Apple fined $368 million after losing FaceTime patent lawsuit - Suraj-Sun http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/402444/20121107/apple-fined-facetime-patent-infringement-case.htm

<comment><AUTHOR> Apple will probably get little press for this, but it was just as unfair to them as the Samsung lawsuit was unfair to Samsung. Software patents (and ultra-cooperative courts) are a problem no matter which angle you look at it. It is not Apple, nor Samsung, nor VirnetX (wow that name sucks)—but the _system_ which allows them to take advantage of patents that needs to be fixed.

<comment><USER2> If Apple takes some expensive licks in this system it is less likely that they will advocate to keep it. I'm all for entities that use software patents as a sword to be hit hard financially as often as possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> _Apple lawyer Danny Williams told the jury that the iPhone maker does not owe money to VirnetX, adding that the company is "not entitled to money for things they did not invent. The VirnetX technology, if used, is a small part of very large, complex products."_

That's the line I like the best. Considering the kind of crazy lawsuits going on between Apple, Samsung et al, I wonder if this can be used by lawyers of defending parties in their next patent lawsuit! :)

</comment><comment><USER4> What makes me curious is whether this lawsuit has anything to do with Apple never actually submitting FaceTime to the standard bodies.

<comment><USER5> I was beginning to think that I had completely hallucinated Steve Jobs telling the world that FaceTime was going to be an open standard.

<comment><USER6> I read somewhere that the FaceTime developers learned that fact from Steve's keynote as well.

<comment><USER4> Yes, that happened, at least according to one dude: [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/05/11/facetime- standar...](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/05/11/facetime-standard)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How much time do developers spend looking at patents? If I want to build something, I will figure out how it should go together and make it. Does a patent still apply if a developer can prove they discovered how to do it separate from the person who originally patented it?

<comment><USER8> The general recommendation for developers is to not look at patents ever. Infringing a patent you know about is more expensive than getting blind sided.

Yes, the patent still applies.

As John Carmac (Doom/Quake engine writer) said:

 _The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying._

<comment><USER9> But on what basis can a developer be accused of knowing something if he chooses to deliberately deny knowing it? Or, put it another way, is there a reliable method for a developer to prove that he knew nothing about the patent in question? Because, if there is such a method, I don't understand why not to look at patents. Also, if there is _no_ such a method, then again - I can be accused of anything, so why not to go look at it anyway?

The idea of patenting paths of reasoning is such a nonsense.

<comment><USER8> If you are willing to lie under oath for unlawful personal gain, then the laws will guide your actions in a different manner.

<comment><USER9> This is not exactly what I'm trying to understand. Is the oath enough (when we're talking about $368 million)? Will there be no investigation of what I said under oath anyway? What do you mean by 'am I willing to lie under oath'? If I'm infringing, but there is no certain (more or less) way of proving I knew about the damn patents, I am willing to lie. I am _going_ to lie, and I'm not announcing it to the court, of course.

The whole concept of oath seems to be very weak.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> How soon until we hit the patent abuse endgame, where all technology companies lay off everybody but the lawyers and just sue each other into oblivion?

</comment><comment><USER11> Maybe Apple and other corps. should offer subsidized housing in this part of Texas, to outsiders, with the criteria being that you must be against patent trolling.

</comment><comment><USER12> Flagged. Patent awards are equitable compensation. A fine is a punitive measure.

<comment><USER13> Most patent awards include a punitive component, so fine is not a completely inaccurate term.</comment></comment>


This May Hurt a Bit: Harvard medical student's blog - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/this-may-hurt-a-bit/

<comment><USER2> This article puts a human touch on a human situation, from their point of view. As a volunteer firefighter I see more stuff than you normally would on average and it gives you a different perspective. For instance:

Before I got into this field, I always thought of firefighters, paramedics and doctors as magical superheroes that can fix anything. As long as you make it to their doorstep you'll be fine. This is not not always the case. the amount of people who are unsaveable would shock you. Even in the very best of care.

That's not a slight on firefighters, paramedics or doctors in the least bit, I'm just saying from statistics perspective there are way too many things out there that will kill you no matter what. They really are superheroes in the sense that they do extraordinary things every day and they always bring their A game. They do things you just wouldn't think possible because of how much they push themselves.

I've also seen what is described in the top article of this blog. When you see someone pass and you see just how much was done to save them. Even a 90+ year old person who at best would have a good year or two left, and I've seen doctors pull out all the stops and work just as hard as they would anyone else. The only difference is the patient is even more fragile at this stage. Life is life and they get it.

I've seen people work and struggle when it was very clear things are over. CPR that goes on long after the patient is past the point of no return. I've never seen anyone "throw in the towel" too early and I've seen people push and fight when everyone in the room knows what the outcome will be.

In short, everyone should read things like this and get a glimpse of this perspective. I don't know what you can take from it, but it sure will make you appreciate first responders and ER personnel more. At best it will make you appreciate life more.

<comment><USER3> I'm a biomedical engineer and have been working with surgeons for a few years. I'm always impressed with their perspective given the situation of surgery. To the surgical team, its just another day in the office. To the person on the table, it is one of the most important days in the life.

I have been fortunate enough to be invited into the OR to observe a few surgeries. The first time, I was shocked at how casual the situation was to the people involved. The atmosphere is more like a workshop than you see on TV dramas involving surgeons (music playing, people chatting about what their kids and weekends, etc. like told in the article).

But after thinking about it some more, this is the atmosphere that's needed. Everyone is calm and collected, and not going to make a mistake from being stressed out. Being stressed out at work every day simply isn't sustainable. Some of these surgeries are tough jobs too, involving standing for hours in awkward positions (which can lead to long-term injuries). These men and women are true professionals - even on routine work they sacrifice their own comfort and well-being for the welfare of their patients.

Agree that it is good to make the perspectives of the original article more widely seen to appreciate what they do!

<comment><USER2> You're absolutely right, that is what's needed. It's the same with the fire service, you'll notice most firefighters are pretty calm but fast. This is because of countless hours of training and building to make the men and women involved think in a very calm, procedural fashion. It doesn't reduce the gravitas of the situation but it's a situation where you know what you should do because you've trained and/or done it so many times. I imagine with a surgeon this is magnified many times over.

In Fire Academy they say "We want to train you so you there are so many things you'll do automatically and not even think about. That way you don't panic and also you can use the available thought power for the exceptions in the situation, not the basics"

Also they want you prepared. "You never see a garbage man pull into a neighborhood and say OH SH*T LOOK AT ALL THESE CANS!! HOW AM I GOING TO DO THIS? because they're prepared for it and have a plan".

<comment><USER4> Nice to meet a fellow firefighter here.

<comment><USER2> Nice! yeah it's a bit rare. Is it just me are there a lot of parallels between software and the fire service? haha.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The first article about the guy who died during a hip replacement surgery (?). It's terribly sad for everyone else, but when I go, that's one of the best ways I can imagine it happening. You go down optimistic for a better future where your hip is working again and just . . . never come back up. Dramatically preferable to years of battling with cancer or a gradual dip into dementia, at least for the victim. Especially if you've led a full life and are only going to be here for a short time more anyway, as is often the case with people who start breaking bones in old age. For the family, my heartfelt condolences.

<comment><USER2> I agree, everyone has to go and this way is preferable to suffering.

My dad had some health problems, and a few close calls in his last years. In the end he fell asleep in his favorite spot in his chair watching television and didn't come back. While it was one of the most heartbreaking things in our lives, but I'm glad his final departure was peaceful and painless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, this is a really moving blog. It shows you their point of view.

</comment><comment><USER7> Based on her writing style, it is a good thing she is going into medicine and not journalism.

<comment><USER8> Are you fucking kidding me? Her writing is outstanding. Sorry it has some emotion, some reflection, some substance.

Would you prefer a log file of events?

Get real.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Med students don't know shit. And don't do shit. But I suppose it's still an interesting perspective.

<comment><USER10>
        Shara Yurkiewicz is a fourth-year student at Harvard
        Medical School. She was an AAAS Mass Media Fellow, and
        her work has been published in the Los Angeles Times,
        Discover, and The Best Science Writing Online 2012. She
        is interested in medical ethics and has served as guest
        editor for the American Medical Association's ethics
        journal Virtual Mentor. She conducted ethics research
        at Harvard, Yale, and the Hastings Center and received
        a B.S. in biology from Yale.

4th year at Harvard Medical School, guest editor for AMA's ethics journal, undergrad at Yale, I _think_ she's qualified to write a reflective / opinion- based blog.

<comment><USER9> [http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/are-med-school- grad...](http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/are-med-school-grads- prepared-to-practice-medicine/?_php=true&_type=blogs&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0)</comment></comment></comment>


How Brown Moses exposed Syrian arms trafficking from his front room - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/21/frontroom-blogger-analyses-weapons-syria-frontline

<comment><USER2> I love this blog, along with CJ Chivers (the NY Times guy who wrote "The Gun"), and a few others.

Sad about Reader, still, for reasons like this.</comment>


Log in page - <AUTHOR>

Hi. I have a question. Many website nowadays grays out everything but the log in form when a user clicks on "Log in." Elance.com is one example. Do you know what javascript library they use? <comment><USER2> According to their source, Elance use YUI containers combined with a bit of custom JS. This isn't anything special though - it's reasonably simple to write something similar from scratch and there's plenty of alternatives (e.g. Thickbox, a Lightbox clone, supports iFrame embedding).

In future, it's worth putting a more explanatory subject line rather than simply "Log in page", and I'd be surprised if you couldn't have found this with a simple Google search to be honest.

<comment><USER3> I understand why my mom used to tell me to "look it up"---it's a good habit to cultivate. But if someone's available and they won't mind, just asking is usually 10-100 times faster than looking it up.

If I didn't know much about what I was looking for (per this example), I could see myself spending a good hour trying to find an answer, vs. the few minutes it took to get one here.

That's what colleagues are for!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yeah this is a simple javascript, theres tons of variations just search for lightbox.

Also, this isn't the most usable way in every scenario. It's alright for login boxes if you want to drive more towards the signup process. But you just as easily add the actual input boxes and eliminate the need for a lightbox... which saves a few clicks and won't make them have to figure out how to close the pop-up.

Or you can use both, for example: have the login input boxes (username/pw) on the top right and when they click on an element that requires a login (for example adding a comment) then the lightbox will pop up.

<comment><USER5> For whatever reasons, the "cover the whole page with a translucent image" thing is dog slow on my copy of Firefox. Most lightbox effects tend to be annoying for me, and possibly for others.

Unless there is an actual need, aside from "Boy, this will look slick", consider other options. Or at least do some user testing to ensure that users respond well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Yep, lots of variations on lightboxes. I remember Wufoo had a post with pretty good library for doing it, but can't seem to find it now.

Overall though, it's easy enough to roll your own without being constrained to use it in a particular way by a 3rd party library.

</comment><comment><USER7> Speaking of Javascript, Elance.com is a great example of how not to use Ajax.

<comment><USER8> I can't speak about the entire site but I actually think some ways they use Ajax are ideal.

[http://www.elance.com/php/search/main/eolsearch.php?matchTyp...](http://www.elance.com/php/search/main/eolsearch.php?matchType=profile#matchKeywords=website%20template&catFilter=100)

I love the sliders on the left side - much better than the old drop downs.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Metomic Contextual Consent – a privacy layer under embedded content - <AUTHOR> https://contextual.metomic.io/ <comment><USER2> I really like the privacy-first products Metomic is creating, but from this perspective imho the Contextual page should have something like the Metomic footer allowing to navigate to the privacy policy (at [https://metomic.io/privacy-policy](https://metomic.io/privacy-policy) )

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point! Have added a link to our privacy center at the bottom of the page

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> If you're looking for an open-source consent solution there's Klaro, which is used by thousands of websites already and is completely free (BSD-licensed):

[https://klaro.kiprotect.com/](https://klaro.kiprotect.com/)

You can easily adapt it to various legislations (GDPR & ePrivacy, CCPA, ...) and customize styling and code. It's fully self-hostable and does not require any external resources, it also doesn't send any information to third parties. Interactive consent as a feature (what they call contextual consent) is coming soon as well.

I like Metomic but I wouldn't say it's "privacy-first" as they log consent in their backend. This unnecessarily sends user data to a third party. Neither the ePrivacy directive nor the GDPR requires such a thing. I can understand why they want this data as they need to monetize their service, but I think it's really pointless as you store a cookie that then allows you to retrieve consent data, which you could just as easily store directly in the cookie as well (which Klaro does). Storing consent directly in a cookie allows the website owner to check it on the server side if required, and to prove that the user was asked for his/her consent.

Otherwise it seems like a great tool with a good UI!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback!

Regarding privacy-first - we're striving to do a good job at this so really appreciate opening up the conversation. We don't actually store consents on our server - unless you enable "logged in mode" as a Metomic customer. When this is the case, you can generate a JWT for your customer that we then use to store a record of their consent serverside.

However for most of our customers, we operate in "anonymous mode", where consents are stored on the browser only. The only thing we do is store an incremental counter on the server that allows companies to see which policies are being accepted and which are not. Whilst we're all figuring out how to be more equitable with users as companies, it's extremely helpful to know when a change you make to a policy is something that people don't support (i.e. reject) - and our dashboard shows you this information

We actually have a community slack channel dedicated towards discussing exactly this type of thing - please do join if you'd like to chat!

[https://join.slack.com/t/metomiccommunity/shared_invite/enQt...](https://join.slack.com/t/metomiccommunity/shared_invite/enQtOTY4MzMyODQwOTEyLTk0MmFjNGExMTRhZjA4ZWY2NTBkYjQ3YTJkMzFiMDU2NmIwMThlN2Y1NTAzNDEwYzZiNTc0NDAwODMyODM0MGI)

<comment><USER3> Well, I can't find a running version of Metomic on any of your reference sites (maybe you can point me to one), on your own site the script sends several GraphQL queries to your backend when I consent, and also communicates with that before I do (not sure if this is due to other scripts on the page not related to the manager).

Again, this is totally fine, I wouldn't call it "privacy first" though, as it does not systematically minimize information exposed to third parties.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> Similar idea: [https://vwochnik.github.io/reveal-frame- component/](https://vwochnik.github.io/reveal-frame-component/)

<comment><AUTHOR> I really like this. It's a pretty elegant way to handle iframe content in particular. Will keep a keen eye on this project!

The issue we ran into in this area was with embeds that don't use iframes - generally it ends up being a third party script that needs innoculating (e.g. instagram / twitter embeds), with a bunch of associated dom content somewhere else on the page (the new facebook embeds work the same way).

The approach we've thus taken is to allow you to bundle related content together under a single "purpose" \- when permission for that purpose is granted, all associated content gets unlocked.

There's also a bunch more info on this over at the docs: [https://metomic.io/docs/placeholders](https://metomic.io/docs/placeholders)</comment></comment>


Intel Talks Thunderbolt 3 - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardware/intel-talks-thunderbolt-3 <comment><USER2> Until Intel ships Thunderbolt as part of all future Intel CPUs, I see no reason why Intel even bothers spending money on it.

None of the computers I want to have Thunderbolt have it, and the one device I don't need it on has it (a MBPr), nor can I add it (very few mobos support add-in Thunderbolt cards, and Intel refuses to allow a generic PCI-E bridge card to be sold).

Intel's strategy is idiotic.</comment>


America's Highest Minimum Wage Sparks Fight in Small California City - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-highest-minimum-wage-sparks-fight-in-small-california-city-11563960603?mod=rsswn <comment><USER2> Typical WSJ rubbish. Focus on anecdotes, like the guy who sacks over half of his staff because of a < 15% increase in minimum wage.

Having grown up solidly in the class of the "working poor", I can tell you a side of the story that is not often told - there is not enough difference in quality of life between "working poor" and just being on public assistance and unemployed. When you are unemployed, you get government benefits, and most people either have a side hustle (odd jobs under the table, or sometimes something blatantly illegal), or commit some type of fraud like claiming to live on their own when in fact they split rent between many people. I'm not judging here, it's just what happens.

So you get these people who make minimum wage, they aren't really living substantially better than those who don't work, yet they have to work 40 hours a week for some a __hole with a Nepolean complex, and we wonder why so many people choose not to work?

The right-wing position is that we should slash benefits because of the lazy ones taking advantage of the system. The left-wing position is that all the poor are just misunderstood. My position is that, from experience, yes there are able-bodied people who are choosing not to work, it is a problem, and the proper way to deal with it is to make sure there are substantial benefits to having a job.

Yes, raising minimum wage will make a minor increase in unemployment, and will make a bit of hardship for a very small number of restaurant owners, those are valid points, that in my opinion are not terrible enough to keep the minimum wage low.

<comment><USER3> >So you get these people who make minimum wage, they aren't really living substantially better than those who don't work,

Supporting yourself (by basically selling your labor) instead of relying on the government is worth something (non-tangible value, obviously) to a lot of people (though I suspect there are few of those people on HN). It makes you feel good (less bad) about your situation and frankly having your existence be dependent on some entity you have nearly zero control over sucks and is stressful.

Obviously on some level it comes down to personal preference but clearly a large subset of the population feels that minimum wage or nearly minimum wage jobs are a good enough deal relative to government benefits that they do them.

The people who I'd personally want to hire are the one's who are gaming the system by getting benefits and working under the table or having a side gig because they clearly know how to optimize for a given set of constraints. Unfortunately those are the ones that aren't in the job market.

<comment><USER4> I think you should indicate somehow that you've edited your comment (e.g. customary "EDIT" following your original comment), granted in your case, you changed your original comment entirely (after the apparent backlash at your disagreement with GP's comment), which is IMO somewhat disingenuous.

<comment><USER3> I added two paragraphs. I didn't feel saying it was edited was warranted since it was an expansion rather than a change of meaning.

Also I agree with the GP comment, I was just expanding on the point about the people who aren't working and don't want to. I thought it was worth noting that that is not something many people can rationalize.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I just can't stress this enough: if you're reading an economics article that relies on anecdotes from owners in the service industry, DO NOT READ IT!

You can find a service industry business owner to shit on literally anything local government does. If there aren't hard numbers in the piece, into the trash it goes.

In the city where I grew up, they implemented a Bus Rapid Transit system that has definitively helped the businesses on its corridor. However, from the moment it was announced, article after article would come out where business owners would blame the BRT for their declining business or even failure. The evidence never backed these claims up.

The case that the minimum wage hurts the service industry, in particular, makes sense to me. In fact, I'm sure it's somewhat true. However, when the best an article can do is a 2018 survey saying that the majority of businesses have increased prices (curiously - no numbers about any negative impact on their bottom lines) - toss it in the garbage. No thanks.

<comment><USER6> In Toronto they did something wonderful. DATA. When they implemented transit priority on a previously more car-centric road, of course you had some small business owners screaming murder, saying their sales were down like crazy (we heard 30-40%) and wanted compensation. Majority of business actually supported the new project because it was about bringing more people total (more people fits in transit than would fit on a parking lot).

Turns out that the city had a partnership with the credit card processors to measure the change in spending before and after the implementation of the project (on a aggregate level for all the shops on that street). Surprise surprise, a year later, they were able to prove there was no drop in business. We never heard again from those business, and surprise, they are still open.

<comment><USER7> Same in Norway just this year. Removing lots of cars from the city centre, people complaining, then the data shows it was not really an issue.

<comment><USER5> Yeah there's tons of data on this, it's essentially not controversial if you care about data/what's real. Cars destroy business in every city in the world where they're dominant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> When I worked in the restaurant biz in the 80's, our franchise owner hated bumps in the minimum wage. If minimum wage went up 10%, (like to $3.35/hour) he'd instruct his managers to cut the amount of hours by 10%. The restaurants would just have to deal with fewer employees. We were all smart enough to see that this would have adverse affects on QSC (Quality, Service, Cleanliness), but he didn't care. He just wanted his costs relatively fixed. It also didn't help our argument that sales were continually rising, so he was shielded from the effects of his labor cuts.

The only thing that made him voluntarily raise his wages was when In N Out opened a location 20 minutes away. The immediate drop in sales at his flagship restaurant forced him to compete for labor (In N Out was starting employees at 2x minimum wage IIRC).

</comment><comment><USER9> The number one cost for businesses are employees, often by far. If you raise that year over year, it's bound to be painful.

Say 60% of my business expenses were employees, 10% was rent and 30% was produce for a restaurant.

A doubling of the minimum wage would likely increase by expenses by 35% - assuming the minimum wage didn't impact where my food was purchased.

This is why there a large fields of economic theory that warn against minimum wage hikes.

The increase in minimum wage is going to mean those whose rent out buildings will increase prices. Food becomes more expensive, shops have to close, etc. it's essentially a race to the bottom and as it's a zero sum game it'll often lead to the economy to slow (long term). This is as there is a shift in purchasing behavior, or people moving due to employment loss.

<comment><USER8> And it's also important to remember that if the min wage rises, it often affects all pay structures at a business. If the entry level position gets a big pay jump, then other employees will expect a corresponding bump in their hourly rate. Otherwise you'll end up with new hires making more than employees with experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> So input costs rise, some business cut services, some raise prices, causing inflation. Not sure what the news story is here.

Anyone interested in the truth will tell you that raising the minimum wage will destroy at least some jobs.

<comment><USER11> >Anyone interested in the truth will tell you that raising the minimum wage will destroy at least some jobs.

This is the "big lie" used to justify keeping it low. The reality is that minimum wage hikes hit profit margins first and hardest, inflation next and jobs get hit _last_ (maybe if it gets hiked $10 / hour).

[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.421...](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.421.7637&rep=rep1&type=pdf)

>"Studying profitability is important because the empirical evidence suggests that minimum wages do raise the earnings of low wage workers, but do not seem to have large negative employment consequences."

>"Across both datasets our results show that that profitability was significantly reduced by the introduction of the minimum wage. "

Minimum waged labor is very, very, very inelastic. For better or worse the people who clean your toilets and serve you coffee in the mornings are extremely necessary and very hard to substitute. Much more so than most middle class jobs, even.

Business lobbies know this to be the truth, but they know that they will get nothing but by asking the general public to have sympathy for their falling profit margins.

So, they try to scare the shit out of you by claiming that they will be _forced_ to fire you instead (e.g. this expensive billboard for the national restaurant association demonstrating their concern):

[https://pando.com/2014/07/17/new-san-francisco-billboard- war...](https://pando.com/2014/07/17/new-san-francisco-billboard-warns- workers-theyll-be-replaced-by-ipads-if-they-demand-a-fair-wage/)

<comment><USER12> > Minimum waged labor is very, very, very inelastic. For better or worse the > people who clean your toilets and serve you coffee in the mornings are > extremely necessary and very hard to substitute. Much more so than most > middle class jobs, even.

Literally the opposite. It's so elastic they can't demand any wages for what they do. Minimum wage is about turning it inelastic with the punishment of prison.

The best argument I have heard around MW is that businesses can afford to pay more but have too much market power to let that go. I tend to disagree in a 3.5% unemployment economy, but its possible.

These famous studies of minimum wage always come with caveats, on both side of the aisles. If you increase minimum wage today you might not see the unemployment _ever_ in a stat, because you are sacrificing future employment (businesses that don't open because upstart costs are higher). In the end, MW is a handout from left leaning people passing the bill to businesses: they could help the working people they want to target just as well with suplemental labor income, but that implies reducing other expenditures from the government, whereas MW looks like a freebie from businesses.

<comment><USER11> >Literally the opposite.

In which case we should see toilets going uncleaned, coffee not being made in response to minimum wage hikes and a clear spike in unemployment that couldn't be attributed to anything else. Doesn't happen (c.f. Dube, Lester, Reich (Nov 2010)).

>These famous studies of minimum wage always come with caveats, on both side of the aisles.

Dube, Lester, Reich is the only one I'm aware of which comes without caveats.

<comment><USER12> > In which case we should see toilets going uncleaned, coffee not being made > in response to minimum wage hikes and a clear spike in unemployment that > couldn't be attributed to anything else. Doesn't happen (c.f. Dube, Lester, > Reich (Nov 2010)).

This effect could be explained by capital consumption. If you already have a business you can't switch your entire capital to adjust to the new costs. But new businesses will invest more in less-labor-intensive coffee machines, smaller/worse bathrooms, and wouldn't fire the staff immediately and take the profit hit now and not invest later. Human systems tend to hide away consequences by playing with future expectations, because they are easy and invisible.

This topic is actually academically difficult as it is, I'm not an academic or professional economist, and I simply distrust all parties. Thus, in case of doubt, do no harm. Do nothing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Take the first guy, he sacks six employees out of ten and closes the dinner shift. Given that on an 8 hour shift the extra cost is just over $60 this just does seem to make sense, in other words, the sacking of people it's unrelated to the minimum wage increase.

He clearly has reasons for doing what he is doing but I find it hard to believe that increase in minimum wage is the issue, specially when the way it's due to increase yearly, preceeds he starting his business (unless the reporting is wrong and is not 2017)

Is there anything I'm missing here?

<comment><AUTHOR> > _Given that on an 8 hour shift the extra cost is just over $60_

Don't other labor costs ( _e.g._ payroll taxes) scale with pay? So the daily savings are more than $60.

And $60/day conserves $1,800 a month, which is a decent amount of cash for a restaurant. If it's a lunch-rush shop with marginal dinner business, $2,000/month could be the break point for that shift and those jobs.

Absent zoning reform, however, these wages are more likely to flow into higher rents versus consumption or savings.

<comment><USER14> Correct - the fully baked cost of these employees is much higher than the extra $/hr increase. The bigger kicker is this location is fixed, they HAVE to pay their employees this amount. The consumer is NOT fixed and given an increase in prices, has the ability to conduct commerce in an area near Emeryville that was not impacted by the higher wages. So all things being equal, the same sandwich made a few miles away may be a few $ cheaper and for people on a limited budget, the consumer may make that choice. It is similar to when a city/county raise taxes within their limits on certain items, lets say cigarettes, then are surprised when instead of raising revenue, the amount of revenue overall collected falls after this increase. Consumers have the ability to purchase outside of the city's taxing authority when the marginal increase is more than the perceived cost to the consumer to travel to purchase them. This is basic econ 101, maybe 201. While these attempts are great, they fail to factor that in and should be coordinated at the state level to have any impact. Even with that, states deal with this all the time when people go across state lines to purchase booze, or leave high sales tax states when making large ticket purchases. It is no coincidence that just across the border from Illinois in Wisc/Indiana there are best buys / appliance stores that do huge volumes of business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Okay, so I have a question. A lot of folks are saying this is anecdotal. Which is true. A hand full of hearsay. Probably just a bunch of jackasses talking crap.

But, how many stories like this are needed until it's no longer anecdotal? I keep seeing people on HN say "Anecdotal! Doesn't matter!". I mean, so is the story of someone getting hit by a car and breaking bones. If they say "high speed vehicles hitting someone can break bones", it's easy to say "Anecdotal! Many people are around high speed vehicles and don't break bones!" Which is true too.

So... just saying. I've been doing data science on and off the last 2 years and the number 1 task is cleaning data. Which, in itself leads to problems. All data is anecdotal, except its collected in one place. Maybe the whole unbiased collection plays in, but no one is truly ever unbiased towards anything.

<comment><USER16> The hint that it's bullshit is when other obvious levers "cannot" get pulled. "My labor costs went up 8%, but I cannot raise the price of a sandwich!" If that we're true, restaurants wouldn't be able to charge $3 for a 12oz fountain coke in a glass cup that costs $0.10.

Guess what... you can. If you can't, usually there's another, self-inflicted reason. If you look back a few years ago, there was a significant tomato price increase and you had similar stories where expensive tomatoes were prompting price increases on the menu.

<comment><USER15> See, you fell into the problem I'm talking about. I'm not saying the people in the article are correct. I already thought they were short sighted and just bitching about problems they put their heads in the sand about.

I'm arguing that this being anecdotal isn't enough to invalidate their claims. Their claims are invalid because of other factors that anyone with their own business can see through. But not for being anecdotal. I have an issue with the HN community using anecdotal as enough justifiable cause to say someone is wrong. Data is just a lot of recorded anecdotes in one place.

<comment><USER17> "Data is just a lot of recorded anecdotes in one place."

I don't agree with this interpretation. Data is the use of quantitative measures to provide sound evidence for a compelling argument. Anecdotes rely on a "shoot from the hip" approach to describing a position. For example, blaming rising minimum wage as the sole factor in the success or failure of a business ignores a whole spectrum of factors (business rent, business insurance, prevailing local population wages, pricing, quality of food, quality of service, etc).

Even if we took all of the anecdotes of these business owners into account and they all said "We had to eliminate staff and hours because of rising minimum wage." it isn't enough to actually support the claim that rising minimum wage causes the problems described. It informs a theory of the effects of rising minimum wage but without all of the supporting evidence and data collection that eliminates possible other influencing factors it is purely anecdotal and should in no way be considered supportive of their claims and therefore does in fact invalidate them.

As an example, suppose that along with the city increasing minimum wage they also increased property taxes gradually over time. The property owners decided to then pass the increase in property taxes onto their renters. Because of the increase in both minimum wage and property taxes occurring at the same time it squeezed the owner's profit margins. The owner unable to do anything about the change in rent focuses entirely on the fact that they had to increase what they pay their employees due to the increase in minimum wage. When interviewed about the situation they only talk about the increase in minimum wage as the problem, which is anecdotal and ignores the other influencing factor, increase in rent due to the increase in property taxes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The question I think is missing from the article is:

"How much do _you_ earn, mr business owner?"

Hey, if your employees earning a minimal wage aren't entitled to some privacy, neither are you.

<comment><USER19> "How much do you earn, mr business owner?"

Answer: "I make -50k per year".

Small business owners aren't the winner. Raising minimum wages don't hurt Walmart or Amazon - they do though, destroy the small guy. Amazon doesn't raise their pay to be nice.

"20% of small businesses fail in their first year, 30% of small business fail in their second year, and 50% of small businesses fail after five years in business. "

[https://www.fundera.com/blog/what-percentage-of-small- busine...](https://www.fundera.com/blog/what-percentage-of-small-businesses- fail)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> > _The economy is booming in the Bay Area, but at Patatas Neighborhood > Kitchen, located in this small city just north of Oakland, owner Marcos > Quezada recently eliminated the dinner shift and laid off six of his 10 > workers. He struggled with the decision but felt he had no choice after > Emeryville increased its hourly minimum wage on July 1 from $15 to $16.30, > the highest in the U.S. "I just didn't see how I was going to survive it,"_

Then perhaps he shouldn't be having a business in the first place? What was his scheme, get his profits (or barely even) by paying people a pittance?

<comment><USER21> This is a terrible sentiment. He's free to make that business decision.

You don't know his use case. It sounds like his money maker was the brunch and lunch crowd while dinner was just something extra. Increasing wages decreases business opportunity.

<comment><USER20> > _This is a terrible sentiment. He 's free to make that business decision._

Sure, and I'd rather he was not.

<comment><USER21> Thank god I don't live in a planned economy where you can't axe the dinner shift and a bus boy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If I open a business and my business is successful because I have labor that's expected to make less than what's required to provide basic subsistence living then my business model is broken. Why? Because the government will end up picking up the tab by providing healthcare, rent assistance, and food assistance to my employees. Which means that my business model is being subsidized by the government and is effectively a welfare business by the transitive property. We can either say, "That's fine the government should subsidize these businesses." or we can say, "The market should handle this, local government should push minimum wage to the point where government subsidies aren't required and then allow businesses that can't make it fail." In the first case if we want the government to subsidize business of this nature then we should raise taxes on businesses because they're the ones who want subsidized labor. In the latter, the ones that will get hit first are restaurants that have low prices and serve food to people in the price tier of the bottom half of the middle class. Which also highlights a cultural shift that may need to occur, the reality that the amount we eat out at restaurants and have others providing food preparation for us is economically broken and that a large portion of the population that currently enjoys this benefit by eating at these restaurants in reality can't actually afford it, at its non- subsidized price, as frequently as it's currently enjoyed.

<comment><USER22> "others providing food preparation for us is economically broken".

Shouldn't it be more efficient with mass production of meals? If economic efficiency is the goal, people would eat in neighbourhood rotating menu restaurants. Like a Soviet kolkhoz or any army camp.

<comment><USER17> > Shouldn't it be more efficient with mass production of meals?

It already is: McDonald's, Burger King, Taco Bell, etc.

The difference being that in the examples given the means of production are also controlled by the business. With fast food, and McDonald's as the example, they control their own supply chain[1]. It's the reason that everything tastes the same no matter which McDonald's you go to. Many fast food businesses emulate this process because it has been so successful for McDonald's.

With your example of a Soviet kolkhoz, the state owned the agriculture and determined the prices because they had control over the whole supply chain.[2]

I would also argue that this is what people are buying when they buy pre- packaged frozen meals. People seem to forget that home refrigeration wasn't a thing until it became really accessible starting in the 1930s. Then with the invention of the frozen dinner in 1950s changed how a large set of people looked at meals. You suddenly didn't have to cook and didn't have to pay someone else to cook you a meal on demand. For a price comparison, a frozen dinner in the 60s was around a dollar[3] or less [4]. Whereas a restaurant would have cost approximately an extra 100%, 200%, or more[5] "1964 A one- plate turkey dinner at Howard Johnson's $1.49" (specifically the standard fare, not fine dining).

[1] [https://boxaroundtheworld.com/mcdonalds-supply-chain- managem...](https://boxaroundtheworld.com/mcdonalds-supply-chain-management/)

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

[3] [https://www.encyclopedia.com/sports-and-everyday- life/food-a...](https://www.encyclopedia.com/sports-and-everyday-life/food- and-drink/food-and-cooking/frozen-foods-industry)

[4] [http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/60sfood.html](http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/60sfood.html)

[5] [https://restaurant-ingthroughhistory.com/restaurant- prices/](https://restaurant-ingthroughhistory.com/restaurant-prices/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> "restaurants have thin profit margins" too many restaurants ? The unit margin is fairly high.

<comment><USER8> Most restaurants aren't competing with other restaurants really, they're competing with you staying home and eating a frozen pizza.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'd pay an extra 1.50 for a sandwich

<comment><USER25> But $14.50 for a plate of eggs and pancakes? I don't care where you live. That's crazy.

<comment><USER26> It could be that's the true cost of a basic breakfast provided to you by someone else when you take into consideration the value added through labor, facilities costs, food costs, food transportation, etc. There's really no axiom stating a meal out must not be substantially more costly than preparing your own food.</comment></comment></comment>


California Introduces Its Own Bill to Protect Net Neutrality - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/01/california-introduces-its-own-bill-protect-net-neutrality <comment><USER3> Relevant anecdote: I've recently switched to full-time hotspotting with Verizon, and I'm still adjusting my Netflix habit to match.

Verizon, as usual, sent me my "you're at your last 10% before we throttle you" notice just as I went over my limit, and at the exact same time, DNS stopped working for netflix.com.

Everything else worked just fine, but none of the netflix.com properties would resolve.

I had lazily been using Verizon's DNS for my hotspot. Changing to 184.108.40.206/22.214.171.124 immediately brought it back online.

I can't prove it wasn't just a glitch, but it was pretty damn suspicious anyhow, and exactly the sort of underhanded behavior I'd expect from today's telecoms.

<comment><USER4> I do full-time hotspotting on verizon, always max out over my limit, and have never experienced this.

What specific configuration did you change from 18.104.22.168/220.127.116.11 - i would like to know for future reference if it does happen.

<comment><USER5> They changed their DNS to point to Google's servers, which have the static IPs 126.96.36.199/184.108.40.206

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Before anyone gets ahead of themselves, this bill only _protects_ net neutrality and does not enforce net neutrality as defined here [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality) .

ISPs are still allowed to discriminate traffic under this bill. They are allowed to block and throttle content such as illegal streaming downloads, some torrents, spam, and other traffic that degrades network performance. For example, this bill does not prevent Comcast, At&t, Verizon et al. from blocking port 25 as they have been for the past decade. The bill also does not preclude zero-rating.

This bill is a good thing yes, but let's not get ahead of ourselves and call this net neutrality.

<comment><USER7> I don't see any real point in including zero rating under net neutrality, for several reasons.

1\. The usual argument is that if an ISP can zero rate service X, that makes it harder for competitors of X to compete, and so we need to ban zero rating to encourage competition.

This argument fails because a last mile ISP like Comcast can easily side step any internet neutrality rules in offering X by making a deal with the X provider to serve the service from Comcast's own servers. Then it is not being provided over internet and so is out of scope for net neutrality.

They could even go farther, and not even use IP at all to deliver it from Comcast to the home. They run IP on top of lower level protocols, and they could use one of those lower level protocols to deliver to an app running on the set top box, which could then serve on the LAN using normal IP protocols (which would be out of scope for net neutrality because they are just running on a LAN in this case).

If we want to stop this for competition reasons, we'll need to use antitrust, not net neutrality. Antitrust cannot be evaded by simply changing the protocols.

2\. We accept zero rating in every other or nearly every other common carrier service. In telecommunications. for example, I've never seen any objections to zero rated telephone service, whether paid for by the phone company (such as free calls to government offices), or paid for by the company called (commercial toll free numbers). In transportation, we don't get our feathers ruffled when a bus or cab company offers free rides (possibly paid for by a sponsor). What is different about internet?

Generalizing this, in general we allow nearly every provider of goods and services to give you MORE than you have paid for. As long as they deliver the service that you paid for, if they want to give you a gift of more service to promote a particular offering of their own, or to promote (possibly for pay) some sponsor, we allow it. Regulation is concerned with making sure they don't under deliver, not preventing over delivery.

It is hard to make a case to the typical consumer that there is something fundamentally different between, say, Safeway giving a discount on Pepsi, and an ISP giving a discount on bandwidth used for Spotify.

3\. Suppose I'm a company selling something that uses a lot of bandwidth, such as a game that requires a large download. I'd like to pay major ISPs to zero rate it. If I cannot directly do that, but the ISP sells prepaid bandwidth cards that you use by entering a code from the card, I could simply buy prepaid bandwidth this way, and when someone buys my game I could give them a bandwidth code for their ISP to cover the costs of the download. Are we going to ban prepaid bandwidth to stop this?

If we want to get net neutrality back, and have it STAY back instead of just flipping every time we change which party is in control we need to keep it to just involving things ON the network. That's basically throttling, blocking, and paid prioritization. Billing is OFF the network. I think it should be reasonably possible to get bipartisan support for those.

<comment><USER8> The argument for prohibiting zero-rating under NN generally goes like this:

If provider X provides a very limited (or no) quota for regular internet traffic, and provides access to sponsored zero-rated services - then this inhibits competition, and (depending on how agressively it's implmented) can inhibit free speech.

This has been seen seen in some countries such as India where facebook.com was zero-rated traffic, and data prices for regular internet access were extremely high.

It's also seen today in Australia where Apple Music, Spotify and Google Play Music services are zero-rated traffic on certain mobile (cellular) plans - many of these plans also have zero-rated access to various popular social media platforms too (facebook, instagram, etc) - and data quotas are generally fairly limited (2-10GB/month is typical for mid-range plans). A competitor to these services is going to have a very hard time entering the market, since their customers will all have the data usage come out of their regular quota.

Continuing with Australia - Most ISPs provide zero-rated access to Netflix (or provide 'unlimited' quota). Telstra does not zero-rate Netflix traffic, but they do zero-rate Foxtel and their own movie/tv services. At the same time, having rather low data quotas.

So those who're stuck with Telstra (eg because they live in an apartment/development that is a Telstra-exclusive estate, or just because they're on a 24-36 month contract, having been unaware of the problems) - <USER2> unable to use Netflix.

<comment><USER9> With Australia, submarine transport costs to Singapore (nearest 'major' Internet hub) or all the way to North America or Europe for the largest hubs is an order of magnitude more expensive than continental terrestrial transport within North America or within Europe. So that Netflix offers free caching boxes to ISP's meeting minimum traffic levels allows the Australian networks to save substantially on their overall bandwidth costs. It's reasonable for them to zero-rate that traffic as they're effectively passing their cost savings on to their customers, as opposed to trying to double dip by charging content networks for access to their subscribers. This may violate more pure definitions of net neutrality, but should be desirable behaviour as it's pro consumer.

This goes back to the distinction between the real problem, the lack of competition in many markets compared to net neutrality which mitigates situations where there's a lack of competition, but it's not necessarily a win all across the board. What's needed is to separate last mile access, from eyeball network service, from carrier network service, from content network service, from actual content. This would ensure competition across the board, and prevent excessive power accumulated by such a small number of large corporations as is currently the case. However, the nearly religious reverence to capitalism in the US would make such a solution nearly impossible to legislate.

<comment><USER8> > With Australia, submarine transport costs to Singapore (nearest 'major' > Internet hub)

There's very little direct bandwidth to Singapore - there's only one cable going west (SEA-ME-WE-3), it's old, and constantly has breaks.

Unless you live in Western Australia, your traffic (even to Singapore) doesn't go via that - it goes via the US over SXC or Endeavor to the east, or to the north to Guam (PIPE-1) or Japan (AJC)

> It's reasonable for them to zero-rate that traffic as they're effectively > passing their cost savings on to their customers, as opposed to trying to > double dip by charging content networks for access to their subscribers. > This may violate more pure definitions of net neutrality, but should be > desirable behaviour as it's pro consumer.

I agree, however I've had (heated) arguments with people on this aspect. Not everyone agrees, and thinks that all traffic should be zero-rated if any traffic is going to be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Comcast and AT&T set data caps at 1 TB per month, knowing that we will all soon be doing much more traffic than that. Every year bandwidth requirements go up and it's accelerating.

Home internet access in the US went from unlimited usage to capped with $200 overage fees overnight.

We need an "Effective Sustained Rate" law that says something like:

If you sell internet access with a 1 terabyte cap, you have to market it as a 3 megabit connection. The effective sustained rate. Or preferably, just outlaw data caps entirely.

<comment><USER11> > If you sell internet access with a 1 terabyte cap, you have to market it as > a 3 megabit connection. The effective sustained rate. Or preferably, just > outlaw data caps entirely.

That's like saying that laptops must be marketed with their "effective sustained" battery life. The MacBook Pro can't be marketed as having 10 hours of wireless web, but rather just 2 hours of "effective sustained" performance. Regardless of whether it's a sensible measure for your typical user, who is actually likely to get the 10 hours because they're using their laptop for office and web browsing.

Residential ISPs are selling burst connections, which is an entirely sensible thing to do in a world where the top use case for a home internet connection is sucking down a 5MB Facebook page as quickly as possible then going idle. It's not like they're hiding the data cap in fine print: [https://dataplan.xfinity.com](https://dataplan.xfinity.com).

Note that outlawing data caps doesn't address the phenomenon of companies with market power being able to charge monopoly prices. It just redistributes the burden of that upcharge away from heavy data users to ordinary users. _E.g._ consider if you outlawed Apple's practice of charging $100, $200, etc., more for $15-20 worth of flash memory on an iPhone. Do you think Apple would just lower those prices and leave it at that? No, they'd raise prices on the base model. All you'd do is hurt the users who keep everything in the cloud in order to favor those who store a lot of data locally. (Unsurprisingly, price discrimination tactics that benefit ordinary users at the expense of power users are unpopular among power users.)

<comment><USER12> > Residential ISPs are selling burst connections, which is an entirely > sensible thing to do in a world where the top use case for a home internet > connection is sucking down a 5MB Facebook page as quickly as possible then > going idle. It's not like they're hiding the data cap in fine print:

Go idle? Since when?

Steam auto updates my games, Windows downloads multi-gigabyte updates in the background. My Android phone syncs files in the background to cloud storage, and on a nightly basis finds a good dozen or so apps to auto-update. For many people, Alexa now streams music in the background whenever they are home. Multiplayer online games nowdays have voice chat, increasingly richer and more populated worlds, and support video streaming of one's exploits.

Even that 5MB Facebook page is actually an endlessly scrolling multimedia fest, that starts streaming videos as they come into view.

Heck Hacker News is one of the few paginated sites left!

<comment><USER13> It's not "endlessly scrolling", it's scrolling for the few minutes you're looking at it. Nobody scrolls FB pages - or even downloads updates - for 24h in a day, and it would be absurd to limit speeds as if they did.

<comment><USER12> Average usage of FB is 50 minutes a day.

Snapchat has 30 minutes. Reddit has some ungodly number, but is much less multimedia heavy.

And that is average, I know multiple people who average ~2hrs a day on Facebook.

<comment><USER11> Even if you're reading FB 50 minutes a day, you're probably only downloading 5-10 minutes of that time. In the last two months, The FB app has used 557 MB of data on my iPhone. That's about 1% of my soft data cap over that time with VZN.

<comment><USER12> Checking my Laptop's network usage, over the last 30 days, Chrome has downloaded 88 GB of data.

To be fair, I stream movies using the Netflix website, 3 movies, so approximately 18GB to video.

The rest? Who knows. Youtube is certainly part of it, though I rarely watch videos full screen so whatever 480p takes up.

Then there are mobile apps like Snapchat which, for heavy users, can eat up an easy 5GB or more per month.

I had the Chrome bandwidth monitor open while researching that number. The 3 or 4 articles I read to figure out the average Snapchat data use ended up themselves using 36MB of data! (and this is with an ad blocker running...)

Figure it took me 3 minutes (not really) to do the research. that is 12MB per minute of data consumption just browsing the internet for references!

My overall point here is that data usage has exploded, and not just for consumption of streaming media.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I don't want to be a bummer, but video streaming might stress the hell out of the internet infrastructure.

Before YouTube and Netflix, video broadcasting meant that you send data once, but a per view service sends a copy each time.

I'm all for net neutrality, but to be honest I think that some use cases might add a little pressure to the whole network when you compare them to more classic uses (HTML, images). I don't think that Snapchat, YouTube and Netflix can really be sustainable models if they keep growing and growing forever.

At some point, transmitting video online, on a large scale, at a good resolution, at peak hours, is going to be expensive.

Netflix is popular because the real cost is on the ISP, and there never are any guarantee of quality of service, it's not up to Netflix.

<comment><USER15> If you pay for 250 GB of data from your ISP, then they're on the hook for the cost of delivering that 250 GB. That's what they sold you - or actually what you should be able to buy.

The problem is when they'll deliver 250 GB of $PARTNER_SERVICE but not 250 GB of Netflix or YouTube, and none of the 1 or 2 ISPs in your area will give you a reasonable deal on your GBs from Netflix. (And to be clear, Netflix is not charging them anything.)

(The other problem is when they say "unlimited" but of course it's never really unlimited.)

<comment><USER16> I agree with you but then I believe that with the recent developments in video streaming (becoming mainstream) it would then be totally reasonable for ISP's to start charging a lot more for packages that give you the data to stream that much video.

It just seems like underlying the whole NN debate is the very large uptake in the average user's data usage over the last 10 years that is just sort of ignored when it comes to how do such upgrades get paid for and before such upgrades take place, who or what gets slowed down in the case of congestion?

<comment><USER17> Moore pays for that. My internet hasn't gotten 10 times as fast, but networking equipment did. So much exponential growth and here you are discussing if we can really deliver 10 Mbit to the population?

ISPs want to pay so little industry is still spending R&D money on how to make that fucking copper cable go all the way to Shannon capacity. G.fast is now doing over 100 Mbps on 500m copper.

<comment><USER18> Radio spectrum does not follow Moore's Law. It is finite.

<comment><USER19> The radio spectrum isn't the bottleneck for wired Internet. The bottleneck is in the routers, switches, etc. that sit in between the pieces of wire. Moore's law is highly relevant to how much bandwidth they can handle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I wish ISPs billed like a utility. Something like $10 connection fee + 10-15 cents per GB.

This will force bandwidth hogs to self-regulate. If you have the ability to purchase 4k/8k TVs, then you should be responsible for the associated streaming costs and not have others subsidize it.

Also, NN does nothing to foster competition - the real problem. All we have are a bunch of local monopolies/duopolies.

<comment><USER21> That's not actually what bandwidth costs. The cost to the ISP is based on the connection speed (eg, bits per second) not on how much is transferred.

The ISP needs to size for peak usage, and they over-subscribe because that's the only way to be profitable. This is why your speed will often be slower at night than during the day. It also means when you pay for data transferred at non-peak times, you're not actually costing anything since the bandwidth was sitting there unused anyway.

<comment><USER22> > your speed will often be _faster_ at night

Fixed that for you

<comment><USER21> Sorry, poor wording on my part. I meant slower in the evening (peak time), and you're right: late at night is typically the least busy and thus fastest time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > However, state laws can only restore network neutrality for some Americans, > and only a federal rule can ensure that everyone in the country has access > to a neutral net.

To accurately reflect the scope of the problem that should read "some Americans some of the time," no?

I doubt California businesses and residents restrict their internet traffic to stay within the state.

</comment><comment><USER24> This is my simple proposal.

Regulate the use of the term "internet service" to include network neutrality principles. If the provider violates these principles, they cannot call themselves an "internet service provider".

They can all themselves "network provider" or "mobile data provider" but they can't use the term "internet" anymore.

</comment><comment><USER25> Why not just solve the problem once and for all and build out a statewide public ISP?</comment>


#vegastech has lots of momentum - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wedgi.es/post/10284106629/vegastech-ive-been-participating-in-vegas-tech

<comment><USER2> I've been in Vegas 14 years doing business and I've never seen anything like what's happening in #vegastech this year. Previous attempts felt lean and temporary but this time, well, it's for real. Zappos' support is foundational but other entrepreneurial leaders are emerging to run with the baton and build momentum in a myriad of areas (events, coworking spaces, services swaps, funding, organization, media, etc.). There are a lot of smart people here and it's a collaborative vibe thus far. We have to be in it for the long haul but it's awesome to be part of what feels like a very authentic #vegastech groundswell.</comment>


Done is better than perfect - <AUTHOR> https://vec.io/posts/hello-world-again <comment><USER2> My job involves a lot of editing the writing of technical experts, for whom I'm a sort of communications gatekeeper so my small organization is coordinating properly with our parent organization. Even in the role of proofreading others' writing, I won't try to go from initial draft to finished product in one pass, because I know that the initial errors will wear me down too much to catch the ones later in the document, or to catch the more holistic problems with what's written. Point being, the act of taking initial ideas from your stream of consciousness to the most complete and accurate portrayal you can offer is extremely iterative, and no one should feel bad about dumping a whole bunch of half baked concepts onto a page when they're starting a project.</comment>


Show HN: SpotDy - Analytics for Government - <AUTHOR>

have been working on a startup to provide data analytics for government. company url is https://spotdy.com please review and give feedback.. would greatly appreciate it. <comment><USER2> I think you would certainly make a case if you provide some recent analysis / case studies where a government entity have used your services and they were able to derive this value.

If you still don't have that portfolio, then I would suggest that you go to small government agencies where your product may be used. Negotiate with them that you'll provide them free access for a certain couple of months and in return, you would be able to utilize the information gathered in building a case why your product is truly disruptive.

Best of luck.

</comment><comment><USER3> Should have SaaS option, no need for contacting, no one wants to spend time anymore waiting for the sales rep. Should have a freemium for test drive option to get to know the product, get engagement. Should resize the logos in the footer of the page, some of them are not easy to understand and it's not professional to have it the way it's, it's best to resize them into a single width and height, all of them.

</comment><comment><USER4> You should submit it as 'Show HN' to have the response you want.

Edit: I noticed you already submitted this a few minutes earlier and that you have a new account. What I mean is you should be doing this: [https://news.ycombinator.com/show](https://news.ycombinator.com/show)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for the feedback, Ramon, AngeloAnolin and Gys. I really appreciate your time.</comment>


Alive - achieve any goal, step by step, with community support - <AUTHOR> https://www.alive.do

<comment><USER2> Every one have goals in lifee :)</comment>


Tesla's new Solar Roof is actually cheaper than a normal roof - <AUTHOR> http://inhabitat.com/teslas-new-solar-roof-is-actually-cheaper-than-a-normal-roof/ <comment><USER2> Well with that calculation it is, but here in Holland you lay a roof (ceramic tiles) for about $55 for per M2 (11sqft) They will last for 60 years. That's including installation. Source here [https://www.dakdekker- weetjes.nl/dakbedekking/dakpannen/](https://www.dakdekker- weetjes.nl/dakbedekking/dakpannen/) . Makes you think, is it clickbait?

<comment><USER3> Note the qualification "after energy costs and tax credits". There's definitely cheaper roofing material (our house has a flat rubber roof--much cheaper than tile). Tax credits, of course, vary by jurisdiction, and may not always be available.

It would also be useful to compare the cost to more traditional sorts of solar installations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Can we get an apples to apples price comparison? Most people dont get huge government kickbacks, and have to pay connection fees to the local power company, etc...

I know 3 people with solar, and none are able to use it because of regulations except when completely disconnected from the grid.</comment>


Migrations and Future Proofing - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Prismatic/eng-practices/blob/master/swe/Migrations_and_future_proofing.md <comment><USER2> This is a really good write-up.

In consulting and mentoring on this topic, I've found a lot of engineers push back against how "dirty" it is to have multiple copies of the data around in different formats. It feels wrong to not have a single, authoritative data format at any given instant. If the idea is to change the column type, why not just `ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN` instead of `ALTER TABLE ... ADD`?

But if you think about it, excepting trivial cases, once you're migrating data, there are parallel realities at least for the duration of the migration and deployment. It's not a question of whether you create divergence by versioning/staging (in some fashion) your data. It's a question of whether you manage the divergence and convergence of the parallel realities that already exist as part of a migration. If you don't, you either incur downtime or risk data corruption.

One big win here is that, by being disciplined about your code and data changes, you can cleanly separate _deployment_ from _release_. You can deploy a feature but have it disabled or only enabled for a subset of users. Releasing a feature means enabling its feature flag, not orchestrating a set of migrations, replications, and deployments.

</comment><comment><USER3> When I was at Google this was the single worst problem we had in engineering, at least in terms of engineer-hours consumed. We came up with a bunch of solutions, a few of which (like protobufs) are open-sourced and many of which are just in the heads of the engineers who did them, but there's unfortunately no general solution to the problem. Sometimes I dream about a programming language that has thought through all these issues and includes "evolvability" as a first-class design constraint, but oftentimes these problems show up in multi-process situations where you may be using multiple programming languages.

</comment><comment><USER4>
        When you introduce a new API endpoint or format
        for data at rest, think hard

Yup. I've added columns where I've used a datetime where a date would have sufficed and then regretted it later once tons of data was already in the table. Or added a varchar(255) and only later realized that that wasn't big enough. Sometimes the wrongness of a type only becomes clear down the road.

        If you're designing an experimental server-side
        feature, see if you can store the data off to the
        side (e.g., in a different location, rather than
        together with currently critical data) so you can
        just delete it if the experiment fails rather than
        being saddled with this data forever without a
        huge migration project.

Yup, sometimes an extra join or lazy-load is well worth the isolation.

<comment><USER5> Why is it hard to drop an extra column from a database, or to change its type? ALTER TABLE...

<comment><USER6> It a) takes time, and b) means current code can not possibly work. Worse, it c) means canceling a rollout is now a complicated process, due to b.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> When we introduced pluggable storage drivers in Docker 0.7, we wanted all existing data to work as usual (full compatibility of data at rest), but we also wanted to migrate the layout of the legacy storage system (based on AUFS) so that it would be "just another driver" instead of a perpetual special case. At the same time, we didn't have the luxury of a full-stop mandatory migration, because if anything went wrong, the upgrade would fail and the user would be stuck in a hairy half-migrated situation. Keep in mind we are not talking about a relational database, but directories used to mount the root filesystems of live containers. That means that some of those directories may be mounted and therefore unmovable. So we had to accomodate partial migration failure, and the possibility of a partially migrated install.

So we shipped a migration routine which ran at startup _every time_ and gave up (gracefully and atomically) at the slightest sign of trouble. Over time, we reasoned, each install would converge towards full migration, and the huge majority of containers would be migrated within seconds of the upgrade. The rest would be much easier to deal with if anybody had any trouble.

Of course we had the luxury of a data structure which allowed this.

</comment><comment><USER8> At least for the server size, entity framework partially solves this with code first migrations. Using the code first model you can define your data types in code then have entity framework generate the appropriate sql code. If you change your data structure down the road you can autogenerate a migration that changes the database from one version to another. If you deploy a version that is a few migrations ahead then it will execute the proper migrations one after the other.

For the client side it's usually a good idea to specify a versioning relationship between server and client. AWS, for example, you request the API version you want to use: [http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonSimpleDB/latest/DeveloperGu...](http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonSimpleDB/latest/DeveloperGuide/APIUsage.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> How does Erlang deal with these problems? It often touts minimal downtime and the ability to run updates to your code while it's running.

I _think_ that means you can have Process V1 and Process V2 running on the same server simultaneously. If they read from the same database, won't you run into issues?

<comment><USER10> When you update an erlang module, the vm stores the old and new versions of the code. Calls like foo() call the current running version. Calls like module:foo() call the latest version of that module. So typically you would have all the control flow for a given process in one module and it would use the module call to control when the upgrade happens. At that point it gets to pause and migrate it's data.

The process isolation and code swap mechanisms do give you some help, but when it comes to messages sent between processes you are back in the same boat with API versioning or carefully ordered upgrades.

There is no real magic involved. It takes careful thought and tons of testing to make live upgrades work. Most of the projects I worked on preferred to just eat the few seconds downtime instead rather than risk getting the server into some weird in-between state.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Author here, would love feedback on this, and also happy to answer any questions.

<comment><USER11> I saved the document for later use, but it got me thinking how ORMs like hibernate is dealing with the migration and future proofing issues. I wrote code libraries for a small company, in which part of the libraries design is to allow data transformation/representation of Data Models to work on the new database schema/changes while representing the data structure as if it were from previous versions. So I ended up writing generators to create a mapping of the DAO and the Models exposed to the API's in such a way that when the database changes while you still have to support the previous version of the API, I will only have to edit/tweak the mappers of the previous version of the API.

The library has been opensourced here in this link [https://github.com/ivanceras/orm](https://github.com/ivanceras/orm)</comment></comment>


Go Scan 3D – Handheld 3D Scanner - <AUTHOR> https://www.creaform3d.com/en/handheld-portable-3d-scanner-goscan-3d <comment><USER2> Reminiscent of the Logitech Scanman handheld 2D scanner from 1988 ([https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Logitech_ScanMan...](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Logitech_ScanMan_32-Mus%C3%A9e_Bolo)), but now in 3D. (How is there not a Wikipedia article about this product? I bet deletionists are to blame.)

I think this concept could eventually be a success just because it has the potential to be a lot cheaper than a fully automated/mechanized solution.

Just like the Scanman was a lot cheaper compared to the very expensive flatbed scanners of the 80s. Smaller, lighter, zero/minimal amounts of moving parts, etc. Perhaps not good enough for professional use, but the pro market was kinda small anyway.

I guess the endgame is that high-end 3d scanning functionality gets built into regular smartphones.

<comment><USER3> _I think this concept could eventually be a success..._

I worked for a sister division of Ametek (Creaform's parent corp) a while ago. It's a real company and this is a real product line (I think this is the 3rd or 4th gen product by now).

Ametek is big on precision metrology for industrial/aerospace use and Creaform is a bet on the future. The corporation also owns Taylor Hobson from the UK. They're not looking to put this into smartphones.

[https://www.taylor-hobson.com/](https://www.taylor-hobson.com/)

<comment><USER2> Sorry, I was being unclear. I guess in my mind innovations that have obvious mainstream applications aren't really full-blown successes until they have reached the mainstream.

> They're not looking to put this into smartphones.

That probably means that someone else will be making money off this kind of feature.

Anway, I do hope this thing can go mainstream!

<comment><USER3> There's a lot of money to be made in verticals, my friend.

"Mainstream" doesn't always equate to "success". In fact, trying to please everyone usually pleases no one.

Creaform is doing just fine. They wouldn't have been acquired otherwise.

<comment><USER4> Yes, there is a huge amount of profit to be made by just serving the traditional 'boring' industries. A company can be extremely well off without ever dipping into consumer market.

See for example Oracle as an example closer to programming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> *Creaform technologies start at $35K.

<comment><USER6> This one is $400. I've used it to scan people with pretty good results.

[https://structure.io/structure-sensor](https://structure.io/structure-sensor)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm really curious to see how this would work on humans.

It'd be great to see quality level similar to the Obama 3D scan available to consumers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpMOe7O88cY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpMOe7O88cY)

I've been hobbying around with Bellus3D's face app leveraging the iPhone's depth camera: [https://www.bellus3d.com/faceapp/iphone](https://www.bellus3d.com/faceapp/iphone)

<comment><USER8> I had a Fit3D total body scan done at a local clinic when starting a weight loss program. I was surprised by the detail level for something that cost me $5/scan. I had to switch to wearing bicycle shorts during the scans because the first time I wore just underwear and the result produced an inappropriate amount of detail in that area. My plan is to 3D print my "before" body and display it in my exercise area to motivate me. Might have to make a pair of shorts for it to wear or edit out those details in the obj file.

<comment><USER9> It would be interesting to split the models down the sagittal plane and join the left and right sides of before and after.

<comment><USER8> That's a pretty interesting idea. Can't see any reason why it wouldn't work. I'm only looking to lose 50 lbs so it probably wouldn't even need any additional rafting.

<comment><USER9> Would be pretty easy to cut and join the models in blender for a single print. You could even get creative with the cut too, instead of a sagittal cut you could do multiple horizontal bands or a helix...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Much like the 3D printer market of fifteen years ago, the problem isn't so much a lack of selection as the price. When out of the box 3D scanners get below $300 I'll get excited.

<comment><USER11> Have you looked at Structure Sensor before? (structure.io) - it's $399

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Can anyone suggest a hobbyist/entry-level 3D scanner? I have a 3D printer that I would love to replicate or modify some real-world objects on.

<comment><USER13> They all suck. I've tried so many from cellphones to $5k devices. Until you get into $20k systems, don't expect a workable scan that doesn't required many hours of CAD work for cleanup.

Photogrammetry will be your best bet. Also not cheap. [https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/photogrammetry- software](https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/photogrammetry-software)

I would really suggest learning Fusion 360 for mechanical or blender for organic modeling and build from scratch. It's a great toolset to know and can be very rewarding. It will teach your core skills that you can apply all the time with your 3d printer. If you have never done any 3d work before, start with tinkercad.com until you feel comfortable.

<comment><USER14> Tangentially related but I've had a 3D printer for years but only just recently learned Fusion 360; it has been a real game changer in terms of the kind of projects I can tackle. Can't recommend it enough.

<comment><USER15> I think Solidworks is a better bet for numerous reasons:

1) The interface seems to be simpler, especially when making things a little bit more complex

2) Greater amount of CAD models already available in this format

3) Greater amount of resources and tutorials

<comment><USER16> SolidWorks is $5000/seat, right? At least, for the non-Student version?

And the Student version is only available to people with a valid current student ID, and saves files in a format that is intentionally incompatible with the normal version?

<comment><USER17> Student files are not incompatible, but as soon as a student licensed copy touches a part or assembly, it becomes "tainted" (such that it says "student edition" in the corner or something). I worked at a university-based company where we had a bunch of student licenses and a couple pro licenses, and we had to be very careful about separating the files and making sure that the student edition never touched our professional files.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This would benefit from more threaded mount points. Presumably there's one on the bottom?

</comment><comment><USER19> i had the previous generation of this device.

incredibly good, but incredibly expensive and incredibly fragile.

</comment><comment><USER20> What SLAM algorithm do they use to achieve such high accuracy?

<comment><USER21> The accuracy they state is a maximum, it depends on how close you are to the object. The closer, the higher the resolution. It appears to be a structured light technique so it is limited by the resolution of the projector and camera setup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Something like this integrated in a smart glasses

<comment><USER23> this thing is 2.7 pounds, so there's a bit of a ways to go on miniaturization</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Better code readability/reviewability - <AUTHOR> I'm in a situation where several nested functions are used and each of these functions are present in different files (which are in different directories). (I'm sure there's legitimate reason for modularizing code to such an extent).
I'm having trouble reading the code and being able to understand what exactly is happening.
Is there a tool that would comment function calls and replace them with the function body instead so that I can read it better? Also, would it be able to do this on-demand.
For e.g., in ST3, I could call a function that would find the definition of the function in my project and replace it in my file and does not do so for calls made in the replaced function body until I ask it to?
In my context, this is about Javascript, but this is a language-agnostic question.
Alternate question: How the heck do you deal with situations like this? <comment><USER2> You're looking for a refactoring tool that can perform 'inline method' refactorings (the reverse of 'extract method', which turns whatever you selected into a function call)

And yes, the idea is language-agnostic, but tools doing it aren't, and, generally, tools are easier to write for less dynamic languages.

One way to deal with code you do not understand is to print out the various functions, sit down with them away from your computer, but with a few differently colored pens or pencils, and start making notes.

It also can help if you can single-step through the code with a debugger, even if it's just to be able to write down a few (inputs, return value) pairs.

</comment><comment><USER3> > I'm having trouble reading the code and being able to understand what > exactly is happening.

[...]

> Alternate question: How the heck do you deal with situations like this?

Rewrite the fragment so it's easier to understand. Because...

> [E]ach of [several nested] functions are present in different files (which > are in different directories). (I'm sure there's legitimate reason for > modularizing code to such an extent).

...you probably have code that works with several different abstraction levels at the same time.

And no, there may be no legitimate reason to keep it that much split up (as you call, "modular"). It may be just an abuse of overestimated DRY principle.

</comment><comment><USER4> Code connect maybe, best bet is to single step through the whole thing a few times.</comment>


Quit Social Media. Your Career May Depend on It - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/jobs/quit-social-media-your-career-may-depend-on-it.html <comment><USER2> Quote that will be of interest to many, if not most in the HN community:

"The idea of purposefully introducing into my life a service designed to fragment my attention is as scary to me as the idea of smoking would be to an endurance athlete, and it should be to you if you're serious about creating things that matter."</comment>


"Google now listing Wikileaks as a 'dangerous' site http://bit.ly/2ajvUmC" - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/756618117875376129 <comment><USER2> A site dumping SSINs like they're irrelevant. Well.

</comment><comment><USER3> Because of the DNC e-mail dump?</comment>


Learning eLisp - <AUTHOR> http://learn-elisp-for-emacs.uses.hn/ <comment><USER2> Don't forget that since you can safely assume somebody learning emacs lisp is _using_ emacs. You could provide some text as a commented emacs lisp buffer that can be evaluated in place, like a variant of literate programming.

<comment><USER3> And, Emacs comes with documentation on both Elisp and every built-in feature of Emacs itself... but apparently nobody reads that. It really confuses me, as the built-in documentation is like the whole point of Emacs...

<comment><USER2> No kidding! I've led a couple sessions where I've taught other developers how to use Emacs (basic or advanced usage), and I continually emphasize that the built-in help system (including info) is very good. You just have to get comfortable with the idiosyncratic terminology, and you can pick up half of that just from the C-h t tutorial.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can't make the help documentation work in Emacs - and I use it every day and have done for 6 or 7 years...

I can open it but I don't know how the navigation works.

<comment><USER2> Press C-h C-h (or type M-x help) and look at the menu that comes up. These are the essential ones, IMHO (I cut out about half):

        You have typed M-x h e l p, the help character.  Type a Help option:
        (Use SPC or DEL to scroll through this text.  Type q to exit the Help command.)

        a  command-apropos.  Give a substring, and see a list of commands
        	(functions interactively callable) that contain
        	that substring.  See also the  apropos  command.
        f  describe-function.  Type a function name and get documentation of it.
        i  info. The  info  documentation reader.
        k  describe-key.  Type a command key sequence;
        	it displays the full documentation.
        m  describe-mode.  Print documentation of current minor modes,
        	and the current major mode, including their special commands.
        t  help-with-tutorial.  Select the Emacs learn-by-doing tutorial.
        v  describe-variable.  Type name of a variable;
        	it displays the variable's documentation and value.
        w  where-is.  Type command name; it prints which keystrokes
        	invoke that command.

For example, type C-h a (command-apropos) and then type "compile". That brings up a list of commands with "compile" in their name. Each is also a hyperlink; moving the cursor to them and pressing Enter brings you to their documentation, which also usually _includes a link to their definition in elisp_.

"apropos" is a good example of using an idiosyncratic term used by the help system. Also: kill-ring, "window" vs. "frame", "point". You just need to learn these, but you can pick them up from the tutorial and Emacs docs in the info pages. (Most of the terms come out of old Lisp culture, AFAICT.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Honestly, the frequent "answerers" on SO don't know their arse from their elbow either. The way to learn Lisp is reading the Emacs source code. When you wonder how something words, do a describe-key and follow the link to the code. Explore. Edit. Learn.

</comment><comment><USER4> Lesson #0: It's Elisp or Emacs Lisp, not some intercapped 90s abomination.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's what they said on StackOverflow but I have not yet summoned the courage to work through the pages.

Waiting for a rainy evening with nothing on the telly :(

<comment><USER5> He was talking about your HN submission title. It should be _Elips_ or _Emacs Lisp_ , not _eLisp_.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well its through the book as well. I might be wrong but at least I am consistently wrong :(

The book will be fixed, the submission not so...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This looks nice. Looking forward to reading it.

On a related note, here is an interesting article from Steve Yegge on elisp (useful for folks like me who just want a quick primer)

<http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/01/emergency-elisp.html>

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I learned a chunk of stuff from that when I started writing the book as well...

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is a follow up to: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2057483>

</comment><comment><USER7> This is great. I have been dabbling in elisp myself (trying to debug a major mode I modified) and it is a nightmare, partially do to the lack of resources. The more resources the better.

<comment><USER3> What lack of resources? Every symbol in Emacs is documented in detail via describe-function or describe-variable. Emacs ships with four entire books; "Emacs", "Emacs FAQ", "Emacs Lisp Intro", and "Elisp". "Emacs" documents pretty much every user-visible feature in Emacs, and "Elisp" documents every programmer-visible feature. (And yes, they are built in; try 'M-: (info "Elisp")'.

And if that's not enough, it comes with nearly a million lines of example code, that you can get at with three keystrokes; describe-function / describe- key (etc.), TAB (to select the link to the source code), ENT (to follow the link). From there, you can edit the code, press C-M-x, and immediately play with your changes. Emacs is written in Emacs Lisp, and you can view the code and edit it at runtime. This makes Emacs Lisp significantly easier to learn than pretty much anything else, where all you have books with snippets of code that nobody ever used or ever will use.

Emacs does not lack resources for learning Emacs Lisp.

<comment><AUTHOR> Emacs has plenty of resources if you know Lisp - if you don't all it has is the reference manuals. I learnt to programme from IBM 360 Systems Manuals, and guess what, learning from reference manuals was shite then and is shite now.

I want to write a book that will get you to where you can profitably read the manuals.

<comment><USER3> Nah, the elisp intro is quite conversational and starts with "this is a list". The "Elisp" info page is a bit of a reference manual, but it is all well- organized and readable cover-to-cover. I learned Emacs Lisp this way and have a couple of the more popular Elisp projects on github, so the manual must have done something right :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Have people stopped designing for Firefox? This is what I get on 3.6.13: <http://i.imgur.com/26vC4.png>

The scrollbars disappear if you remove this attribute:

.hn-wc-body { overflow: auto; }

<comment><AUTHOR> hmm - what o/s are you on?

On windows with Firefox 3.6.13 I get: <http://imgur.com/G4yl8>

On Linux with Firefox 3.6.13 I get: <http://imgur.com/x5WRt>

It might be a font issue. We are finalising some layout features at Hypernumbers - this side project website is layout in a spreadsheet (I know, I know) so there are going to be some glitches. I suspect it is might be font related.

<comment><USER5> Linux as well. It might be that I'm using really big fonts on a really big monitor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What kind of modes are people writing nowadays?

I'm mostly a vim user, but everytime I dabble in emacs (usually to play with org-mode :-)), it seems to have just about everything covered... Just curious.

</comment><comment><USER9> Page seems cut off on the bottom "Generally? Well pleased..."

If that is really the end, it could use some padding.

<comment><AUTHOR> That really is an interesting Hypernumbers bug/feature which I will fix...

<comment><AUTHOR> (spoof fixed on the site)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Awesome. Am looking forward to the whole book.

</comment><comment><USER11> Dynamic scoping is eLisp's downfall :-(

<comment><USER12> there is now a "lexbind" branch in the Emacs development repository, so this won't be the case for long...

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> .hn for honduras

Clever.</comment>


How the video arcade industry fell apart in 1983 - <AUTHOR> https://arcadeblogger.com/2017/06/02/gdis-slither-the-1-3-million-dollar-crash-burn/ <comment><USER2> The title is misleading, it should read "how one arcade company fell apart in 1983". It took over a decade for the industry to fall apart.

In 1996 Capcom released Street Fighter 4, this game pulled in 5K per week per cabinet for the first 3 months after the vending company I worked for got it.

Golden tee golf was another extremely profitable arcade game made in the mid to late 90s.

Im pretty sure highspeed internet and connected game consoles is what caused the arcade industry to fall apart.

I have to say the arcade industry was most exciting and fun industry I ever worked in, huge profits in a cash business made for some wild and crazy after hour parties at the trade shows!!!</comment>