Why the US needs to blacklist, censor pirate websites - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/why-the-us-needs-to-censor-pirate-websites.ars <comment><USER3> I think for the people in general to respect copyright, they need to have something to respect. 100 years is ridiculous. And it's unrealistic. Basically it gives certain companies a right to print money. It's particularly egregious that Disney built up a huge pile of their "intellectual property" by stealing stories that, in this day and age, would cost them a fortune to license.

Copyright used to be for 25 years. In this day and age, that is an eternity. Back when it was implemented, it was probably a little more relevant - <USER2> the distribution of media being a lot slower and organic.

If copyright was for 7 years, with the option to renew for another 7 years (for a period of time - say up to 21 years total), that would protect the rights of content creators, whilst letting work that is deemed worthless to fall back into the public domain. And NO ONE could hijack our culture in perpetuity.

What is this COICA going to do for the consumer? For society?

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm vaguely reminded of the bartender's exchange with Ford Prefect.

"I always through we were supposed to lie down or put a paper bag over our heads or something."

"Yes, if you'd like."

"Oh, will that help?"

"No."

</comment><comment><USER5> _"Castro: If you accept the fact that piracy is a problem, government needs to do something. You have to start from that premise."_

Castro immediately sets up a false dichotomy and proceeds to argue from that perspective. I'm not convinced that the government needs to be involved any more than it currently is at this point.

<comment><USER6> I'd extend that line of thought a little to say that the government likely needs to be _less_ involved than it is right now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't get the comments here saying this is an April Fool's joke. What are you folks basing that on?

Daniel Castro (who's giving the interview to Ars Tech) is:

 _[..] a senior analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). He is also a co-author of a 2009 paper on Internet piracy, which was influential on the development and adoption of the U.S. government's Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) legislation._

Just because the article was posted on April 1st, is it automatically an April Fool's joke? Or are these comments an elaborate ploy to laugh off and discredit the article and the contents of the interview?

<comment><USER7> The comments start at around 6am April Fool's. I assume it was posted that day... Generally, ridiculous things posted on April Fool's start with "Not an April Fool's joke" if they're not...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Castro: If you accept the fact that piracy is a problem, government needs to > do something.

Piracy is not a problem. There are numerous studies proving piracy increases popularity of games, artists and software. If you can't monetize piracy, don't go to the government asking for help. Update your businessmodels so piracy has a positive effect on your business.

</comment><comment><USER9> This will be a good thing to set up anyway since the government has needed for some time an efficient way to eliminate web sites from the internet that have any forbidden, threatening, inappropriate or questionable material, without having to resort to long drawn judicial processes requiring probable cause.

I also like his advocacy of deep packet inspection, meaning corporations searching 3rd party internet traffic that happens to pass through their routers, without needing warrants or being liable to wiretapping laws. That will definitely come in handy.

</comment><comment><USER10> Be sure to look at the date of the article.

</comment><comment><USER11> This is hilarious.

2 days late.</comment>


C.I.A. Admits Penetrating Senate Intelligence Computers - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/world/senate-intelligence-commitee-cia-interrogation-report.html <comment><USER2> This is the time for damage-control PR that they were handed on a platter by the intelligence oversight committee. The report was supposed to be released months ago but instead the CIA was given special early access to the report to conduct massive redactions and had the released delayed, giving them plenty of time to come up with good excuses and rebuttals to questions.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/26/world/george-tenet-ex- chie...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/26/world/george-tenet-ex-chief-of-cia- is-set-to-defend-actions-on-interrogation-program.html)

The only government response to hacking the oversight committee is to create an extra accountability board. Adding more layers of bureaucracy instead of holding anyone responsible doesn't create a better agency.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you or I penetrated the Senate's computers I would expect we would spend quite a long time in jail. Is it naive for me to expect that someone at the CIA will spend a long time in jail?

<comment><USER4> Well to be fair it is quite likely that the CIA was doing this legally which just goes to show the uselessness of the laws and the oversight provided by this particular committee. I think the CIA used to be prevented from operating domestically but that this has changed at least for terrorism.

And this was clearly a case of terrorism because that report makes the US look bad and it could be used within terrorist propaganda.[0]

[0] I wish I was being sarcastic but I think this is actually reality now [1]

[1] See David Miranda detention at Heathrow.

<comment><USER5> I think the whole point is that it isn't legal and more importantly to the senate, it isn't constitutional.

No one wants to prosecute anyone in the CIA. It's terrible politics. But this isn't legal.

<comment><USER6> I personally don't care about how good or bad the politics are. The CIA clearly broke the law and anyone directly involved needs to be held accountable to the fullest extent possible. At the very least Director Brennan needs to be brought up on charges of perjury. Between him and Director Clapper the precedent is being set that its OK to lie to congress especially if you're a member of the Intelligence community.

We simply can NOT have bodies with the power of the CIA and NSA spying on our own government or people. There's no way that ends well for us as a nation.

<comment><USER7> Is there some sort of incompetence charge? That way later when he claims not to have direct knowledge he must be dismissed immediately on the basis that anyone who is the executive of the CIA and doesn't know that the CIA spied on the Senate Intel cmte, isn't fit to run the CIA.

<comment><USER8> This is worth parsing. Is it really incompetence? Or is it actually a very high level of foresight? As a general rule, the only thing people are evered fired for is breaking the law. While there are exceptions to this, in an organization like the CIA, such would be aking to admitting terminal liability at the next level within the organization.

(This seems to be why companies like GM never admit to an engineering flaw; or why wall street firms are never prosecuted criminally to the full extent of the law.)

<comment><USER7> I believe that if a CIA director were actually oblivious to such a flagrant violation of law/ethics/trust/separation of powers, whatever you want to call it; then that would be incompetence. If after faced with the facts, he refused to immediately produce the perpetrators, that makes it malevolent, he is now a co-conspirator.

Of course, I don't really believe it is incompetence, but rather, as you say the result of careful planning, or very competent crisis handling.

If we can't prevent guys like Brennan from playing the "I didn't know... honest!" gambit, then at least that could trigger the "incompetence response" which would be immediate dismissal, and hopefully change the rules of the game a bit, even if it allowed the criminal a comparably graceful exit.

<comment><USER8> As a point of history, this may be of interest

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

 _Plausible deniability is a term coined by the CIA in the early 1960s to describe the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities by the CIA became public knowledge._

You are dealing with purposeful behaviour. One mans 'obliviousness' is another man's 'innocence'. In other words, it helps to not mis-understand this situation as the work of the ill-informed or 'incompetent'. It sort of does a dis-service to the complexity of the problem, here.

(And I'm certainly not arguing about the existence of a _problem_ ).

<comment><USER7> >You are dealing with purposeful behaviour.

I agree.

> One mans 'obliviousness' is another man's 'innocence'. In other words, it > helps to not mis-understand this situation as the work of the ill-informed > or 'incompetent'.

What do you propose? Just because some people understand it as a deception or a possible deception, that understanding is not universal. Plenty of people accept these "ignorance" claims making it so that executives are able to effectively use the plausible deniability gambit. How else can we work around it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Don't forget that when Feinstein accused the CIA of doing this, the director replied that it was simply _absurd_ that the CIA would do so.

<comment><USER10> I note that's not actually a _denial_ , just an admission that what they do is absurd. :-)

<comment><USER11> "Nothing could be further from the truth" is an explicit denial.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Accountability in society has been lost. What I don't understand is why we tolerate this. Are we all really too busy with status updates and mindless entertainment not to give a damn and demand it again? It's an interesting sign of our society that we allow events like this.

For the CIA to be accountable someone needs to spend time in prison, senior directors need to be fired. Anything less sends a message that this is ok.

Nor was this a one off. Look at James Clapper (NSA Director), he perjures himself to Congress with no consequence.

Banks caused a global economic collapse and many of the CEOs remain, nobody has faced the possibility of jail.

<comment><USER13> I share your sentiments entirely. However, it's important to remember that this is a global issue. I travel a lot, and it is my distinct impression that a rapidly increasing number of people (many of them young and educated) around the world are becoming increasingly aware of the problems with the established systems, in some cases openly protesting and in others merely refusing to participate. Think Argentina, India, North Africa, the Middle East, China, Russia, Iran, Thailand, Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal. The global social climate has never been better to try out new solutions... solutions that remove centralized control of communications, finance and political power. We are getting to the point where there are viable offerings and where _state- level_ actors are throwing their lot in with development: look at Putin's response to Mastercard/Visa on ATM networks, India's response to US+Israeli segregation of Iran (their major oil supplier) from SWIFT, or China's quiet and unrelenting expansion of their own alternative financial networks across the world (especially Asia) as they push for the RMB as a regional reserve currency.

The fact of the matter is, the US's present position is an untenable anachronism.

 _Open source everything is about the five billion poor coming together to reclaim their collective wealth and mobilise it to transform their lives. There is zero chance of the revolution being put down. Public agency is emergent, and the ability of the public to literally put any bank or corporation out of business overnight is looming. To paraphrase Abe Lincoln,_ you cannot screw all of the people all of the time. _We 're there. All we lack is a major precipitant – our Tunisian fruit seller. When it happens the revolution will be deep and lasting._ \- Robert David Steele, ex-Marine, ex- CIA, Open Source Intelligence expert in _The Guardian_ , 2014-06-19

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Many Congressional bodies in history would have charged those responsible with espionage and treason, and moved immediately to impeach the president, if they found that the Executive branch was illegally wiretapping an internal Congressional committee charged with investigating the executive branch's conspiracy to secretly torture and kill enemies of the executive branch.

It is abhorrent to our democracy and a direct, domestic threat to the legitimacy of our elected government and the survival of the rights guaranteed to us by our Constitution.

Unfortunately, when you cry 'wolf' / 'impeach' / 'Benghazi' every five minutes after it becomes clear a black man is going to live in the White House, that kind of neutralizes the ability to express outrage and be heard on legitimate issues. If the center-left Constitutional Law professor can get away with this sort of shit, I cringe at where we're going.

</comment><comment><USER14> _" [CIA] officials suspected the intelligence committee had improperly obtained an internal C.I.A. report about the detention program"_

How is that even an excuse? The Senate Intelligence committee is supposed to oversee the CIA. How can they do that without access to any and all CIA documents?

</comment><comment><USER15> This seems pretty clearly criminal. I hope someone presses charges.

</comment><comment><USER16> Oops. Sorry.

</comment><comment><USER17> HN title at 1406825693 is "C.I.A. Apologizes for Penetrating Senate Computers." That is not the title of the NYT story. The NYT title is "C.I.A. Admits Penetrating Senate Intelligence Computers."

The article does mention an apology from Brennan, but not to anyone beyond the two ranking members of the Intelligence Oversight Committee.

<comment><USER18> It's worth noting that the NY Times sometimes revises their headlines. I don't know whether that's happened in this case, but it's a possibility given the NYTimes tweet contained the HN title: [https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/494878654934302720](https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/494878654934302720)

<comment><USER19> Alternative titles I believe are briefly A/B tested for click through rates when published - it's a standard procedure at NYT and other news sites these days. Plus title 'correction' could have been made by the editors already after it was out.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Anyone need an Ember JavaScript Dev? Side projects? I'm bored - <AUTHOR> I work full time as a dev doing 90% Ember JS stuff on a big app. I'm looking for ideas or projects to work on with someone or help out when needed.
Let's chat.
firstname.lastname@example.com <comment><USER2> Bored? Learn Elm, it's like React but done better

</comment><comment><USER3> does ember make you feel bored ?!</comment>


Analysis of Twitter.com Leak - <AUTHOR> https://www.leakedsource.com/blog/twitter <comment><USER2> Their business model benefits indirectly from the leaks. I'm not sure about the ethics of this. I found one of my email addresses in a couple of leaks, wanted to see the raw data, but the site asks for a paid subscription.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wasn't even aware of this leak. Is this one of the first mentions?</comment>


How Using Periscope Got My PGA Tour Media Credential Revoked - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/the-cauldron/how-using-periscope-got-me-kicked-off-covering-the-pga-tour-1ea37ffac209

<comment><USER2> When I'm driving, bikers are annoying. When I'm biking, of course, I hate drivers. Similar thing here. I can empathize with wanting to control a product and public image. At the same time as an individual person out living in the world, it incenses me to be censored or restricted in what I can share about my own real-time experiences. The PGA, the boxing match they mention, etc. - no one will ever think it's cool or ok to censor people who want to take photos or streams or whatever of their life as it happens. I always wonder, are they (PGA, etc.) aware how slimy it feels and just do it anyway? Is it truly just lost on who ever is calling the shots or what?</comment>


Which word does rhyme the most? - <AUTHOR> https://blog.vocapouch.com/which-word-does-rhyme-the-most-ebd66dedcce7 <comment><USER2> I'm skeptical of the meter of that limerick.

<comment><AUTHOR> Meter! That's what I forgot!</comment></comment>


How to deploy your next Rails app with database to the cloud - <AUTHOR> https://docs.qovery.com/guides/tutorial/deploy-rails-with-postgresql/ <comment><USER2> Thanks for sharing</comment>


British Airways: Suspect code that hacked fliers 'found' - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45481976 <comment><USER2> "According to RiskIQ, they even went so far as to acquire a Secure Socket Layer (SSL) certificate - which suggests to web browsers that a web page is safe to use."

The BBC's technology reporting usually isn't that bad for a mainstream audience, but this is just egregious. On the one hand, perpetuating the myth that "anything I do on this page must be super safe because there's a green padlock", and on the other completely exaggerating the difficulty of going HTTPS now we have LetsEncrypt.

<comment><USER3> Although this comment in RisqIQ's report ([https://www.riskiq.com/blog/labs/magecart-british-airways- br...](https://www.riskiq.com/blog/labs/magecart-british-airways-breach/)) is even worse - it suggests that LetsEncrypt certs are less "legitimate" than paid ones: "Interestingly, they decided to go with a paid certificate from Comodo instead of a free LetsEncrypt certificate, likely to make it appear like a legitimate server"

<comment><USER4> After years of watching actual users, my first guesses as to why the crooks went with a "paid certificate from Comodo" would be:

1\. They genuinely didn't know about Let's Encrypt

2\. Learning some new stuff to get a free cert didn't seem worth it because they're not paying anyway (at corps this is often because they have a bulk deal, or there will just be a Purchase Order so it's not their personal credit card bill, for crooks it's probably someone else's money anyway)

3\. Some minor technical inconvenience made doing the ACME proof of control validations tricky. For example their DNS provider doesn't implement a sane API for changing TXT records.

<comment><USER5> Crap DNS not supporting CAAA records can be an issue too

<comment><USER4> Good point. Worth spelling out that your DNS doesn't need to understand CAA records, it merely needs to be able to conform to the obvious requirement that if you ask it "Hey are there CAA records for this name?" it says "No" rather than crashing, silently ignoring the question or returning an error indication.

As usual in DNS this works fine in the Free implementation your OS vendor included, shame about all the expensive proprietary choices that get this wrong for every single new record type.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What I can't get my head around is how they managed to add their code to the .js file.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the file was hosted by BA within their CMS, yet the attackers were able to update this file to include their 22 lines of code.

Does this mean the attackers had access to the CMS for BA.com or is there a step I am missing or has been deliberately omitted?

<comment><USER7> Why "yet"?

I've worked with CMS tools that allow you to add plain HTML blocks, even stuff inside <script></script>. If their CMS allows this, and some marketing person had "password123" as their CMS password, and they allow access from the web (instead of intranet/VPN + 2FA requirements)...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is interesting as a lot of initial speculation for this attack focused on the large amount of 3rd party JS being loaded into the BA payment pages as a likely source of compromise.

Instead this looks like a fairly well executed "traditional" attack on BAs CMS/Web server infrastructure.

It's a good example of why even front-end infrastructure components need good protection...

<comment><USER9> The write-up is a little unclear, at least to me. I read it as being that it _was_ a third-party JS attack. At least of a sort - e.g. a compromised third- party package downloaded and then used by BA? [0]

[0] [https://cdn.riskiq.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/Webp.net-r...](https://cdn.riskiq.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/Webp.net-resizeimage-22.png)

<comment><USER8> I took from the article that the attacker had modified an existing copy of the Modernizr script that BA were running by appending content at the end of it.

The targeting of the attack and the fact that prior to that the file hadn't changed for 6 years make it unlikely that it was a downloaded copy that had been backdoored and then installed by BA.

<comment><USER9> Thanks, that makes more sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> How's that modified modernizerjs script ended up in there? I mean, it must have been included directly from the BA website? I also wonder how can BA be so sure about the dates this was stealing payment data, since this was apparently a frontend attack. Maybe they somehow know when that js script had been modified?

</comment><comment><USER11> Both this link, and the technical one posted by @iicc seem really light on _how_ the infected modernizr got onto their CMS in the first place...

</comment><comment><USER12> This is a good advert for using sub-resource integrity [https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/Security/Subres...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/Security/Subresource_Integrity)

</comment><comment><USER13> Here's the thing tho', BA's website exists solely to provide information on and sell their own services. Why is there third-party _anything_ on it in the first place? Fix that and you'll fix everything, well almost.

Disclaimer: worked on ba.com in the '90's

<comment><USER14> It's not a third party script. It's a copy of modernizr hosted on their own server. Someone has either hacked their CMS (Teamsite) or it's an insider.

<comment><USER15> I love it how big companies still use legacy CMS like Teamsite thinking it is too expensive to move to something modern.

<comment><USER16> If you have a large customer-facing website retail website, redoing the whole thing in something "modern" (which will only be "modern" for a year or so) is actually very expensive. Have you ever migrated a non-trivial website from one platform to another?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Marcus Greenwood (Founder of UB.IO) put out some good analysis of this at [https://medium.com/the-automator/so-about-that-ba- hack-a82e5...](https://medium.com/the-automator/so-about-that-ba- hack-a82e5701f095)

And there's more analysis at [http://huagati.blogspot.com/2018/05/things-you- probably-dont...](http://huagati.blogspot.com/2018/05/things-you-probably- dont-want-to-do-on.html)

And the fake BAWAYs server is still up - [https://twitter.com/inventur_es/status/1039519364733497344](https://twitter.com/inventur_es/status/1039519364733497344)

<comment><USER18> Ehh, Marcus's analysis is off on some of the details and his prediction of a 3rd party JS (which he strangely originally kept referring to as XSS, which makes me question his thoughts even more) ended up being wrong.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Maybe some sort of one use creditcard numbers should be used so that if hackers steal them they're worthless, and have a centralized service for providing those one use generated numbers...

</comment><comment><USER20> Why not a quick scan twice a day if all static content looking for ip addresses and domains against a whitelist of allowed domains? This would have found the issue same day.

</comment><comment><USER21> A simple connect-src CSP would have prevented this

</comment><comment><USER22> better link: [https://www.riskiq.com/blog/labs/magecart-british-airways- br...](https://www.riskiq.com/blog/labs/magecart-british-airways-breach/)

<comment><USER23> Yes it is

And the attackers knew how to use SSL as opposed to some 3DS/VBV "partners" I've seen in the wild

Excepted for the botched GDPR "agreement" box

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Genuine question... Why the scare quotes around the word "found"? I'm assuming "hacked fliers" refers to the people who had their details stolen. So how exactly did they "find" the "suspect code"?

English is my first language, but I'm really struggling to grok this headline.

<comment><USER25> From the BBC:

> Quotation marks should be single:

> in headlines and cross-heads (eg: UK 'to leave EU'); in promo text and for > quotes within quotes (eg: Tom Bone said: "They say, 'The Labour Party is > finished' before every election") and inside quote boxes (eg: They sprayed > 'go home' on our front door – Sandra Harris).

> In headlines where the attribution is clear, do not include unnecessary > quote marks (eg Britain won't hold referendum, says PM rather than Britain > "won't hold referendum", says PM).

> They should be double:

> outside the categories listed above - on the ticker, in regular text, > summaries and picture captions. Also, at first use of phrases such as "mad > cow disease" or "road rage". (But quotation marks will be single if the > phrase comes inside a direct quotation (eg: The minister said: "The spread > of 'mad cow disease' had ruined thousands of lives.") Either way, no > punctuation is required after the first reference.

[https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art201307021121335...](https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133530)

<comment><USER24> Thanks for the clarification. I've re-read this headline a dozen times and it finally makes sense.

By removing the phrase "that hacked fliers" you're left with "Suspect code 'found'". Which is the core of the statement. But that doesn't give enough context so the reference to the fliers was added.

I also think they wanted to lead with "British Airways" so a bit of contortion was necessary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> If I had had the developer console open in chrome while going through the booking, would I have seen in the network tab the posting to baways.com...

I think the answer is yes.

So I wonder why this issue was not reported earlier by some techie guy who's just booked a flight</comment>


Open Source Micro E-commerce (+API +CDN) Example, installs with a single command - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/renasboy/php-mysql-micro-shop

<comment><USER2> Is it possible to import csv file with data to it? I may help you to select right csv format Contact me by mail nik [at] mydataprovider.com</comment>


Credit card scam exposes mind-blowing ignorance about security. - <AUTHOR> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/in-person_credi.html

<comment><USER2> Once again this proves that the biggest security risk by far is users.

Maybe the security industry should start hiring people with a psychology background to try and alleviate the problem?

<comment><USER3> No, everything should hire people with a security background to alleviate the problem. But the ROI would be too low to justify it - security is expensive. And in the big picture, even a $8K loss is peanuts.

<comment><USER2> Somehow I don't think you'll find many secretaries with a security background.</comment></comment></comment>


Now Your Smartphone Can Be Used To Diagnose Ear Infections At Home - <AUTHOR> http://singularityhub.com/2012/07/15/now-your-smartphone-can-be-used-to-diagnose-ear-infections-at-home/

<comment><AUTHOR> Essentially,

"the company is developing an iPhone attachment that turns the smartphone into an otoscope, providing a magnified view of the middle ear."</comment>


Ask HN: Is the virus/anti-virus story on Windows any better today? - <AUTHOR> The last time I ran a Windows (8) computer was years ago. You "had" to have anti-virus software and most of the anti-virus software was bloatware that only seemed to slow the computer down. Reinstalling the entire operating system every few months was simply a matter of course. I am still amazed by how zippy OS X, Linux, and FreeBSD desktops are compared to the Windows I am used to.
However, I need to be able to run Photoshop so I'm looking into Mac and Windows desktops again. If I wanted to go with a Mac, I'd be dropping at least $1k on a good Mac mini. If I went with Windows, I could simply reinstall Windows on my FreeBSD desktop ($100 for the Windows license). But I'm very wary of going back to the days of the bloatware that you "needed" to install to protect you from... worse bloatware?
Is Windows still like this? Or has the state of virus/bloatware-protection improved? <comment><USER2> I setup a Windows 10 computer the other day. When I was done with the initial configuration I opened control panel to add more local users. I'm clicking on the button to add a new user, and guess what happens; The modal window to create a new _local_ user actually shows a loading bar, because apparently it's connecting to some online server. To make things worse, that server was unavailable for some reason so I actually couldn't add local users... "please try again later", ffs.

I got around the problem by using the tool "lusrmgr.msc", but still. God knows what else is going on.

</comment><comment><USER3> Windows now feels free to take over your computer to advertise its other products to you, when it pleases - it has become a virus, too. Not the worst virus, but a virus.

<comment><USER4> You can remove all those live tiles from the start menu. Cortana and those Office installers can be disabled easily. With a simple registry hack you can even remove OneDrive from the file explorer.

It would be better if you didn't have to do those things, but it's not that bad.

<comment><USER3> Not easily, not just once. It is in fact easier to endure the viral behavior, which is part of the design.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I come from 10 years using macs and gave a shot a Windows 10 for a couple of weeks.

Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender which is more than enough if you are one of those rare persons with common sense.

If you only need to use Adobe software (or any other industry specific) Windows 10 is good. You can chose your own hardware, and personally I've found it to be stable and fast. No need to get an overpriced and decrepit Mac Mini.

I wouldn't use it as a general use machine though. I've found that the Windows ecosystem is plagued with old win32 XP era software.

</comment><comment><USER5> Its much better, than in the XP/Vista days. I havent had a virus in the last ~6 years. W10 has a built in antivirus, that works well. I cant tell much about it, since it never had a chance to catch a virus. The only thing I know that its totally hassle free, I've never seen a popup or anything else annoying from it.

Just make sure you dont do dumb things: dont blindly click next on installers, dont run executables from shady sites. Keep your PC and browser up to date (again, they do this totally automatically.)

<comment><USER6> And don't install Chrome extensions because Windows antivirus doesn't block Chrome malware, and Google doesn't remove extensions that were sold and updated with malware.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I didn't install an anti-virus since Windows 7.</comment>


University of Tokyo lab suspected of altering data in 43 scientific papers - <AUTHOR> http://news.sciencemag.org/education/2013/07/forty-three-university-tokyo-papers-are-tainted-says-japanese-news-report

<comment><USER2> Duplicate: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6102208](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6102208)</comment>


Scientists discover new mechanism for information storage in one atom - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2018-09-scientists-mechanism-storage-atom.html <comment><USER2> Article in _Nature Communications_ : [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06337-4](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06337-4)

Press release from Radboud University: [https://www.ru.nl/english/news- agenda/news/vm/imm/solid-stat...](https://www.ru.nl/english/news- agenda/news/vm/imm/solid-state-physics/2018/scientists-discover-new-mechanism- information/)

The phys.org "article" is word-for-word the same as the press release, except that they added a link to an earlier phys.org "article" on a related topic, which in turn was word-for-word the same as this press release: [https://actu.epfl.ch/news/a-step-closer-to-single-atom- data-...](https://actu.epfl.ch/news/a-step-closer-to-single-atom-data- storage/) apart from, again, a link at the bottom to an earlier phys.org "article" which, well, you get the idea.

<comment><USER3> Actually I don't get the idea - are you saying the whole thing is birds of a feather or that the Nature article is the real deal?

<comment><USER2> Sorry, I should have been more explicit. I'm saying that _every_ phys.org article is like this: they reproduce a press release without adding anything to it, except for some links to other stuff on phys.org (which in turn are just copies of press releases together with more within-phys.org links).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Cool sci-fi idea would be to try doing this and suddenly discover that there is already some "other" information there.

<comment><USER5> What if we end up corrupting parts of our simulation?

<comment><USER6> Oh, the system has defenses. You wouldn't want to meet them in a dark alley.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How long can the information stay in it in a stable way? Trusting your information to single atoms sounds quite volatile

<comment><USER8> Honestly, under ideal conditions probably a while. Outside of that not long would be my guess.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Scientists at Radboud University discovered a new mechanism for magnetic storage of information in the smallest unit of matter: a single atom."

This press release is aimed at a fairly technically oriented audience, so I'm going to being very precise about why the leading statement in the press release is wrong.

The electron is smaller, more fundamental, _more fundamental as a unit_ , and more fundamental at a higher level of science (is in, electrons are even more fundamental to chemistry than atoms are to physics), than the atom.

<comment><USER10> There appears to be no universally agreed upon definition of _matter_. By at least one definition, an atom is indeed the smallest unit.

<comment><USER9> See my reply to MrEldritch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is a feat of enginneering. Not a fundamental discovery of new quantum states as I first assumed.

</comment><comment><USER12> This sounds incredible. How far away are practical application of it? And would they likely use this Cobalt on a phosphorus substrate or something else entirely?

<comment><USER13> 50% chance this is just another stunt for fame, glory, investments, etc. and nothing useful will come out of it...

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Pardon a seemingly stupid question here, but how far away are we from practical realization of Atomic Transistors?

<comment><USER15> Simple demonstrations of 2 atom transistors have already been done (search for Rydberg blockade rubidium transistors).

Practical applications are very, very far away. A single collision with a molecule of air is plenty to dislodge an atom from any given internal state. Demonstrations are all run in vacuum chambers and rely on control of an atom's internal state.</comment></comment>


A stellar example of a security researcher responding to abuse - <AUTHOR> http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/01/19/16 <comment><AUTHOR> Regular reminder not to treat well-meaning security researchers like dirt. (Not that most HN users would, but I think this story is worth sharing!)

Epilogue: [https://twitter.com/_mr_me_/status/695366241045729280](https://twitter.com/_mr_me_/status/695366241045729280)</comment>


How To Start An Amazon FBA Business - <AUTHOR> http://www.arbing.co.uk/amazon-fba-business/?post=awesome <comment><USER2> I've worked with quite a few old school manufacturers that have expanded their business by selling direct on Amazon.

Amazon's easy to use marketplace is the only online medium that has ever worked out so well for companies that make products but are not savvy in e-commerce. The profits from Amazon are giving these businesses the opportunity to dip their toes in e-commerce.

The real advantage to the world from all of this is just starting to appear: In every example that I know, the manufacturers are now getting the confidence to start seriously selling directly outside of Amazon, because of their experience on Amazon.

<comment><USER3> > the manufacturers are now getting the confidence to start seriously selling > directly outside of Amazon, because of their experience on Amazon.

Hmmm. Are they concerned about marketing? That seems to be where Amazon provides a ton of value--aggregating a tremendous number of customers that are shopping. A manufacturer's website won't have the same traffic, right?

<comment><USER2> Precisely.

<comment><USER3> Err, maybe I misunderstand. Is it possible that their confidence is misguided, or are they aware that Amazon provides a tremendous platform that, if they sell direct to consumer, they'll have to replicate in some way?

<comment><USER2> Sorry, yeah, misread your question. It is really hard to expand beyond Amazon because marketing is so hard. But the few that do succeed can then control the customer relationship, so its worth the risk and investment.

<comment><USER3> Ah, yes, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up for me.

To me, it's a bit like the relationship between an author and a platform like FB or twitter. Whoever owns the customer relationship is in the driver's seat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Very interesting, great guide. As a seller, it's actually very tempting.

On the other hand however, this is everything that's wrong with Amazon. This feels messy and like wild west ecommerce. If I, as a customer, wanted to shop with little to no curation I'd do that at eBay. Since I'm rarely interested in buying that way I'd prefer Amazon to focus on quality products instead of setting up a free for all environment.

<comment><USER5> Amazon has never had curation. Other places such as Jet have curation but much fewer products.

<comment><USER6> Wouldn't user reviews technically be a form of "curation?" It's not like when I search "SD card 16gb" I go past page 2 on the search results.

<comment><USER5> Sure, crowd sourced curation.

The problem is, what happens when someone buys 100 reviews? If there was marketplace curation - wouldn't matter, still only 4 listings for SD card 16gb. But with 600 people competing and buying reviews for SD cards? Who knows what shows up as the highest reviews...

FWIW Amazon has 1,826 results for that query, and Jet has 35. I am sure Amazon has more unique products, but not that many more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Really interesting. I also followed on to this: [http://www.arbing.co.uk/create-sell-physical- product/](http://www.arbing.co.uk/create-sell-physical-product/) which is worth a read.

Nice to see all the steps laid out, it's impressive how smooth the process can be for manufacturing and selling something these days.

</comment><comment><USER8> How risky is it to ship straight from the factory to Amazon? It seems like a supplier could switch to shipping duds/rejects, Amazon would sell them for you, and you'd get a pile of 1-star reviews on your listing. Do FBA businesses do anything to deal with supplier risks?

<comment><USER9> For a quality supplier, it's not in their interest to sell you rubbish. If you make money and are successful, then so are they. Get to know them really well but make sure you get lots of samples. In saying that, some just don't sell quality products, it's up to to filter them. You can also hire people to do Quality Assurance testing at the factory on your orders.

<comment><USER10> As Vibrelli says, I use an extra step where the freight forwarder quality check every item before sending them to Amazon.

<comment><USER11> How does that work? Do they open 1 in 10, 1 in 100, etc.? Are products sealed at the factory? Or does the freight forwarder seal them for you?

<comment><USER10> They open and repack everything. Amazon requires a specific Amazon barcode, you can either pay them to do it for you for 20c an item or pay someone else to do it. I found I could get the item quality checked and barcoded for the same price as Amazon would do it.

<comment><USER11> Great answer, thanks! So quality check is 100%? And what is the defect rate? What happens when a defective product is found?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> From experience - really really research your suppliers as these will make of break your business. Many 'suppliers' on Alibaba, are not manufacturers just on-sellers. Also use other non-alibaba methods of sourcing suppliers, hire sourcing agents who speak the lingo and help vet the factories for you. Also focus on quality.. don't sell junk ;)

</comment><comment><USER12> This looks fantastic. I am curious about reselling Chinese products - why do Alibaba sellers value FBA businesses? Why don't they just set them up themselves?

<comment><USER10> Hello. I'm the guy who wrote the article. Just created an account as I saw I was getting some traffic from Hacker News.

In answer to you question: They do sell on Amazon FBA themselves. More and more so in the last year. In fact, in the seller center there are two choices for language, English and Chinese. That is why I suggest focusing on creating your own products or improving on existing ones rather than just reselling stuff from Alibaba.

Even then you need to do your own marketing. As a consumer in your own market place you should have an advantage over a Chinese seller who can only speak broken English.

It's also worth pointing out that these factories aren't in the business of creating brands. They're in the business of mass producing other people's brands. As such the more people who work with them the better, regardless of where they plan on selling the final product.

<comment><USER13> Constructive suggestion: make a note of which URLs are affiliate links, or have a referral/affiliate disclaimer on the article.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I have been selling on Amazon for about a year now.

If you have not sold on Amazon you do not understand the scale of their platform.

If you are interested in getting started I would recommend going the retail arbitrage approach first. It is a great way to get your feet wet without much risk. Trust me you will be amazed.

<comment><USER3> Here's the same author discussing retail arbitrage: [http://www.arbing.co.uk/retail-arbitrage/](http://www.arbing.co.uk/retail- arbitrage/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The article glosses over a critical element: Getting Amazon reviews and positive ratings.

Unfortunately, many sellers of new products take the easiest way out, and go to Fiverr or a similar service to pump up their product with dozens of fake reviews. A few also use fake reviews to bring down competing products. It's a broken mess that misleads buyers and hurts legitimate vendors.

<comment><USER10> I'd always recommend new sellers to not buy or fake reviews. Not just from a moral view point, but also from a business one - if Amazon catch you (which they're quite good at now) that's it, no more selling on Amazon for you.

I totally agree with you that the Amazon review system needs a complete overhaul. I've had fake reviews from competitors damaging my sales, and have seen people get hundreds of reviews in a few hours. The issue is that it's too easy to leave a fake review (you don't even need to buy the product), and too few customers leave a real one. Less than 1%.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have a small factory in Arizona, and we sell products on Amazon as well as through multiple other distribution channels. A few thoughts came to mind while reading this:

1\. China isn't the only place to get stuff made. Look locally. We manufacture our products, as well as products for two other companies who also sell partially on Amazon. You probably have local contract manufacturers like us who would appreciate a chance to compete with China. We use lots of automation, and we are cheaper than China on heavier metal goods (over 20 lbs). We are also cheaper in small runs, or MOQ is typically 1; in China it is often 1000. You probably have someone near you that can do the same.

2\. Getting a hit product isn't easy. Mostly it seems to be luck. Manufacturing is like software development; sometimes you have to iterate for a while before it all clicks with the customer. Once it clicks, its off like a rocket. One basic path to a hit product is to create a product that is a combination of others. I have a friend who makes a kit out of a bunch of specialty tools for EMT. His is the only kit on the market and is a great seller for him. Another friend had great success with an automotive accessory this Christmas season on Amazon. He sold up to 50 units a day, that season he sold 3000+ units. He was #1 on the "top seller" list. Don't forget that he had to have 3000 units in stock before this; that is a huge gamble if you are just starting out.

3\. Having a hit product isn't easy to manage. Once you get a hit product it goes 0-1,000 real quick. I had to manage 50-100% growth per month in the first year of manufacturing. Per month. With a product made out of steel. If your hit product is coming from China, I hope it is lightweight because you will end up air freighting it constantly. I once air shipped a 1000 10 mm bolts with a special head from China and it cost me $1000 in fees, $1 in shipping per $0.13 bolt. If you ever run out of stock, you will fall of the "top seller" list and your volume will plummet. China can take 3-6 months for a restock order to get made, shipped, through customs and onto Amazon warehouse. How do you keep stock for 3-6 months on hand? My friend who sold 3000 units before Christmas, he had to ship those units to Amazon FBA well before then and pay storage the whole time. The storage is sold by the cubic foot, and he had thousands of cubic feet to pay for at elevated Christmas rates.

4\. Single Point of Failure. If Amazon suddenly decides that they don't like you, sales can go from 100-0 instantly - and now you have money tied up in product, fees in storage, and no cash flow. Even if you have multiple channels, Amazon will be a BIG customer. They are about 10% of our business, and if they disappeared tomorrow it would hurt. If they are over 30% of your business, getting shut off could mean bankruptcy for you.

5\. Building a brand is hard, and a different skill set than manufacturing. The article is correct that there are thousands of manufacturers wanting to build stuff for you. How well could you build a brand in a foreign country? Especially if you are a manufacturer (focused on efficiency) and not a marketer (focused on A/b, Social, advertising)? This is why the Chinese manufacturers are happy to let a marketer take on the risk of developing a brand, seeking out a customer base. As a USA based manufacturer I am happy to make whatever you want too! We take Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, Bitcoin …..

The article is fairly complete though, I believe the author has actually done this stuff.

<comment><USER17> Serious question about point #1: I've thought about contacting local manufacturers, but I don't know where to find people such as yourself.

Do you also get discovered through Alibaba or is there some U.S. equivalent version of the site?

I'd love to try someone local for some prototypes I'm building.

<comment><USER18> Picking up a phone book is one option for finding local manufacturing firms; one benefit of dealing with someone local is that you can pick up a phone and speak to them in your own language. Another is that it significantly reduces the iteration time during the prototyping stage, since you can drive over to inspect things yourself.

Another is by web search: "contract manufacturing <city name>", "injection molding <city name>", or "machine shop <city name>".

<comment><USER19> While it's true that you can find them using a phone book or any search engine, it is not a similar experience to using Alibaba.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great article.

I'm in the process of making a physical product: a new quick-release plate for DSLRs; I did find a manufacturer in China for CNC machining and had a couple of prototypes sent to me (in France), which were of very good quality.

The problem is however, the final product will be made of several parts from different manufacturers: the plate, a rubber pad, screws, washers, a box for "clean" packaging, etc.

Are there factories that specialize in assembling/boxing a product, and what would the proper keywords be in order to look for them?

<comment><USER20> Have you asked your current suppliers if they could perform the assembly or find someone who can ? That's what my company does and it has worked well.

<comment><USER11> No, not yet, but I will.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Quite enjoyed this. I've been toying with the idea of using Amazon distribution to increase scale.

Very helpful to see the steps laid out. Thank you

</comment><comment><USER22> I don't buy stuff on Amazon because I'm in Australia (the shipping from US or UK is too expensive), but I use Ebay and there are a number of local resellers for any small electronics items I want to buy. Does anyone know of a similar site about 3rd party fulfilment centres that can do Ebay shipping?

</comment><comment><USER23> It's incredible how efficient the market is these days. Great article.</comment>


STNS allows you to easily manage Linux users with TOML-based configuration - <AUTHOR> http://stns.jp/ <comment><AUTHOR> \- Installation Guide: [http://stns.jp/en/install](http://stns.jp/en/install)

\- Configuration: [http://stns.jp/en/configuration](http://stns.jp/en/configuration)

\- Advanced Guide: [http://stns.jp/en/advanced](http://stns.jp/en/advanced)</comment>


Ask HN: Does Async API service make sense? - <AUTHOR>

I am the co-founder of a cyber fraud detection startup (beta soon). We plan to provide our API in an asynchronous mode, meaning that you can use the service anytime, but you don't get the results immediately. You would be able to poll for updates (API or web interface) or get the results by email.
Does it make any sense to provide an asynchronous API? Any services that work in this manner?
Thoughts/comments/questions <comment><USER2> Several APIs work like that. One example I can think of is IQEngines' (see [http://developer.iqengines.com/apidoc/current/apis/query- api...](http://developer.iqengines.com/apidoc/current/apis/query-api.html)). You upload an image and a few moments later need to query another endpoint to get your results.

One thing that makes it easy for developers is that they do provide a web hook feature (as does the likes of Github).

@skram</comment>


Making Sense of Political Texts with NLP and t-SNE - <AUTHOR> http://blog.caseystella.com/senate-speech-investigation.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Just wanted to add that I'm the author. If anyone has any questions, I'm happy to comment here.</comment>


Mountain Lion UX Fail - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/i_am_goran/status/230520963207409664

<comment><USER2> How do you click that? You just click it - it really works (I just tried!)

<comment><USER3> Arrow keys would probably work too to select it.</comment></comment>


Flat UI: Free Web User Interface Kit - <AUTHOR> http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/ <comment><USER2> I love the work that was put into this and there are some elements that I think are done extremely well and stand on their own...but after seeing a page where _everything_ is flat, I've totally joined the non-flat side of the debate, due to the confusion/ambiguity of the interface...the buttons were especially jarring for me.

<comment><USER3> It gets worse on something like Windows 8's Metro where you get to see like 20 different square blocks, each with a different color, that may update all the time too. Try not to get a brain seizure from that.

<comment><USER4> Actually, Metro works much better because _everything_ is clickable. Every block has an action. UI kits like this are considerably less intuitive.

<comment><USER5> But everything in this UI kit _is_ clickable. Design and clickability of elements is down to the designer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> While very pretty, these controls make me feel like an old person who is learning how to use a computer for the first time. I have no idea how anything will respond if I click on it. It's a bit unnerving, but helps me empathize with first-time computer users.

<comment><USER7> I agree with the usability; in terms of aesthetics, it also simply feels heavy-handed.

I don't know where to look, or where to click, because there's simply no nuance -- it's all big boring blocks of colors. It's the opposite of delightful.

<comment><USER8> I generally agreee with the feeling, but keep in mind that on a regular page, the elements would not be all packed together as in this showcase. I imagine the feel would be substantially different.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Am I the only one who doesn't love the whole flat trend? It seems like once the novelty wears off, it becomes bland more than anything else.

<comment><USER10> Flat trend? Flat design has been around for decades, i.e. Josef Muller Brockmann

<comment><USER7> Josef Muller Brockmann wasn't designing discoverable interactive UIs, he was designing for print.

There's a difference, and flat design advocates would do us all a favor if they'd try to remember it.

<comment><USER10> The fact that he wasn't designing for web doesn't mean his style (or other creatives for that matter) didn't influence the medium. Not to mention there is nothing that says a flat style is superior given that there are so many additional factors in web analytics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If I saw the unchecked checkbox without a nearby checked one for comparison, I don't think I would know what it is. The solid fill strays a little too much from the paradigm.

Other than that, beautiful design.

<comment><USER12> Agreed. Perhaps replace the unchecked box with the current disabled checked, then use a darker center to signify "disabled".

<comment><USER11> Or, for consistency it could have the gray border and white fill like the unselected radio button. _(Every designer's dream - unsolicited design by committee. Yay!)_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> FlatStrap -- <http://littlesparkvt.com/flatstrap/>

It's exactly what you think it is.

<comment><USER14> Flat Strap is good but it lacks with components

<comment><USER13> I'm not affiliated with the project but please do open an issue over at Github.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Just as a joke, I'd like to see someone do a Skeu UI, the polar opposite, one with such ridiculous degrees of skeuomorphism, that you want to laugh. Maybe have it look like a WW2 era Navy Cockpit.

<comment><USER2> The Google-for-Mad-Men site was so popular it's a little surprising that you haven't gotten what you asked for

<http://www.masswerk.at/google60/>

<comment><USER15> Oh my god, that's awesome. Thanks for the link.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm confused as to why people seem to think that only designs featuring large blocks of color and strong accents qualify as "flat UI". What is this 'style' a reaction to? Gradients? Drop shadows? What for? Does anyone really think that employing this aesthetic will free them from some perceived constraints imposed by current fashion? Does anyone think that the elimination of drop shadows will free the user to think about computing in more abstract, powerful terms?

Look around the web, and it is apparent that "flat ui" is already the standard. Indeed, I find it difficult to find many popular sites that makes heavy use of drop shadows and gradients to simulate light. Why is this single aesthetic now being heralded as the way forward while computing has been predominantly "flat" for most of its history?

I think people tend to forget that exercises in style ( such as this ) don't necessarily equate to design. The choices made in any given design must consider content and audience. Anything else becomes decoration, not design.

<comment><USER17> You used a lot of words to make strawman arguments, gave anecdotal evidence, then berated the same strawman, but really said nothing at all.

This is data dump, much like how there are data dumps of CSS styles, gradient buttons, and WordPress themes all over the internets. People use it if they want to, or not.

<comment><USER16> This comment was more of a response to the discussion surrounding the whole "flat design" trend. Perhaps I should have responded to a particular comment, but my thoughts on the subject weren't specific to any one person's opinions.

My thoughts, put another way, are that I don't like that this particular aesthetic is now being held up as some great way forward in UI design. I don't like the discussions that seem so frequent here, that completely miss the point. This is merely a style, and really has little or nothing to do with affordances or whatever reasons often professed by supporters and detractors when it comes up.

The fact that this particular look has attracted so much debate and thought is what confuses me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I think it's a bit too raw - unpolished at places. The "Messages" menu item for example; the red notification circle with the count of unread messages is off in padding. Some icons are a bit fuzzy when they should be clear (<http://dribbble.com/shots/492245-Idiot-Tip-2>, if you don't follow me).

Why do people insist on creating a ton of bootstraps, straps or "Web UI Kits"? Let me rephrase the question, why do people want to make the web look the same? These days all I see is some site with Twitter Bootstrap on it and I'm pretty sure it's proven that it's really rare when someone bothers to use those UI kits or straps and make them their own, so in the end you don't help developers with those things, you make them more lazier.

<http://xkcd.com/927/>

<comment><USER19> To be fair, you only notice when it does look the same - you don't notice when someone has customized it successfully.

<comment><USER18> On the majority of cases, not true. The stink of a bootstrap is still there even if it's mostly over-designed. But that's not the point, the point is there's so many sites out there with just bootstrap - nothing else - and that is bloody horrible. Developers should stop inventing ways to be more lazy and just do what they do.

SASS, LESS, Bootstraps, insert_whatever_thing are just tools that ideally help to be more productive, but a few years in and you rarely see any raw code or from-scratch work. And they won't care either, because "it's more productive" is a perfect argument.

<comment><USER20> You seem to miss the point that many of those sites wouldn't have been launched in the first place if a way to make it look half-decent, fast, wasn't widely available. Making a website, especially a web app, takes some breaking inertia, if you've ever tried you'll know, and anything that helps you in getting it out is one step further from not launching at all. Given popularity, the design can be amended. A non-launch has nothing to amend, and is, if nothing else, a tiny loss for the web.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Text boxes don't look like text boxes. Buttons don't look like buttons. Checked toggles might be easily confused with unchecked. Toggles also look like something you should drag, but do nothing unless you click them. Unchecked check-boxes look like oversized bullets from a bullet list.

Moreover, most controls are not semantic and simply stop working if you disable JavaScript. (And no, I don't care whether you consider this issue relevant or not. Users of text browsers, screen-readers, some mobile browsers and people with JS blockers _will_ consider it relevant.)

Moreover #2, these controls don't blend in with text at all. They will distract users from actual website content.

</comment><comment><USER22> This is particularly interesting in the context of the widespread accusation that flat UIs tend to have worse discoverability (example: [http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing- usab...](http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-usability/)). If you inspect the key navigational and menu elements, they did a pretty nice job making it visually obvious (with hover states, borders, shapes etc.) what kind of functionality those flat blobs of color offer. ;)

<comment><USER23> Related to your point about UI discoverability, I really like this article on the concept of "Almost Flat Design".

<http://www.matthewmooredesign.com/almost-flat-design/>

This points out how important and useful the subtle and tasteful use of gradients and shadows can be within flat designs.

<comment><USER24> that's the most realistic post of them all. And basically what he says here, is what everyone should be doing. Design for your objective, your message, not for a trend. Use flat elements if they are an advantage to your project, use realism if it benefits your message. Basically, use whatever you want that may help you accomplish your objective.

<comment><USER22> Well put.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I really love the flat design trend. Does anyone know of any good photoshop/illustrator tutorials that teach this new trend?

<comment><USER26> Read some books about Swiss design :)

[http://www.richardhollis.com/books-as-author-and- designer/sw...](http://www.richardhollis.com/books-as-author-and- designer/swiss-graphic-design)

<comment><USER24> but now I see, that most people that like the flat design "trend", probably have no notion of design history and never even heard about the international typographic style. And that worries me, a lot.

<comment><USER26> Some of us have though, and I'll talk for days about International Style to anyone who asks :)

<comment><USER25> How do I go about asking?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Ouch, someone just sent in a DMCA:

[https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerV...](https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerVault.md)

Now you can't download it, however the OP link still seems to work fine.

Is this a troll DMCA? I don't get it.

<comment><USER28> Looks like it comes from these folks. <https://layervault.com/>

<comment><USER29> [https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerV...](https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerVault.md)

this guys said about "exclusive rights holder for the artwork contained within Flat UI, Free Web User Interface Kit; These exclusive rights are being violated by material available upon your site at the following URL:

<http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/>

i made an comparison with <http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/>

what artwork in Flat UI is the same??? layervault are crazy?

<comment><USER30> At least they got some traffic to their site!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Just beautiful. It looks so refreshing after getting used to Twitter Bootstrap. I love Bootstrap but it's everywhere on the internet now. This looks pretty refreshing and neat. Well done.

<comment><USER32> Agreed, have you seen Bootstrap's new default feel/theme?<http://rc.getbootstrap.com>

It's also more flat and metro. Anyone know of a release date?

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Very nice looking.

Bootstrap 3 is actually headed towards a flatter look (a little like this), so buttons and the nav-bar don't have gradients in the newest version of Bootstrap by default.

<comment><USER34> Where can I preview Bootstrap 3?

<comment><USER33> You can look at the 3.0.0-wip branch on Github. You'll have to download the source yourself and compile it to use it, though.

Technically the CSS is already compiled inside of the docs directory for the documentation, if you wanted to use that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Weirdly, nobody is complaining about the contrast. This might all seem crisp on a high-def screen in good lighting conditions, but try a cheap tablet or laptop and evaluate again. Elderly have tremendous problems reading the labels on the buttons. Try the firefox plugin [https://addons.mozilla.org/en- us/firefox/addon/wcag-contrast...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- us/firefox/addon/wcag-contrast-checker/) to evaluate the contrast.

<comment><USER36> Just saw this elsewhere on HN and it seemed appropriate: <http://contrastrebellion.com/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> OFFICIAL page is here guys - <http://designmodo.com/flat-free/>

</comment><comment><USER37> Animations are fun. I recently created my first animated widget and it felt great. Going from "it works" to "it works and is animated" is a huge step. The animation really helps to tell the story of the switching in my widget. Think the animation of the Chrome tabs when you're switching them by dragging.

</comment><comment><USER38> First somehow this broke my history so when I hit back I got to the same page.

Second and far more importantly your use of "Big Buck Bunny" is in violation of its copyright. While "Big Buck Bunny" is Creative Commons you either have to provide attribution or show the video in its entirety including its credits.

</comment><comment><USER39> "Free" is vague, but accurate. CC-BY-3.0 specifically, though I had to download the zip to find that out.

</comment><comment><USER40> This usage of color only fails entirely for color blind people isn't it?

Minimalism is about making it as simple as possible, and not simpler. Texture is a way to add redundancy and even when not facing people with disabilities, in communication a level of redundancy/repetition is _good_

</comment><comment><USER41> I decided to view it as a blind person might, but removing all styles ("View->Page Style->No Style") and it was interesting to see what was still a user interface (toggles were) and what wasn't (buttons weren't) and what was in between (tags).

<comment><USER42> I think it's a worry that controls like radio buttons are using non symantic mark up.

Is this down to a problem with browser vendors not allowing full styling of basic controls? Perhaps they should have a no css tag, simular to no scrip that lets you put a radio button in there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I can't believe people even mention Josef Muller Brockmann to compare this UI kit with something like Minimalism. People at Designmodo are telling you to "...better to use different shades of provided colors than new." This is not a flat design guide, this is not minimalism. This is fashion trend. This is dogma.

And as designers we shouldn't be following trends so easily, so blindly. We have the knowledge to create interfaces that work. We don't need pre-baked buttons and colors.

Shame on us.

</comment><comment><USER44> No clear link to the normal github page was a bit frustrating.

<https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI>

</comment><comment><USER45> Very neat. Couple of nitpicks with the toggle controls though. The animation looks kind of weird here. Instead of sliding the visible "knob" from one end to the other, it animates the "knob" entirely away and brings in a second "knob" that represents the other state. This feels extremely bizarre to me. Also, double-clicking a toggle control selects part of the page.

<comment><USER46> We will fix it soon. Thanks for the comment!

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Hey guys, don't know if you read the comments of your social networks or hacker news first but I've sent an email to your info@ email regarding this post and also posted on your recent social networks' updates. Hoping to hear back from you. Again, thank you for putting this out! :-)

</comment><comment><USER48> Amazing. Too bad the site itself was not responsive, and nothing was put in there to adapt to a mobile display. All you saw was a white page. The scrolls are hidden on iOS, so you could scroll and/or zoom out to see the rest, but nothing is indicated that it's doable.

</comment><comment><USER49> Here's a great article that discusses the 'Metro', or 'Flat' design pattern that is now gracing the shores of many new up and coming projects and websites → <http://sachagreif.com/the-flat-sink/>

</comment><comment><USER50> I am building a demo site with this just to test things out. I feel like a grid is missing from the demo. I would also like to see how he does the single color background like in the screenshot. I don't see a way I can recreate that given the toolset.

<comment><USER51> If by grid, you mean "table" I've built one with it. Might put it on github after I've fixed the rough edges. The design inherits bootstraps css so it includes a grid layout by default.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> I really like this kit. To me eye, it's very stylish and smooth. I feel like there are tons of "safe & technical" developers on HN, to the point where a UI has to be done by the "rules" for it to be acceptable.

Thanks for the kit it's awesome.

</comment><comment><USER53> Agree with most of the usability comments here but have to give kudos for the color selection. They are phenomenal. I'd love to see a bootstrap theme implement these. Maybe I'll whip up the sass vars file later.

</comment><comment><USER54> Really beautiful design. However, I'm not really sure what this is trying to be. Is it a fork of Bootstrap or do they see themselves as a separate entity. Because if this is indeed a fork of Bootstrap I do have a few grievances:

\- Why are there no fixed to top navbars? \- What about lists or stacked navs? \- I don't see any responsive behaviour \- It seems to be missing almost all of js from Bootstrap and doesn't have equivalent implementations in most cases. \- Hover based dropdown menu is a bit irritating, much rather have click based events. But that's a personal preference.

On the whole it's beautifully designed but it's missing so much in comparison to Bootstrap that it becomes useless for building apps.

Also, maybe mention Bootstrap somewhere on the page.

</comment><comment><USER55> The icons are available here: <http://www.iconfinder.com/search/?q=iconset%3Aflat-ui-free>

The glyph are coming in a few :-)

</comment><comment><USER56> Don't put a buy now button if the product is not available. I tried buying it from 3 different links and was just greeted with a subscribe form. Also, raise your prices by 10 dollars.

</comment><comment><USER57> These are nice, but I wish they hadn't picked the exact same shade of green as Layer Vault ( <https://layervault.com/> )…

<comment><USER58> You mean turquoise? It's a pretty commonly used colour.

In terms of exactness, it isn't the same colour either.

<comment><USER57> Yes it is. #00bd9c vs #00b290, I doubt you can tell the difference with the naked eye.

<comment><USER59> They're actually quite different <http://i.imgur.com/LxoNXK2.png>

<comment><USER60> Any two colors start to look very different when you put huge blocks of them next to each other. It's called Color Relativity. (That's half of why Josef Albers's illusions work in the first place...)

Regardless, it's clearly _very_ inspired.

The face icon: [http://dribbble.com/shots/884574-Designer-News- Badges?list=u...](http://dribbble.com/shots/884574-Designer-News- Badges?list=users?list=users) [http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault- icon-set-for-del...](http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for- delivery?list=users)

The gears icon: [http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for- del...](http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for- delivery?list=users)

The newspaper icon: [http://antoniopratas.com/blog/wp- content/uploads/2013/01/des...](http://antoniopratas.com/blog/wp- content/uploads/2013/01/designer_news.png)

The clock icon: [http://antoniopratas.com/blog/wp- content/uploads/2013/01/des...](http://antoniopratas.com/blog/wp- content/uploads/2013/01/designer_news.png)

Don't really know what's going on with the icon collection... they are all in slightly different styles and don't fit together at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> This is what I think people call "clever" webdesign.

It looks good, but practically, it's not going to work very well for the reasons people in the comments have so elaborately laid out.

</comment><comment><USER62> Nice yeah, but I think shadows for buttons will make it best. Also way make it with sass when bootstrap use less? That complicate retrofit it for older projects...

</comment><comment><USER63> Cool!

If you're thinking about buying one of the paid packs, I've purchased some of the earlier design elements kits from Designmodo and found them to be super high quality.

</comment><comment><USER64> Actually like it. I wont necessarily use it but as an option I am sure there are people out there who will find it a perfect fit for some use-cases.

</comment><comment><USER65> It's very beautiful, but as danso commented it's very jarring.

I appreciate it, but I'm afraid I don't personally like the look of it, I'd never use it myself.

</comment><comment><USER66> Where could non-designers learn how to use color swatches in custom designs?

The Flat UI's Color Swatches look delicious and I'd like to learn to use them.

<comment><USER53> Generally color swatches are paired to give a suggestion for a complementary or accent color that is determined according to prevailing color theory. Sometimes you'll see the primary color with 2 to 4 other swatches, depending on the color relation used (tertiary, complementary, etc).

I use compass-colors to apply this concept to my stylesheets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Taken down by DCMA: <https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI>

</comment><comment><USER68> The challenge for flat UI is to create depth and I love the depth you gave to the vector icons

</comment><comment><USER69> Really nice. I get a very Soviet feel from it. Bright colors, round corners, very monumental.

</comment><comment><USER70> Resizing the window seems to screw with the positioning of the tooltops (Chrome, Windows 7).

</comment><comment><USER71> Re: maintainability... does this add to bootstrap, or do you use their modified copy of it?

<comment><USER46> This is add-on, which modify bootstrap default skin. So if your site is on bootstrap - you can easily change design in one line of code. But we change not each elements, only defaults. More features will be in pro version.

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> I've actually had a project in mind for a while now that this is perfect for. Cool beans.

</comment><comment><USER73> Very Pretty. Reminds me of the Otl Aicher Munich Olympics icon and typography work.

</comment><comment><USER74> The icons, while nice, seem to have depth (shadows, etc). Is that still flat?

</comment><comment><USER75> I think this is beautiful. Thank you for creating it and sharing on github.

</comment><comment><USER76> Love the design. It's exactly what I need for a project I'm working on.

</comment><comment><USER77> Lots of pretty things but the pagination is definitely questionable.

</comment><comment><USER78> The color scheme of the icon makes me think of Dropbox...

</comment><comment><USER79> just started with node yesterday, to bring on my new website, and i totally love FlatUIs, so thats a perfect css for me =) will use it today.

</comment><comment><USER80> Am I the only one who see debian logo at footer?

</comment><comment><USER81> You should add a link of your github project.

</comment><comment><USER82> Crocodile is always the hero that I choose.

</comment><comment><USER83> The color swatches paired up very nicely!

</comment><comment><USER84> This is amazing, good job guys.

</comment><comment><USER85> it's not that bad. but I find the non-flat giant diamond icon rather ironic. :)

</comment><comment><USER86> hmmm seems this has been taken down for copyright issues.

</comment><comment><USER87> so glad you guys finished this!

</comment><comment><USER29> Very nice!

</comment><comment><USER88> that is really great :D

</comment><comment><USER89> Stunningly beautiful!

</comment><comment><USER90> nice!

</comment><comment><USER91> sehksy

</comment><comment><USER92> Subscribed and waiting for release. Perfect UI kit, detailed design.

Waiting for responsive pro version.

<comment><USER93> Responsive? sounds nice.

<comment><USER94> This is built on bootstrap, and includes the responsive css. Throw everything in a container-fluid.

<comment><USER54> yes but the collapsing features are not applicable i.e. navbars won't collapse or elements won't auto hide, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER95> Awesome, thanks for sharing!</comment>


MVP is about not wasting your life - <AUTHOR> http://istommydrunk.svbtle.com/mvp-is-about-not-wasting-your-life

<comment><USER2> I would replace fear with pride and vanity. the behavior seems to be more about the anxiety of looking bad in front of your peers than evolving a business model or product. its unfortunate because smart people from past successes seem to be more afflicted than those with 'less to lose'

<comment><AUTHOR> You're not wrong. Not at all.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Optimal shop sorting? - <AUTHOR>

We have an online shop has a lot of user submitted items.
Up to now we sort by default by newest, but it's becoming a mess now, hard to find the good items.
Are there any algorithms or suggestions for best sorting?
We are considering a ranking based on:
Sort by revenue generated with a weight for age (previous 24 hours sales * 100 + previous one week sales * 30 + previous months sales * 20 + previous year * 10 or whatever)
Any suggestions? <comment><USER2> Hi, I'm new to programming but I'd like to ask a few questions: 1\. What's your definition of good items? 2\. Do you think your problem sounds like it could be solved by genetic algorithms (provided that computational costs are acceptable)? It seems like a possible way to think about it would be to let the best selling products compete to be on the first page. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm></comment>


Nissan's Path to Self-Driving Cars? Humans in Call Centers - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/2017/01/nissans-self-driving-teleoperation/ <comment><USER2> This is the obvious stopgap measure so you can get to market when your self- driving software is very very good but not quite perfect. You use the data from these situations to improve the software, requiring fewer and fewer manual interventions until you only need human assistance in truly exceptional situations like physical damage to the sensors.

I wouldn't be surprised to see an almost-entirely-self-driving car service in certain areas in the nearish future. As long as it's 100% safe and only requires assistance rarely, it makes sense to start building out the infrastructure sooner rather than later.

<comment><USER3> Level 4 self-driving seems the second-least desirable after Level 0, as it's entirely passive but requires full active attention. It's a ripe situation for distraction, something Tesla cars attempt to combat with the "wheel-squeeze".

From a cynical perspective, it's easy to see a future where we constantly approach, but never quite reach, full Level 5 autonomy - or at least not with existing technology. Maybe Level 5 will prove to be an NP problem. Marketing teams are likely going to promote terms like "Level 4.1 self-driving" or "Level 4.5 self-driving" or "Level 4.9 self-driving", as edge-cases are slowly resolved.

<comment><USER4> > Maybe Level 5 will prove to be an NP problem.

Humans are able to "Level 5" driving, so...

<comment><USER5> For a subset of cases, but not all of them, as traffic safety statistics show.

<comment><USER6> Yup. Humans are allowed to make mistakes and fail fatally. If self-driving cars make a single fatal mistake, then watch out for negative press coverage for weeks. Why? Because every failure can be traced back to a root cause. Every root cause (other than something like another driver literally trying to kill you) looks like an incompetent screw-up after peeling back all the layers. In principle, self-driving cars are basically perfectly safe (as a system). So every failure causes righteous fingerpointing.

...which is also partly the motivation to improve.

I expect self-driving cars long-term to be a lot like air travel. It'll have a reputation for being super unsafe, with lots of people paranoid of it, for decades after it has far eclipsed the safety of regular human car driving. The paranoid hyper-focus and ridiculous press coverage is also what will enable it to become essentially perfect (like passenger air travel is today in the developed world).

<comment><USER7> > Yup. Humans are allowed to make mistakes and fail fatally.

It's because in almoost all cases, one fatal mistake results in one fatal accident. And in most cases, the failing party is part of the accident - giving us reason enough to believe people to what they can to avoid it.

With AI, one sloppy mistake can be the root cause of 100 fatalities, with no risk to the one who made the mistake. That's part of the reason we don't accept it.

<comment><USER6> I think you're right that human drivers makes it a lot easier to blame the victim (even though it's really the whole system that made it possible for the human to make such a mistake that is responsible... the system isn't held to account because it's just so easy to blame the human for making the proximate fatal error).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This idea will never work. Putting aside all other reasons — the liability equation doesn't make sense.

Imagine being a lowly "meat bag" in the call center. You're presented with an endless stream of situations so difficult that the robot can't solve. Eventually, you make a mistake, and people die. Checkmate.

<comment><USER9> Sounds like 9-1-1 operators. I'm sure there's a way to make it work, but it won't happen over night and unfortunately most processes are the result of learning from mistakes which in this context are potentially life threatening.

<comment><USER8> Seems different than 9-1-1 operators, who are responsible for passing information to first responders. These autonomous car operators would make decisions such as "go ahead and ignore the construction cones." They won't simply say, "okay, I'll send a police crew out to the intersection to triage the confusing construction cones."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think I find the prospect of a random call center employee being able to commandeer my vehicle more concerning than AI screwups.

<comment><USER11> >I think I find the prospect of a random call center employee being able to commandeer my vehicle more concerning than AI screwups.

Whether the commands are given by an AI or a call center employee, I would additionally highlight the "remote" part (please read as "over a possiby flaky GSM or satellite connection that can have an hiccup at _any_ time).

<comment><USER4> The way the article (and pictures) describes it, the car will receive a full instruction package before starting to execute it. And all regular systems (collision avoidance, ...) will presumably still be active.

<comment><USER11> >The way the article (and pictures) describes it, the car will receive a full instruction package before starting to execute it. And all regular systems (collision avoidance, ...) will presumably still be active

Will receive the "full instruction package" IF the connection works at the needed time or however before it is needed.

The approach could be very good for whatever you have time for AND that is not "vital", just as an example to correct a navigation plan, but for something in an "emergency" the reliability of the connection at the right time needs to be taken into account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> It makes a lot of sense to me, we're way off an AI being able to cope with random construction sites. But then it does have to be able to cope with out comms, for example there was a recent self-driving truck case where the truck came to a stop because the remote office had just lost power - that would be a mess if there were thousands on the streets.

<comment><USER13> > we're way off an AI being able to cope with random construction sites.

And this is why level 5 autonomous cars are basically strong AI: current roads assume that a human controls every vehicle. When some guys want to unload a truck full of bricks, they park, turn on the flashers, and wave traffic through in alternating directions. Humans understand this, but good luck teaching a robot. The Nissan solution of having the robot freak out for 30 seconds before a remote operator moves it out of the way is better than nothing, but hardly great.

<comment><AUTHOR> This just gave me a thought. What if the onboard self-driving system doesn't really need the teleoperator to take over completely, but to select from a set of decisions in difficult situations? The teleoperator doesn't need to watch the footage continuously, but only needs to respond quickly when the onboard system generates an alert.

<comment><USER14> Only a subset of decisions (can I proceed as normal) are easily dealt with as yes/no answers. "How do I proceed through this environment which is playing havoc with my sensors?" is less straightforward.

Of course, there's a big class of problems which can't be dealt with by remote takeover at all, such as "should I hit this unclassified small obstruction that's entered the roadway or brake/swerve in a manner almost certain to result in a collision?"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Having rented a 2017 Altima last summer, and finding it to have only non- adaptive cruise control, I'm somewhat surprised to see an article on Nissan cars having self-driving capabilities. From another article[0], Adaptive Cruise, Lane Assist, and Automated Braking (ACLAAB) are set to launch in the 2019 Leaf. But the article makes it clear that these in no way make the car autonomous, and the driver must constantly be ready to engage. Instead of using a "wheel-squeeze" like Tesla, Nissan's car uses steering wheel torque data to tell if you're holding the wheel.

Combining the two, it sounds like their system is ACLAAB that comes to a full stop and "phones home" when it gets confused. But how often will it get confused? Will it be better than the self-check bag sensor detecting your reusable bag correctly? And how long will it take someone in their call center to "pick up their phone call" and remotely drive the car?

This might be an acceptable situation for driving elderly people to the grocery store. But it's going to cause a great deal of frustration for other drivers - having to deal with cars that stop at random spots on the street or highway - and sit there for up to a minute as someone remotes in to drive.

[0] [http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2017/07/nissan- propilot-a...](http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2017/07/nissan-propilot- assist-takes-adaptive-cruise-control-to-the-next-level.html)

<comment><USER15> I thought Tesla also used wheel torque data? [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/how-does- autopilot-s...](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/how-does-autopilot- sense-hands-on-wheel.75905/)

> _One method is to detect torque on the steering wheel, hinted Musk. "So we > might issue a visual and auditory alert to make sure you're okay."_

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm trying to articulate how pointless this sounds. First, you create some AI system that's supposed to help take the human out of the loop in order to improve safety (allegedly). You realise there are still situations your AI can't handle. You decide to give control to a human outside the car, in a call centre. So now the human brain is back in control, except it's not the human in the car (presumably, there is a human in the car?), but someone completely different.

So you have to spend the resources to develop self-driving technology _and_ to maintain a stable of remote drivers. And all that- for what? Human brains are still in control of cars and car AI is still dumb as bricks often enough to make them less safe than humans. If you had problems with humans forced to jump in and take control at a moment's notice where the car failed, before, now you're making these problems even worse by having someone take control _remotely_ so that they're even less aware of the unfolding situation than the human in the car.

It's just ...pointless. It makes even less sense than a car that drives itself safely only when you're paying attention (hey, I can kill myself when I'm not paying attention just fine on my own, I don't need an AI car to do that).

<comment><USER17> The point is that you would only need this .01% of the time, and in everyday driving, the autonomous vehicle would be safer than a human

<comment><USER16> Where is that "0.01% of the time" coming from?

And what about the claim that the rest of the time the self-driving car is safer than a human? How do we know that self-driving cars are safer than cars driven by a human?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I might be missing something, but why wouldn't the passengers step in and override the car? Is this assuming the car is unmanned?

</comment><comment><USER19> The current problem, as mentioned in the article, is that signage for exceptional situations is made good enough for human drivers, but not for self-driving cars.

When self-driving cars become more prevalent, couldn't we have standardized signage that allows the cars to deal with exceptional road conditions like the example in the article?

Agreeing on industry-wide standards (insert relevant xkcd link here) can make such situations solvable for the machine, by employing well-recognizable clues that signify, for example, 'ignore red light and drive on opposite side of the street'.

</comment><comment><USER20> Why was this article resurrected from Jan 2017? What makes this relevant now?</comment>


Brain-Computer Interface Demonstration by Emotiv - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40L3SGmcPDQ

<comment><USER2> For those interested, these interfaces are just based on some findings on kinaesthetic behaviour. Signals are hierarchical and based on population vectors.

It would be interesting to see if one could model other working memory problems with population vectors...

</comment><comment><USER3> Emotiv is such a trainwreck; part vaporware, part straight old-fashioned fail.

They're literally years behind schedule with a product that doesn't work (see [http://killerprojects.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/arduino- assis...](http://killerprojects.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/arduino-assisted- mind-controlled-tv-using-eeg/)) and is based on a theoretically flawed operating principle. They were a great PR machine for about a year a long time ago and since then have had one fiasco after another.</comment>