 Influencers Guide (party by party breakdown) - <AUTHOR> http://socmetrics.com/sxsw <comment><USER2> Cool site, I'll check it out when it doesn't take forever to load though.

Is everything a "startup" nowadays?

</comment><comment><USER3> A 1.1mb background image? 200KB of javascript?

Whew.

</comment><comment><USER4> Nifty graphs... Too bad I'm not going.</comment>


Ask HN: Best email service for indie projects? - <AUTHOR> Do you have a preferred email provider for indie SaaS projects where you're sending ~1000 emails a day?
I'm currently using SendGrid and one of my group IPs has been blacklisted by a variety of email providers leading to delivery issues. Sendgrid's process for rectifying this issue seems to be pretty manual and slow. The cheapest plan that provides for static IPs is $90/month which is pretty pricey for an indie SaaS project.
Obviously, I don't expect any companies to focus specifically on low-volume (and therefore low revenue) clients, but I was hoping there might be a provider who is a bit more proactive in dealing with these issues. <comment><USER3> Zoho has recently launched TransMail ([https://www.zoho.com/transmail/](https://www.zoho.com/transmail/)) - <USER2> exclusive service for sending transactional emails via SMTP and API. By isolating transactional emails from marketing emails, TransMail ensures great email deliverability and inbox placement. TransMail is used by 45+ Zoho applications to send transactional emails. It has a user-friendly interface with email performance monitoring and tracking tools. You can even do away with monthly flat prices with TransMail's pay as you go plan ([https://www.zoho.com/transmail/pricing.html](https://www.zoho.com/transmail/pricing.html)), where you buy email credits as and when you use them up. With TransMail, sender reputation and quality of shared IPs are monitored so you won't be forced to pay extra for a dedicated IP. For queries, inbox us: support(at)transmail.net - TransMail (Zoho)

</comment><comment><USER4> You need to fix your content. You can move to a different provider but you're just going to get blacklisted again if your emails are getting flagged as spam by automated systems or the folks you're sending email to.

I worked at a place that got blacklisted. First I looked up the list we were added to using MxToolbox. The list we were added to did not have anyway of disputing so I put together a list of email best practices for our sales people and it cleared up after about a week.

<comment><AUTHOR> My emails are not getting flagged as spam. They are being blocked because they are being sent from a shared IP that has been blacklisted because other Sendgrid users used the same IP to send mail. I have a 99% reputation on Sendgrid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Similar question a couple of hours ago [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24210008](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24210008)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for flagging! It's comforting to know I'm not the only one. I'll chime in on that thread.</comment></comment>


Abolish the Department of Homeland Security - <AUTHOR> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/01/abolish_the_dep.html

<comment><USER2> DHS is too inconsistent to be credible. The only flight I've ever missed (I was running late to a wedding), I missed because I had a tube of toothpaste in my carry-on. It was found to be small enough to be acceptable, but not until it had gone through a second round of X-ray.

On another occasion, I was equally late to a connection flight (this time, not my fault), and I got through security despite having a bottle of water, a toiletry kit (including 5" blades), etc.

Why? Well, I don't know and I don't really care. The fact of the matter is that they will give me an aluminum can on the flight anyway, so who cares how long of a blade I bring onboard in the first place? It's security theater no matter how you slice it.

<comment><USER3> Look up the term "security theater". That's exactly what they are doing.

Well, that and buying extremely expensive machinery from a company partially owned by the very man, Michael Chertoff, who co-wrote the PATRIOT act and jump-started this whole stupid thing. Talk about revolving-door politics and corruption. _That_ bothers me more than any pat-downs.

<comment><USER4> Is there a list somewhere of all of these corrupt politicians / traitors? If not, I'm going to start a wiki. Who knows, maybe it will be useful if the winds of change ever blow through this country.

<comment><USER5> That would be a great website -- though perhaps somewhat dangerous to run.

<comment><USER6> You could ask the Wikileaks folks and community around them for help. I'm sure they wouldn't be adverse to such a project.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > _TSA was created two months after the September 11 terrorist attacks, when > Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) [.pdf] > to keep the millions of Americans who travel each day safe and secure across > numerous modes of transportation._

The rise in death rates after 9/11 from people switching from safe air transport to dangerous road transport is well known by now.

So it's surprising to see TSA still saying they're spending money to keep transport safe. That is blatantly not true. One man tries to set fire to plastic explosive stored in his shoe - now everyone has to take off their shoes. Meanwhile, thousands die in road traffic every year.

I've travelled on California[1] roads. God almighty; for a nation obsessed with doing everything by car some parts of the US have an appalling road system. (I never knew why Americans were happy to drive cars with awful gas milage. Cheap gas doesn't quite answer that question. Cheap gas and bloody terrible road surfaces which need a big comfy car does.)

You can kind of forgive Joe Sixpack for being bad at risk assessment and management. But a government department, spending millions and billions of public money? It's a disgusting waste.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm not a native english speaker, the word "homeland" just seems like a weird choice to me. It feels too patriotic and even a bit fascistic. I can't recall any public discussion about the name when they were created, but then I'm not from the US so I might have missed those.

Also, I'm associating the word with "fatherland", from the post-WW2-nazis-won- movie with Rutger Hauer :-/

<comment><USER9> It's a euphemism.

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

The US government uses typical propaganda tactics like this, grease up the names of their authoritarian bills to make them sound nice, when in fact they are usually quite sinister. For example, the Patriot Act includes provisions for torturing and spying on Americans.

<comment><USER10> That is happening almost in every country in the world. Privacy, freedom of speech, you name it. Blood was spilled to assure we have rights. Even though, most people are consistently waiving them and they seem not to care about it. How is it even possible? I'm perplexed by this.

<comment><USER11> That's something that really bothers me. I try to talk to people about this stuff and they honestly don't care, because it doesn't effect them yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Have you seen this: NY Times has an article. Good friend did the research and filed the FOIA: <http://epic.org/2012/01/epic---foia-documents-reveal-h.html> <\---EPIC - FOIA Documents Reveal Homeland Security is Monitoring Political Dissent

</comment><comment><USER13> Google Cache [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pxxPIla...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pxxPIla6u9sJ:www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/01/abolish_the_dep.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

</comment><comment><USER14> Before the decade is out they will just rename it to do an end-run around public relations. Nothing will change and it's never going away because there's major money being made from it's fake foolishness already.

You really think they are going to give up the "visual response teams" for searching people at bus and train stations (and even in traffic)? That's the gold topping of security theater.

ZERO terrorists caught for all that money and other than the box cutters the original 9/11 would have still made it on the planes for all the rights violated and money spent.

The should have just secured all airplane cockpit doors and called it a day but first rule of government, why spend just a million when you can potentially spend a billion and get lots of wartime powers.

</comment><comment><USER15> I was reading along, nodding my head, then I got to this:

 _Hard to argue with most of that, although abolishing the TSA isn't a good idea. Airport security should be rolled back to pre-9/11 levels, but someone is going to have to be in charge of it. Putting the airlines in charge of it doesn't make sense; their incentives are going to be passenger service rather than security._

What? How many passengers can you service if the airport is unsafe? Is the author unaware of the hundreds of different types of businesses that operate in hostile environments yet manage to keep their customers safe as part of their service? Has he never walked into a fast-food restaurant on a weekend night and seen the security guards? Hell, that's _McDonalds_ , for chirstsakes, they sell you 2-dollar burgers. Don't you think the airlines would do a bit better?

The TSA is the one department we _should_ abolish. They have too broad of a mandate -- they think they are responsible for controlling, er, protecting _all_ transportation, not just airline travel. They have too many powers -- the ability to virtually strip-search passengers, prevent innocent people from traveling, and interfere with international commerce. And, worst of all, they've combined the military-industrial complex with a paramilitary quasi- police force. This is like an endless cold war where the people themselves are the enemy.

The TSA is a terrible mess. That's the one thing we have to get rid of. The facts are that we went 70 years without the TSA just fine. The threat has not increased so much to warrant this kind of intervention. So we have tens of thousands of "officers" harassing normal business travelers daily as part of this ongoing shoddy security theater. It's a witch hunt without any witches, but with lots of government dollars, security contractors, and union jobs. They'll just keep tightening the screws until they do find something alarming. Then they'll congratulate themselves and ask for more money (and authority.) You don't need to be a genius to see where all of this is heading.

The TSA is a monster and a menace to freedom. I doubt we'll ever get rid of it, but that's no reason to give up. Speaking out against it at every opportunity, to me, is a civic duty. I freely admit to being over-the-top in my language here, but you have to remember that the entire _idea_ of the type of security state we now live in was the wildest fantasy just thirty years ago. I'm just trying to write something that will still be relevant in another 20 years or so. Using that standard, I'm not sure I've been over the top _enough_.

<comment><USER16> I don't think a free market solution would work - airports will cut costs until there's a disaster. But airports could do it the way they handle general aviation safety. You don't have a TSA minder next to the pilot, giving instructions on how to lower the landing gear - there's a system in place which seems to work pretty well.

You could argue that no solution (an honor system?) is better than the TSA. Or that it would be better putting the police in charge (and giving them the funds to put a couple of officers in each airport gate). If that's a waste of valuable police time, they could reduce their presence.

<comment><USER17> I agree, "free market solutions" sounds nice until you notice that capitalism has no soul. It was only a few years ago that airlines bribed the FAA to skip inspections on their planes. Watch the frontline documentary on how airlines treat their pilots, barely giving them enough sleep, paying them terribly low wages, and putting non experienced pilots in senior positions, all to make a profit. Not to mention this: <http://www.defraudingamerica.com/faa_corruption.html> and lets not forget that every few years a major airline files for bankruptcy.

"Oh but the airlines will want to protect their planes because in the long term it will affect their customers"

We the passengers look into the long term and assume that airlines do too. History has shown that corporate greed plans for nothing beyond the next fiscal quarter. I wouldn't trust them one bit.

I don't like the TSA either but leaving it up to the airlines... We can't go "back" to the way things were, times change, society changes, new threats emerge.

AND at the end of the day we're all just a bunch of speculators sitting in front a computer reading one sided stories off of some guy's blog. We don't have a fraction of enough real data and information to make a call that would affect millions of people.

<comment><USER18> > I agree, "free market solutions" sounds nice until you notice that > capitalism has no soul.

I've got news for you. Economic models are inanimate. Sorry Che.

> I don't like the TSA either but leaving it up to the airlines...

It _is_ up to the airlines. All the mechanical components on that capitalist plane were made by free enterprise. Now, why you trust a private corporation to manufacture jet engines and brakes, and _not_ checking for bombs is pretty irrational. And besides, when you have _choice_ which, free markets afford you, you can take a greyhound bus if you're that afraid of the "terrorists".

<comment><USER17> > why you trust a private corporation to manufacture jet engines and brakes, > and not checking for bombs is pretty irrational.

Naa, Irrational is when you trust airline companies that don't give their pilots 8 full hours of sleep and bribe officials into giving them passing safety inspections simply because you've been conditioned from a young age to assume that the free market would never do anything to jeopardize human lives in the name of profit. Now that is irrational.

I don't like the TSA either, I'm not trying to protect their wasteful security theatre, I'm just saying, leaving it up to airlines to somehow collaborate together to work on increasing safety isn't going to happen on its own.

<comment><USER18> Why trust McDonalds to cook a burger? Because money. Crashing planes costs money. What, now you don't believe in profit motive? You admit it's a security theater, why defend it? Is TSA presence welcome only at airports, or how about in your home?

<comment><USER17> <whisper>Pssst. Read my previous comment. No, actually READ it. </whisper>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> DHS is the poster child for mission creep. The White House suggested last year that they could help track down "circumvention devices" such as game console mod chips. From the Office of White House's "Copyright Czar":

 _"[It] is illegal to import or traffic in devices that can be used to circumvent technological measures that control access to copyrighted works," they wrote. "When DHS discovers the importation of a potential circumvention device, current law does not authorize DHS to share a sample with a rightholder to aid CBP in determining whether it is, in fact, a circumvention device. Allowing DHS to provide a sample would aid enforcement efforts."_

</comment><comment><USER12> They also hired contractors to monitor social networks: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3463850>

</comment><comment><USER20> So the argument is that DHS is ineffective and wasteful? I thought the article would talk about how DHS is dangerous because it systematically dismantles your freedom in exchange for omnipresent surveillance and faux security.

Then again, I'm only watching it from the outside.

<comment><USER21> The security wouldn't be "faux" if the department were efficient and effective.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Link seems down, anyone have a mirror?

</comment><comment><USER23> the link isn't just down, the domain is not resolving for me now

<comment><USER24> Non-authoritative answer: Name: schneier.com Address: 220.127.116.11

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Guidelines ask why is this posted. :( <http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm always fascinated when writers use the phrase "defeat terrorism." It would be equally stupid to say: defeat murder. It's the kind of jingoistic bull that led to the Patriot Act and Homeland Security.

If someone told you the price for living in the most free society possible, is that 5,000 of your fellow citizens would die annually by terrorism, would that not be worth it? I would willingly risk my life, given the threat ratio, for that exchange. Particularly given the counter-terrorism efforts are already killing that many now.

If someone wants to blow their self up, or randomly stab you in the throat with a knife, the odds favor they're going to do it. You can try to prevent it, you can deal with the outcome, sometimes you'll succeed, sometimes you'll fail - what ultimately matters is that you don't fail big (nukes). That's it. You battle and deal with terrorism, you don't defeat it. You can't argue with irrationality or insanity, and someone somewhere is always going to be willing to commit terrorism.

<comment><USER27> >> If someone told you the price for living in the most free society possible, is that 5,000 of your fellow citizens would die annually by terrorism, would that not be worth it?

It depends how many people are in that society. If everyone else is too scared to join you, you might just be the only one and be 1 of the 5000 next year, if you're lucky this year.</comment></comment>


Rutger Hauer, star of Blade Runner, dies aged 75 - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/jul/24/rutger-hauer-star-of-blade-runner-dies-aged-75 <comment><USER2> I will never forget Blade Runner, Ladyhawk, Blind Fury, all incredible performances. I didn't realize he was 75. Man, time flies.

</comment><comment><USER3> Like tears in the rain. RIP, Rutger.</comment>


Social Login Myths Debunked - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/about-oauth/7-social-login-myths-debunked-8a8115108e9c

<comment><USER2> ugh, i was really hoping to see some data, not opinions

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm working on an article with the data that we have (conversion rates, impact of permissions asked, etc.). Will publish :)

<comment><USER3> How far do you have data going back? It would be interesting to see whether user attitudes towards social logins have changed over the past 3-4 years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like reddits system. Pick a user and pass. All other fields are optional, and you can fill them out later if you wish or as needed.

Imo if your website doesn't use that system its because you're more interested in collecting and selling my private information than you are providing me with whatever service you want me to sign up for.

</comment><comment><USER5> These arguments are not arguments in favour of social login, they are arguments in favour of _third party authentication_.

OAuth as an authentication method is stupid. Use Persona ([https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/persona/](https://www.mozilla.org/en- US/persona/)). Third party auth done right.

<comment><USER6> Persona assumes something trivially false for most end users: that email addresses are canonical and precious; in fact, email addresses tend to be recycled (by schools and ISPs), users have many of them (causing them to never remember which one hey are using, a problem compounded y the usage of clients that aggregate their email together), and they are extremely temporary (users throw them away and get new ones when they start getting too much spam, and are even forced to do so when they change jobs, graduate from school, move to a new area, or simply change email providers, as even savvy users tend to rely on third-party domains, including gmail.com).

This makes persona both frustrating for the user (having to do account migrations at the least convenient time _on every website they use_ , always using the least convenient flow as by the time they notice they have already lost access to their old email address) and insecure for everyone involved (the situation where user's account is compromised when their email address is recycled is bad for everyone). In comparison, users tend to have one account on Facebook, and that account is theirs and theirs alone essentially forever.

Facebook has amazingly well-engineered mechanisms to do account password recovery (my favorite is the one that shows you uncommon pictures of your friends--old shots, people in Halloween costumes, etc.--and asks you to identify them), the account has a username independent of email addresses (to the limited extent to which email addresses matter, if the user changes addresses Facebook will be the first thing they think of to update _before_ they go through with the process, and even if they don't they will catch it immediately as most normal users use Facebook often), and Facebook provides a central location to store a bunch of common profile information (in particular a picture) that the user will actually keep up to date (which is pleasant for both the user and the website). Using Facebook as a login provider actually solves problems for both users and website operators in a reasonably secure manner.

Users on websites like Hacker News, developers, the kinds of people who build websites, sadly don't notice these problems, as they are the kind of people who value email addresses and understand the issues related to security if addresses are reused: this is fundamentally unlike a normal user or sadly even a normal system administrator. I have been email@example.com since 1997 and will be until the day email is dead: I was really argumentative any time my University asked me to use email@example.com (an address they later cancelled on me and recycled :/) and so avoided third-party addresses, and noticed the canonicalization problem after only a year of firstname.lastname@example.com (a service that happened to also help users get "vanity" email addresses, as users care more about cool addresses on domains like starfleet.com than ones that won't change). I am not typical: Persona, sadly, is designed for users like me at the exclusion of normal people :(.

For more details about these issues, I will refer you to earlier discussions of Persona and social login mechanisms, where I provided much longer comments, examples, walkthroughs, etc.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7243021](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7243021)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5408735](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5408735)

<comment><USER5> > Persona assumes something trivially false for most end users

No. No no no no no. No.

This is not "trivially false". Maybe if you said "Persona assumes something which is false for some end users" then you would have a point.

What persona does is _being practical_. You are identified by an email address which is already the way most people are identified on the web (immediate integration with existing services and no introduction of a new concept such as an "URI identity" a la openid).

Your email address can still be updated as long as you own it and the web app allows it, as you would expect. But using a username instead of an email address would be worse. How many times have I changed my username? I love my current one but it is short and not always available: I sometimes have to use an alternative one. Not to mention the times people outright steal my username; something they cannot do with an email address for obvious reasons.

Please. Persona does have flaws, so don't waste time burning it on a non- issue.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What do you think about new Yahoo ads? - <AUTHOR>

Here are 2 alternative designs that I posted for Yahoo ads.
http://zeynel.posterous.com/new-yahoo-ads
http://zeynel.posterous.com/yahoo-ads-2
What do you think? <comment><AUTHOR> Live links:

<http://zeynel.posterous.com/new-yahoo-ads>

<http://zeynel.posterous.com/yahoo-ads-2></comment>


Congress Should Pass the Protecting Data at the Border Act - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/congress-should-pass-protecting-data-border-act <comment><USER2> The lead paragraph of the bill:

> To ensure the digital contents of electronic equipment and online accounts > belonging to or in the possession of United States persons entering or > exiting the United States are adequately protected at the border, and for > other purposes.

50 US Code 1801 defines "United States person" as:

> a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent > residence (as defined in section 1101(a)(20) of title 8), an unincorporated > association a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the > United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a > corporation which is incorporated in the United States, but does not include > a corporation or an association which is a foreign power, as defined in > subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3).

In short, it looks like this bill only applies to US citizens or lawful alien residents, not travelers.

<comment><USER3> On the other hand, we've seen U.S. citizens being detained and forced to reveal private information to the Customs officials. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629593](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629593)

So I would say it's an improvement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I hadn't heard of this bill, but it sounds like a great idea.

As a side note, it is so refreshing to have bills that just do one thing and do it well. Incremental improvements are the way forward, and _focus_ is something that should be encouraged for all bills (perhaps even legislated?).

As a counter-example of this bill, take GDPR. GDPR has similarly good intentions related to data privacy, but it is so extensive that it takes an excessive amount of time for a single individual to grok the whole thing, which is generally a bad idea.

<comment><USER5> Focus is great in theory but Congress has always been more effectively run in a smokey backroom engaging in good old fashioned horse trading. The more Congress hamstrings itself, the less effectively it can legislate and the more de facto power POTUS amasses despite Congressional supremacy under the Constitution.</comment></comment>


Rich and American? Australia wants you - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/12/us-australia-usa-immigration-idUSKCN0PM10320150712

<comment><USER2> This is by no means limited to Australia:

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

[http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27674135](http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27674135)

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-11/passport-k...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-11/passport- king-christian-kalin-helps-nations-sell-citizenship)

</comment><comment><USER3> Odd article ... this scheme is definitely not targeted at Americans, it's for Chinese, and they use it a lot.

</comment><comment><USER4> If you're rich, America won't let you out, see [1]. If you don't plan on expatriating make sure you understand the difficulty you will face with overseas banking, see [2].

[1] [http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International- Taxpayers/Expat...](http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International- Taxpayers/Expatriation-Tax) [2] [https://americansabroad.org/issues/banking/](https://americansabroad.org/issues/banking/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Why would anyone pay to become an "Aussie?"

</comment><comment><USER6> This just sounds pathetic.

</comment><comment><USER7> Auto playing video, agh!</comment>


How to Read 2 Books a Week - <AUTHOR> https://forge.medium.com/how-to-read-two-books-a-week-414f4d3148e8 <comment><USER2> I think most readers that decide reading books will lead to a better life are missing the point. I keep on reading about people that feel so proud that they read 1 or 2 books a week. When it comes to books for self-improvement it's not the number of books you read but how you apply what you read. It's many times better to read fewer books and apply what you learn rather than to read so many that you barely remember what was read and never get a chance to apply it in life.

<comment><USER3> I feel the opposite. You need to develop a broad range of education on different life topics rather than obsessively implementing a small number of things. How much you implement from a smaller number of books is what I think would be useful for eg learning how to play guitar or invest better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Non-paywalled link: [https://outline.com/ZYBDsE](https://outline.com/ZYBDsE)

Summary:

* Force yourself to read everywhere

* But don't force it

* Buy a lot of books at once

* Read them all at once

* Remember stuff you read

I don't even know why I'm commenting on such a low-effort blog post. Ironically, I read a lot of self-help books as well and I realized that most of them are a sham, so I'm writing a book on ... well ... how to read self- help books.

<comment><USER5> Outline flat-out refuses to work on Firefox (Mobile) for me. Firefox Lite and Chrome(ium) works fine. Any idea why? Disabling all my addons and it still doesn't work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> My two cents to add. Dont use a highlighter. Underline with a pen. Especially a good ink rich black pen. Not a cheap bic pen. Too many highlights annoy the hell out of the eyes. At least to me. And the older I get, the more it frustrates my vision and focus. Nice clean black lines looks more elegant in the long term compared to highlighter.

</comment><comment><USER5> Can I just say that book fairs or second hand sales are great to get quite literally bucket load of books for really cheap.

<comment><USER7> Alternatively, get a Kindle reader (or use the Kindle App). With an Amazon account you can read the first chapter of (most) ebooks for free.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Which books? If one of them is _The Critique of Pure Reason_ , or _War and Peace_ , that's going to put a crimp in your throughput.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'd summarize it as "first, find 10 hours per week, and read short books."

TANSTAFL</comment>


Snapchat raises $1.8B in funding - <AUTHOR> http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/digital-and-mobile/7385858/snapchat-raises-18-billion-in-funding <comment><AUTHOR> Before somebody tries to claim this write-up is Blog Spam it's the first I've seen with the basic details and also provides a link to the actual filing:

[https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1564408/000156440816...](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1564408/000156440816000001/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml)</comment>


I'm a little sad that the Martian wasn't popular,I guess it's a niche readership - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/zt1n6/i_am_andy_weir_and_i_wrote_the_egg_ama/c67id37/ <comment><USER2> I love reminders like this that "overnight success" is basically non-existent.</comment>


Twitter for Android swaps the Favorites star for a heart… for some - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2015/06/17/twitter-hearts-you/

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, it was just Twitter, A/B testing the change. I've heard about A/B testing, but I never thought I'd be in one. Hard to tell if something is actually getting changed.</comment>


Rails 4.0 Sneak Peek: Asynchronous ActionMailer - <AUTHOR> http://reefpoints.dockyard.com/ruby/2012/06/26/rails-4-sneak-peek-async-actionmailer.html

<comment><USER2> I think this was the lowest-hanging fruit in Rails. Glad they've finally addressed it in core. Years of people using job queues just to send mail is finally over!

But, why doesn't this let me pass objects to Mailer methods? I can't help but think passing ids and finding the object again on the other side is bad design.

Myself, over the past few years, instead of a job queue, I have been using a simple gem called spawn (<https://github.com/tra/spawn>) to fork processes to asynchronously send mail from Rails. It lets me pass objects around... I hope that this asynchronous ActionMailer gets this functionality as well!

<comment><USER3> > I can't help but think passing ids and finding the object again on the other > side is bad design.

It is good design. Why? Because you don't want to pass mutable state (read: your user model) across thread/process boundaries if you can help it. What if the mailer modifies it? What if the caller modifies it while the mailer is working with it? It may no longer be valid. Rather than trying to reason about all possible states it could be in, it's easier just to make the job bootstrap itself with all the data it needs.

Confining instances to threads is far more sane than using mutexes and locks or relying on your runtime's GIL to watch out for you.

<comment><USER4> Since you're unlikely to be sharing memory with your background processor, what you'd really be doing is marshaling the object on enqueue and unmarshaling on decode. In that case, you're no more susceptible to further modifications to the data than you would be with a DB lookup.

There of course may be other issues with marshaling. E.g., marshaling of procs is particularly tricky. But I've been marshaling with sidekiq for the past couple months and really haven't run into any problems. And it cleaned up the code a fair bit because I basically treat it as an RPC without any of the ceremonious DB lookups at the start of every async method.</comment></comment></comment>


NPM not resolving some packages - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/20766 <comment><USER2> The valuable lesson from NPM about package management is that everything on the web is ephemeral. If you don't have it locally it might as well not exist.</comment>


World of Development: academic paper on gold farming as an economic development activity - <AUTHOR> http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/08/07/gold_farming_global_economy/index.html <comment><USER2> Second Life has the right idea. Let users earn money by creating content. If you reward users for drudgery, there will always be cheating. Use market forces and subvert human nature to your advantage instead of fighting it.</comment>


Principles Of An Indie Game Bottom Feeder - <AUTHOR> http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6698/principles_of_an_indie_game_bottom_.php

<comment><USER2> He also has a great blog. If you are an indie game dev, you should read it.</comment>


Ask HN: What is the most effective way to learn React for PHP developers? - <AUTHOR> I'm a seasoned PHP developer, and have been building WordPress sites for longer than I care to remember. I'm quite conservative in my choice of tools because I like to know that what I build has a decent chance of lasting a relatively long time for my clients, hence WordPress / PHP. With WordPress moving to the React-based Gutenberg editor it feels like a good time to get going with React because it seems like it'll be around for a while. I'm OK with JavaScript, but I'm old enough to be self-taught (I worked with the people who built the first BBC website - three pages of TV listings) so things like closures are still a bit of a mystery to me. Where's the best place to start getting a good grounding in modern JavaScript, and from there what would be a good roadmap into React development? <comment> adam-golab The best place for learning React is from official documentation. Also there are courses related strictly to React development (For example: [https://egghead.io/courses/the-beginner-s-guide-to- react](https://egghead.io/courses/the-beginner-s-guide-to-react)). I think it's a good place to start.

For learning JavaScript I recommend the book series You Don't Know JS ([https://github.com/getify/You-Dont-Know-JS](https://github.com/getify/You- Dont-Know-JS)).

About roadmap, check this repo: [https://github.com/adam-golab/react- developer-roadmap](https://github.com/adam-golab/react-developer-roadmap)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the suggestions, I'll take a look.</comment></comment>


New Zealand Declares State of Emergency [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2020-03-25/new-zealand-declares-state-of-emergency-video <comment><USER2> As a Kiwi living in NYC, I'm impressed by the "go hard, go early" approach the NZ government has taken, compared with the delayed response here.

NZ also has easily enforceable border control (surrounded by the Pacific ocean) which is already strict (their economy is so reliant on agriculture exports.)

They should come out of this better than most.

<comment><USER3> My kiwi friend, a doc, thinks that this is a late approach. While Germany etc. was already in lockdown, NZ still was hesitant. So, he calls this a delayed approach as well.

<comment><USER4> I agree this is a delayed approach. We squandered our greatest resource to fight this: our border.

We could not have rolled better starting stats to have:

1) A giant moat around us.

2) Only really four international airports (Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Queenstown).

3) All these are destination airports (as opposed to transit hubs where Singapore or Heathrow are classic examples).

I flew through Asia when SARS was in full swing and just now in February-March (just my luck) and have gone through borders where this was taken seriously earlier. NZs earlier "additional border controls" were pathetic. When I returned in mid March there was:

1) No thermal screening of passengers.

2) No health form to fill in.

3) Australian, Singapore and US!? passports were allowed to use the e-gates.

4) No additional cleaning of high risk surfaces.

5) No protective measures for the customs and border staff.

6) The _only_ extra measure was a tiny pamphlet being handed out which essentially said: "If you feel sick, please ring healthline or a GP and tell them you have travelled."

Instead when I landed on 13th March:

1) I got a pamphlet handed to me which most passengers ignored and threw away

2) Had to touch the e-gates (which had no evidence of cleaning) that were touched by hundreds of other travellers

3) Could not wash my hands properly because soap ran out in a couple of the bathrooms

4) For extra points I could have jumped on a airport to city centre bus full of tourists from Europe (I got picked up instead).

and then they announced with a 48 hour warning that the border was shutting and then planes were packed coming in as people tried to "beat the compulsary quarantine".

The border should have been shut _before_ the first case was detected here.

edit - additional new lines and a sentence

<comment> 2019-nCoV Being remote leads to an apathetic population.

There would have been limited community support for closing the border prior to the first case. It was a distant problem while running rampant across Asia, even more-so as it decimated Europe.

<comment><USER4> Sadly, I think you are absolutely correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> we also did this for the big earthquakes, just gives government power to shut down travel and requisition resources if required. NZ is at level 4 lock down for 4weeks minimum and from the reaction of most of my circle 100% of the people approve of the government action.

<comment><USER6> > the reaction of most of my circle 100% of the people approve of the > government action.

It helps that you have a leader that articulates the scale of the problem and is clear about what measures are being put in place to deal with the situation both tactically and strategically.

I don't want to politicize the conversation, HN is not the place for that, but it's striking how the different management styles in say NZ & IRL differ from the UK & US and how that is helping people deal with the crisis.

In the US for example, individual Governors (aka Team Leads) are taking up the slack where the CEO is not equipped to deal with the scale of the problem. But fundamentally in a pandemic (aka extrinsic force) what counts is trust in leadership, what Ms Arden is demonstrating. Good luck, stay safe.

<comment><USER7> In the US, the State Governors are explicitly in charge of this, not the Federal government which has minimal authority in such matters. It is misleading to describe this as "taking up the slack", given that the US government is specifically structured such that it is _supposed_ to work this way.

<comment><USER6> You are not wrong with respect to healthcare but leadership comes from the top, more so when this is not a State specific problem. Just listen to the Governor of NY plead for help. State's can chose to ignore the president but if the want help from the Feds (FEMA etc) then your point is moot.

<comment><USER8> The feds have explicitly stated they are willing to help, and are sending resources to the states?

<comment><USER6> The leadership, the 'feds' (FEMA) and the states are three separate entities.

<comment><USER8> Sorry, I'll rephrase. Trump has explicitly stated he is willing to give money to the states to deal with the problem. And has sent resources (like the navy ships, dod medical stockpiles, and emergency hospitals)

<comment><USER9> No, he says that he's done things but many of these things (like the navy ships) are far from being launched. Much of what Trump says is not true and a disturbing amount of that is actively harmful.

<comment><USER8> Money to states: [https://www.npr.org/sections/health- shots/2020/03/06/8129648...](https://www.npr.org/sections/health- shots/2020/03/06/812964894/where-that-8-3-billion-in-u-s-coronavirus-funding- will-and-wont-go)

Dod medical stockpiles: [https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2115200...](https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2115200/dod- poised-to-provide-masks-ventilators-labs-for-coronavirus-fight/)

emergency hospitals: [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8144037/National- Gu...](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8144037/National-Guard- arrives-Javits-Center-Manhattan-build-FOUR-emergency-hospitals.html)

Navy ships: [https://thehill.com/policy/defense/489020-navy-hospital- ship...](https://thehill.com/policy/defense/489020-navy-hospital-ship- deploying-monday-to-los-angeles)

You are just spreading lies. Monday is not today, but it is quite close, and the ships were undergoing repairs, as trump said.

<comment><USER10> Monday was two days ago. If you can understand that this is a fast moving situation, maybe it would be best to give people the benefit of the doubt when they give out information you believe to be outdated?

<comment><USER8> The article I posted says this coming Monday? Trump said the ship would be deployed but that it was undergoing repairs. It's being deployed monday. How is it a lie to say the ship is being deployed?

Will you give me the benefit of the doubt and read the article? What lie did Trump tell? At no point did he claim the ships were already present at their destinations.

<comment><USER10> Oh... I misread you then. I thought you were saying that this was new information _since_ Monday.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> What's happening in NZ explained here: [https://covid19.govt.nz/](https://covid19.govt.nz/)

And what the "State of National Emergency" means: [https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/412583/covid-19-state- of...](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/412583/covid-19-state-of-national- emergency-explained)

</comment><comment><USER12> I live in SF but was in New Zealand just 9 days ago. At the time, there were 6 confirmed cases and NZ had already put in place a 14-day self-isolation policy for travelers. Seeing how things _could_ be handled (and watching the U.S. from afar) made it extremely difficult to "go back home." I felt so much safer there. W/ all of that said, I'm actually surprised Arden didn't lock things down sooner.

<comment><USER13> I think the government has failed to prepare everyone, almost misleading us with lack of worry or urgency over the last many weeks. We obviously could have begun some actions months ago (I started acting on the 10th February, Taiwan started acting strongly on 31st Dec). Many people and businesses have been caught out badly in NZ.

However, I have some trust that our government has been actively measuring the signals needed to know when to shutdown, and I am now really happy to see action.

I have seen many people I would expect to be smarter downplay this (Ioannidis, Musk, etc), and the failure of most western countries to act, so I don't have too many hard feelings about what we could have done better...

NZ has a lot to learn from Taiwan, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, and other countries that prepared properly and haven't had to shut down their economies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> As a Chinese living in Auckland, I thought I would be safe here. After the first case detected in the North Shore City about one month ago, people here divided over the virus a lot. Some people were taking it seriously, the other people were not. When I read news and posts from Chinese media, I was so terrified. However when I read news from NZ media like stuff, I felt its not a big deal. I was quite split also. The eventually lockdown is a relief to me. I saw a video, police man already check if people are going out for essential services on street. Also it's grateful we have lots of natural place to go in neighborhood. I do think quarantine here will be much easier than in China.

</comment><comment><USER15> Good luck in NZ. I'm on Day 12 in Spain. I'm passing the time by learning to cook.

</comment><comment><USER16> Where will the billionaires flight to next?

([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22088278](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22088278))

</comment><comment><USER17> [https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and- th...](https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance- be9337092b56)

</comment><comment><USER18> Needs a [video] tag

<comment><USER19> Added. Thanks!</comment></comment>


Y Combinator's Hacker News Advantage  - <AUTHOR> http://fernstrategy.com/2012/12/24/y-combinators-hacker-news-advantage/

<comment><USER2> "why do Paul Graham and YC continue investing their time and resources on this news site?"

A hacker wouldn't find this such a mystery. Once you build something that has users, it's hard to shut it down.

(I'm not denying HN has benefits for YC. But if for example there is some sort of bug that's breaking the site, loss of benefits to YC is pretty far down my list of motivations for fixing it.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Paul, Thanks very much for the comment. I wasn't suggesting that these advantages are the only reason why YC invests in HN. But these benefits are important enough to justify investment, even if we ignore the significant social benefits in bringing together hackers and founders.

By the way, I'd be very curious to know if you anticipated any of these benefits when you first launched HN or if HN was just an experiment (with using Arc), and these benefits emerged over time through serendipity.</comment></comment>


Best SSDs For The Money: August 2011 - <AUTHOR> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-solid-state-nand-reliability,2998.html <comment><USER3> I have a lot of personal success stories with SSDs but here's my current favorite.

A few months ago I had to help one of our scientists (the company is called 5AM Solutions.. they the awesome) run a bioinformatic job written in Perl and R. As it turned out, for long stretches of the processing the job required around 20 GB of memory. The one server that had all the required dependencies installed had only 8 GB at the time.

When I let the job run the first time, it started to page out memory to hard disk. The job ran for about four days, was only about 25% complete and during that time frame the server was un-useable for any other functions. Pretty much everything came to grinding halt.

Between that first run and the time our new RAM would be installed, just for grins, I gave the system 30 GB of swap space on the locally attached SSD. With that configuration the job finished in 19 hours and during that time the server was still responsive of other tasks.

When we finally added the appropriate amount of physical RAM the job took only 15 hours to complete.

It is the first time I have ever seen virtual memory be useful.

<comment><USER4> "Virtual memory" is not a synonym for swap space: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_memory>

Virtual memory is what lets us write programs pretending that we own the entire address space, and it is _very_ useful.

Swapping pages to disk, though, has been useful for a very long time. Yes, once your high-performance application starts swapping all the time, your performance is going to suffer by several orders of magnitude. But occasionally swapping pages in and out of disk is part of what makes modern operating systems useful. You left a large PowerPoint presentation open for several days, but never got around to working on it? Not a problem, since if the OS needs that memory, it will just swap out the pages. Without that ability, the OS would need to go around killing processes. (Which it will do if it has to, but it's a rare event because it can swap out pages.)

<comment><USER3> Hmm... I still think its valid to interchangeably use "Virtual memory" and swap space. Swap space is just where your "virtual memory" lives, right?

<comment><USER4> On modern systems, there are two kinds of addresses. "Virtual" addresses and physical addresses. Virtual addresses are tracked by the operating system, and they can span the entirety of the addressable address space. So, on a 32-bit system that isn't playing any high-memory tricks, that's 0 - 2^32, or 0 - <USER2> GB.

But your system may not have 4 GB. So the operating system has a data structure called a _page table_ that has the virtual to physical mapping for each process. The processor accesses this table (it caches it in something called a TLB) so that it can convert the virtual address to the physical address.

An example using small numbers. Your program has a pointer to data. That pointer may have value 800. Let's assume that the amount of memory on your system is only between 0 - 400. So the processor has to convert the value 800 to a value between 0 - 400. It's the operating system's job to maintain that valid mapping.

Why does this matter, and why is it so tied up with paging to and from disk? Let's say the OS pages out the page containing that data. Then, later, it's paged back in, but in a _different_ physical location in memory. Your program still has the pointer value 800, but your program still works correctly because the operating system keeps track of where in physical memory 800, for your process, maps to.

People in the Windows world often say "virtual memory" when they mean "swap space" because Windows would call the amount of swap space "virtual memory size." But virtual memory is the technique described above. Read the Wikipedia entry from above, or read an operating systems textbook for a full discussion of it.

<comment><USER5> That's not entirely correct. The MMU generally handles virtual to physical memory address translation and the OS is only ever involved if there is a page fault. Outside of OS architecture and very specific and intended application, virtual/physical memory is completely transparent. When I hear "virtual memory" I assume reference to swap space unless otherwise noted because the technical meaning has such a specific domain.

<comment><USER4> That's why I noted that the CPU caches the mappings in the TLB. On modern processors, the MMU is integrated with the rest of the processor, so I didn't see the need to introduce another TLA. It's a part of the processor just as much as, say, the floating point unit is. The whole point of my discussion with small pointer values was to demonstrate that the virtual to physical mapping is transparent.

When I hear "virtual memory," I think of the computer science meaning. However, I am a researcher in high performance computing systems.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Just a warning, a lot of these SSDs "cheat" by using compression. I bought the best drive that I could find for my macbook pro - OCZ Vertex 3 Max IOPS, and was rather disappointed to find out that the posted speeds are based on benchmarks with compressible data. The reason this is an issue is because if you use disk encryption like you should be doing, encrypted data is not compressible. As a result, my speeds are 1/3rd to 1/2 of that which is advertised, and it was not worth the extra money.

<comment><USER7> > if you use disk encryption like you should be doing

I've never found that I had a really good reason to encrypt a drive yet, I'm kind of surprised to see a suggestion that this is the way things are done.

Why should you be encrypting your disks?

<comment><USER8> The OP specifically mentioned a MPB, a laptop, which are pretty easy and high value targets for theft. If my laptop was stolen, I would be relieved to know that my personal data was safe.

There are additional reasons for full disk encryption too, like ensuring that important system files have not been tampered with. Whether or not you want to go that far depends entirely on your level of paranoia.

For a home desktop, the cost/benefit may be a bit different, because the computer is exposed to less places and people. As with many things in security, you would need to calculate what is an acceptable risk to you versus the cost of mitigating that risk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I am surprised to see the OCZ drives recommended so frequently in the article. So far I've owned 2 from crucial, 1 intel, and 1 from OCZ. The first SSD drive I purchased was a crucial, and it is still running like a champ 3 years later in a macbook pro. The OCZ drive failed within 90 days. This wouldn't be a big deal in and of itself, things break. However, their customer service is terrible. I got nothing but a 2 week long run around with them when I tried to RMA it.

<comment><USER10> I am also very surprised to see OCZ drives recommended. I have 10 OCZ Vertex 3 SSDs in a single server. In the past two months, 6 of these 10 Vertex 3 drives have failed so far. OCZ is utter and bitter crap.

<comment><USER11>
      bitter crap

That particular colloquialism does not appear to translate into English very well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I recently bought a Crucial M4 256GB SSD, and I have been extremely satisfied. Blazingly fast and no issues whatsoever. Even better, on my late 2008 MacBook Pro model, I get SATA II speeds (3Gbps). Most other drives (e.g., OCZ Agility) will only be recognized as SATA I (1.5Gbps) on my Mac. This makes the Crucial drive literally twice as fast in best case scenarios.

As an example of the effects it has had on my computer performance, building my upcoming book (which invokes rake and JRuby) used to take 1m 30s on a 7200 RPM drive. Now it takes 15 seconds. Also, productivity apps like Office open in a split second.

<comment><USER13> Upgraded my Cr-48 to a 40 gb Intel drive over the weekend. An SSD with room is a marvelous thing. So, I have a late 2008 macbook (white), looks like a very similar processor (core duo 2.4 ghz), and 4 GB RAM, running Lion. I've been looking at the Crucial 256. That or the Intel 160. How long have you been running this drive, and are you running Lion? How did the upgrade go? Did you need anything besides Time Machine? Do you use macports, postgresql, or apache, and if so, any problems after the upgrade?

Also, have you looked into 3g inside your macbook? Is there any way to make that work? A dual function wifi/3g mini PCIe?

<comment><USER12> > How long have you been running this drive,

About a month.

> and are you running Lion?

Yes.

> How did the upgrade go? Did you need anything besides Time Machine?

I did a clean install and then moved over my data. It was time for me to do a clean up anyway, so I took the opportunity to do so.

> Do you use macports, postgresql, or apache, and if so, any problems after > the upgrade?

I use all the typical dev tools with no problems, but I have not installed macports after the switch to this new drive. (I use brew instead.)

> Also, have you looked into 3g inside your macbook?

I haven't.

<comment><USER13> thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> We use the 600GB Intel 320's as second drives in Macbook Pros for running virtual machines. They're the highest capacity 2.5" SSDs available, and they aren't cheap. However, we can put multiple virtual machines with 100GB+ databases on them, travel to countries with poor internet connectivity, and teach workshops where the students run intensive queries. It's as if we've shrunk a $100,000 storage array and stuck it in our carry-on luggage.

<comment><USER3> I don't understand why SSD are not deployed in EVERY RMDBS server right now. They benefits are truly out of this world.

<comment><USER15> 'cause SSDs are not as reliable as they appeare to be to withstand the server- side workload. Enterprise-grade SSDs are significantly more expensive than consumer-grade ones. You are not looking at $1~2/GB price, but $10~20/GB. Given the capacity required for most use cases, SSDs are hardly good choice for critical servers as primary storage.

In addition, most RMDBS are optimized for mechanical disks. Optimization for SSDs becomes interesting only recently when the price of SSD drops to be barely reasonable.

However, SSDs absolutely rocks as big cache.

<comment><USER16> > In addition, most RMDBS are optimized for mechanical disks.

Since SSDs blow the hell out of platters no matter what the workload or access pattern is, you'll still get significantly improved performances, even without SSD-specific optimizations.

The one "optimization" I'd like to see out of SSD's rise is deoptimization: since access patterns becomes less important (or at least naive access patterns become less costly), I'd like to see systems simplified and "optimizations" removed rather than new optimizations added.

<comment><USER17> We (bu.mp) use a lot of SSDs at our datacenter.. we've probably used ~100 64GB x-25e, and recently we have added 20+ Micro P300 disks.

The first thing we used to do is try to convince the hardware raid controller not to do anything clever, like readahead etc, b/c seek times are practically meaningless. Despite our efforts at disabling every optimization we could control that was tailored for rotational platters, we still found that software raid (linux md) outperformed a classically great hardware controller --perhaps by virtue of being "stupider".

So that is our go-to configuration now: Micron P300 SLC, 200GB drives, with md raid.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm surprised that I'm not seeing even a casual mention of the OWC SSDs in this review. From everything (else) I've ever read, they tend to be way ahead of the curve in terms of innovation and performance. Sure, things change quickly stats wise... but they aren't even on the chart.

[http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Mercury_Extreme_Pro_6...](http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Mercury_Extreme_Pro_6G)

Subjectively, I would describe my OWC 120GB drive as "blisteringly fast". Previously I had a 100GB OWC with extra redundancy for server loads (overkill in my iMac 2010) and the first time it booted it was like being personally greeted by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

<comment><USER19> OWC = SandForce = OCZ

[http://www.anandtech.com/show/4604/the-sandforce-roundup- cor...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/4604/the-sandforce-roundup-corsair- patriot-ocz-owc-memoright-ssds-compared)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> If you use your computer for extended periods of time every day then their performance payoffs outweigh the $. They have come down quite a bit in price lately as well. As the article talks about there are many options available today from at least getting your OS onto a smaller speedy boot drive to housing everything on a larger one.

I for one initially had picked up a 60 GB OCZ Vertex1 awhile ago and then about 10 months ago moved up to a 120 GB Vertex2. Will never look back.

</comment><comment><USER20> Judging SSD's by their little performance bits is a kind of amusing endeavor: the latest SandForce already saturates a 6Gbps SATA III link, and others are catching up real fast. This pretty standard unit of measure is hitting the limits of the interface, not the drive.

What other criteria are there? GB/$, performance/watt, watts at idle, IOps, and warranty or lifecycle costs. Personally, I find something "big enough", ignore power consumption and iops (neither is going to make a huge enough difference for me to concern myself), and then get whatever I can find that has the longest warranty.

<comment><USER21> _the latest SandForce already saturates a 6Gbps SATA III link_

Considering the dinosaur pace of new interfaces, and the fact that SATA III isn't even fully "rolled out" yet, I wonder if we are going to see a new wave of hackish custom solutions by manufacturers. Dual SATA ports on your drive, anyone?

<comment><USER22> Or, direct plug-in to PCI-E like the revodrive.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'm pretty happy with the 256 GB drive in my MacBook Air. I would have considered this limited until recently, but wireless networked storage is cheap and easy to implement(I basically just connected a cheap 3 terabyte drive to my router) and Thunderbolt or USB3 storage gives us a lot of options when more high-performance storage is necessary. Also, cloud services (Facebook/Flickr for photos, Rdio for music) have made me much less of a data packrat. So I increasingly consider the hard disk "working storage" for applications and the most crucial files.

</comment><comment><USER24> I knew this would happen. I bought a Thinkpad T420s which has a non-standard (or new standard?) 7mm hard drive caddy instead of the much more common 9.5mm. I bought a 64GB Crucial M4 because it could be modded to 7mm and the price was right. I'm happy with the performance. It feels noticeably faster than a standard magnetic drive, but the 64GB is in tier 10 on this comparison. I guess as long as I'm happy with the performance it doesn't really matter. I wish this article was around 2 weeks ago.

</comment><comment><USER25> I recently grabbed a 512GB crucial m4 for $730 delivered, from here <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/> (no affiliation) (price has risen slightly since). For some reason I'd been putting it off but seeing it there for less than $1.50 per gig, at the capacity I wanted for my macbook, suddenly seemed to be a no-brainer. Hell, I remember paying $100 per gig back in the '90s. Somehow my mental model of "reasonable prices to pay for storage" has just been totally biased by years and years of dirt cheap HDDs.

Frankly it hasn't been the jaw-dropping entering-hyperdrive performance boost I had kind of hoped for (I'm a rails dev). While a definite improvement, it seems that for many of my most common tasks (read: tests) I have merely pushed the bottleneck back onto the CPU. But while it hasn't sped up all that much, it _never_ slows down, which you don't notice at first but over time has a subtle confidence-building effect. Application launch speeds are much improved, for those who spend a good part of their day launching apps, which is not me. I tend to launch a few and then use them for the next two weeks before I restart. I also like how the drive does not make whining sounds when I move the computer before it's gone to sleep.

Recommended, anyway, they're cheap enough now that it's not a luxury, even if like me you use most of it for your work music collection.

<comment><USER26> From what I read at the time, (january 2011) sandforce based SSDs got much better performance on mac systems. I think this was to do with OSX's lack of support for TRIM.

On the other hand, right after I upgraded my SSD, I went to ruby 1.9.2 and rails 3, which are much slower due in part to a bug that makes requiring files take forever.

<comment><USER27> Not sure about others, but in my case (10 MBP 13" w/ Vertex2 in optibay), I had occasional stalls (anywhere from 2-30 sec) until the TRIM Enabler ( <http://www.groths.org/?p=308> ) showed up and I installed it (OSX Lion supports TRIM on this drive natively, it seems).

I think this is because, although sandforce drives have native garbage collection, it can sometimes happen at a very inopportune moment (like say, a 20s "pause" during critical moments of a SC2 game).

<comment><USER28> By the way, _do not_ use that Trim Enabler. If you want to and are aware of the risks, use this one, especially if you plan on using it with Lion: <http://digitaldj.net/2011/07/21/trim-enabler-for-lion/>

What this does is actually pretty simple, it replaces the string "Apple SSD" (used to identify for which drives trim is turned on) in a file in the relevant kernel extension with zeros. It also creates a backup copy of the original file.

The Trim Enabler you linked to replaces a whole kernel extension (meaning you might end up with an older version of a kernel extension) which is obviously monumentally stupid.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> There's a lot of snake-oil in SSD's until you hit the $400 mark. I'm not going near them until the lies and half-arsed chipsets stop.

</comment><comment><USER30> I've been using an Intel 320. It's a dream. No more hitches _at all_.</comment>


The Big Deal about Pokémon Go - <AUTHOR> http://blog.goemotify.com/big-deal-pokemon-go/ <comment><USER2> Interesting insights about the game. I have been playing it for the last week now, thoroughly enjoyed it so far. As the post suggested at the end, I do feel "Excited" to play this. It makes my evenings after work productive too :D

</comment><comment><USER3> Obsessed with this game.. Been running around delhi to catch pokemon.. Gain exp.. Completely agree with the article.. .. Pretty nice..</comment>


Onword - a simple, distraction-free writing web app - <AUTHOR> http://onword.co <comment><USER2> I'm a bit hesitant to click through. What will I get when I sign up? Will it cost me anything now or later? Can I bring my own domain? Is there anything I can bring my domain to? And first of all, why is it any better than my favorite text editor that has no need to connect to the internet, no browsers, no URLs and no accounts to connect. Sounds like a good niche product, though.

</comment><comment><USER3> Come on! Public posts with no warning? I mean, I seriously thought I could start migrating all my short stories. I actually migrated 4 of them. Then I noticed the URLs being generated. Then I messed with the IDs and found out I can see anyone's posts! Developers: Consider. Please.

</comment><comment><USER4> Very neat, I like the general feel, including simplicity and colours, the minimal permissions from twitter and the list of documents, though I don't know why saving changes quits to the list. It also forces a pretty narrow column for text (~20 characters).

It's hard to get that feeling of immersion with a webapp though. You can fullscreen, I know, but browsers tend to be easily excitable. Locally, I'm using pyRoom[1] which just covers everything and with a little configuration can show nothing except for the text you're writing.

[1] <http://pyroom.org/features.html>

</comment><comment><USER5> I like it. It's simple and I guess it does what it says it does.

However, it's no different to other "minimal writers".

Plus, personally, I don't "just write". By that, I need formatting, I need bullet points. I need bold, italics, underlines if I want to emphasize, stress and make my point. It's great to just write things down and I guess this wouldn't be for heavily formatted documents, but I feel that it's just too minimal for my use.

</comment><comment><USER6> Is it by design that all notes are public?<http://onword.co/100>

Love the Interface.

</comment><comment><USER7> The save button could be hidden for less distraction (Use SUPER + S to save) and logo + logout link on hover only.

</comment><comment><USER8> I don't have a Twitter account. Is it too hard to add at least one other signup method for folks like myself?

</comment><comment><USER9> very nice. I would've wished for an even more pulled back interface. I tried to do prototype something similar some time ago, but never finished it: <http://jsfiddle.net/dirkk0/MySJf/show/>

</comment><comment><USER10> looks fantastic no doubt. i am hesitant to click the twitter auth button, however. maybe some sort of app preview would cure my (and possible some others') paranoia?

looks great, well done!

</comment><comment><USER11> Nicely done, but how is this better than using google docs?

</comment><comment><USER12> Nice app. But i dont understand the point.

</comment><comment><USER13> The app is beautifully simple. Good job.

</comment><comment><USER14> Like try it but I don't use Twitter.

</comment><comment><USER15> This app very lacks autosaving.

</comment><comment><USER16> This looks really cool!

I've used a lot of distraction-free writing tools in the past. First it was DarkRoom, then I tried that thingy that was/is a YC startup ... forget the name, but it had the feature of recording your editing so you could view it later. Lately I'm using iA Writer to write my book and it's the best I've used so far.

The idea behind iA Writer and Onword looks pretty much the same - take away my freedoms and force me to focus on the writing.

But I think iA Writer is better at it. Because it's native, it can take over my whole screen, very important because it then feels like I'm writing paper where the "screen" also doesn't have any other features. I also prefer iA's colour scheme ... but this is just a preference.

I will give Onword a try, but for any serious writing I would need files on a hard drive.

<comment><USER3> Please notice posts are PUBLIC by design, but it is not specified anywhere. You can navigate to any post by using a (sequential) ID in the URL. Just in case you have not noticed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> @teopeurt "Thanks everyone. Just a heads up - currently, all posts are public to _anyone_. Bear that in mind. Private posts are coming." From Twitter.</comment>


Craft Beer, Delivered to Your Office - <AUTHOR> https://www.deskbeers.com/

<comment><USER2> Love the idea :-D Unfortunately not in Aus yet...

I know at our office the receptionist primarily does the drink ordering, but isn't so interested in beer... So pitching it at businesses is great idea to my mind :-)

It might be too costly... But some kind of sample pack might be a good idea as a way to get buy in from others in the office?</comment>


Why I Stopped Helping People and You Should Too - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/life-tips/why-i-stopped-helping-people-and-you-should-too-36d09d04784c <comment><AUTHOR> Terrible advice...</comment>


Interviews of EPA employees concludes agency on verge of regulatory capture - <AUTHOR> https://theconversation.com/epa-staff-say-the-trump-administration-is-changing-their-mission-from-protecting-human-health-and-the-environment-to-protecting-industry-96256 <comment><USER2> "on the verge"</comment>