#Love: Virtually No Sex - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/14/love-virtually-no-sex/?ncid=rss&cps=gravity <comment><USER2> The quote, "Look to Japan to see the start of this growing trend: over 25 percent of young men and 45 percent of young woman say they are no longer interested in sex," is spurious[^1]. It is based on a shallow survey [^2] of a few Japanese men and woman who were put on the spot in a conservative culture.

[^1]: [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people- ja...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan- stopped-having-sex) [^2]: [http://www.ipss.go.jp/site- ad/index_english/Survey-e.asp](http://www.ipss.go.jp/site- ad/index_english/Survey-e.asp)

<comment><USER3> Indeed.

I'll believe many things will change as cultures shift and fashions come and go but the idea young people are no longer interested in sex would fall into the category of extraordinary claims thus requiring extraordinary evidence.

 _Cordelia: So does looking at guns really make girls wanna have sex? That 's scary._

 _Xander: Yeah, I guess._

 _Cordelia: Well, does looking at guns make you wanna have sex?_

 _Xander: I 'm 17. Looking at linoleum makes me wanna have sex._

[from Buffy the Vampire Slayer obv.]

I don't think that conversation will ever not ring true.

<comment><USER4> There is some studies that seem to indicate declining interest in sex. [http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/dating/s...](http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/dating/story/2011/03/more- hookups-on-campuses-but-more-virgins-too/45556388/1)

 _The percentage of those who claim virginity appears to be increasing, according to a National Center for Health Statistics study released this month of 2006-08 data. Among 18- and 19-year-olds, about one-quarter of men and women said they hadn 't had sexual contact with another person, up from 17% of women and 22% of men in 2002. Among those ages 20-24, 12% of women and 13% of men said they were virgins, up from 8% for both sexes in 2002._

It's fairly weak evidence so far. Never the less, I wouldn't dismiss the idea that the kids might someday find something more captivating than sex.

<comment><USER5> Perhaps you've forgotten your own adolescence, or perhaps you were lucky enough not to have trouble finding interested partners. But I feel it necessary to point out that, especially among teenagers, "never been laid" does not at all imply "doesn't want to be laid". (I'd have thought this trivially obvious to anyone over the age of say twelve, but...)

<comment><USER4> No reason to assume everyone works like you. My teen years was spent busily writing code and I had no interest in sex or the opposite gender. It's not implausible that the fraction of the population working like me could increase over time.

<comment><USER5> I spent plenty of time writing code in my teenage years, too. They're hardly mutually exclusive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I read this from top to bottom and really have no idea what the message of this article is about. It has the word 'sex' in it so it must be interesting, right?

<comment><USER7> It has a lot of random statements to try and justify the article as interesting. I'd like to see reasons why STDs will be eliminated besides 'because bioengineering' and then he links to an article about HIV 'cure'.

<comment><USER8> Are there any uncurable STDs left? Anyone who wants to be immune to HIV/AIDS just takes Truvada nowadays and even people who are raped get 30 days of anti- virals to prevent transmission. It's not a problem for the 1% any more, that's for sure, and the technology will filter down eventually.

<comment><USER9> Antibiotic resistant chlamydia, genital herpes, hpv.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There is something that feels a little dystopian about this article. Not in the George Orwell sense but more the Aldous Huxley sense. In Huxley's "Brave New World" the masses are brought under control, not by force or direct intimidation, but by reducing them to decadence and self-indulgence.

To quote Wikipedia's article on Brave New World as it discussed how the authorities maintain their totalitarian rule; "Recreational sex is an integral part of society. According to the World State, sex is a social activity, rather than a means of reproduction and, as part of the conditioning process, is encouraged from early childhood. The few women who can reproduce are conditioned to use birth control, even wearing a "Malthusian belt," a cartridge belt holding "the regulation supply of contraceptives" worn as a fashion accessory. The maxim "everyone belongs to everyone else" is repeated often, and the idea of a "family" is considered pornographic. Sexual competition and emotional, romantic relationships are rendered obsolete because they are no longer needed. Marriage, natural birth, parenthood, and pregnancy are considered too obscene to be mentioned in casual conversation. Thus, society has developed a totally different idea of relationships, lifestyle and reproductive comprehension."

People treat articles like this Tech Crunch piece as if they are somehow liberating but, to me, the tone of statements like this are soul-less: "If you thought contraception brought on a sexual revolution, a world without sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy or social restrictions will for the first time in thousands of years allow us to mate in the way nature intended: without restriction".

Sure, the elimination of sexually transmitted diseases would be a great thing, but to herald it primarily for the potential of the self-centered orgy it might bring is downright depressing and reeks of a man who has never had meaningful sex.

The assumption "as nature intended" would pass as propaganda in Huxley's writings.

I saw this quote from Neil Postman on HN some time ago and I think it is fitting in this instance:

"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us."

<comment><USER11> This is probably one of my absolute favorite comments I've read on Hacker News.

I think the scary part is that we have some mild but very real examples of these two dystopian visions in the world today. There are many Orwellian-ish regimes (e.g. North Korea, or to a very small extent the UK and its constant surveillance). But as can be seen, oftentimes this leads to a revolution and the regime falls.

But on the other hand, much of the western world today is more akin to Huxley's dystopia. American culture and society today is a fantastic example of being drowned in indulgence and stupidity, and being controlled by it. Just watch the constant pointless bickering on cable news for an example of this.

This kind of dystopia is much much harder to escape. There's nothing really to revolt against, because our stupidity & indulgence is our own captor.

Now, of course, both of these dystopian visions are extremes, and the real world is much more nuanced. But that's the purpose of literature; to make a caricature that we can use to more clearly see patterns in the real world.

<comment><USER10> I would say it's not necessarily our stupidity that is our captor, but our self indulgence. Personally, my waistline seems to be expanding - this is not (necessarily) because I'm stupid, but more likely to do with the fact that I like bacon so darn much that I refuse to give it up.

<comment><USER11> You're right, I agree. It's a combination of indulgence, narcissism, and stupidity; different people may fall more into some of these than others. And luckily for us, we have a lot of smart people who think different, so I don't think we're doomed either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> >If you thought contraception brought on a sexual revolution, a world without sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy or social restrictions will for the first time in thousands of years allow us to mate in the way nature intended: without restriction.

If this is how nature intended, why does it require thousands of years of technological progress to get there?

<comment><USER13> It's completely erroneous to think that nature "intends" anything. That would require intellect (at least a little), and that's only within brains, to the best of our knowledge.

Things happen, in evolution and elsewhere, when random chance and external pressures come together.

<comment><USER12> I don't mean "nature" as an explanation for action, as in your second line, but as a guide for it. The context in the article uses it in the guiding sense. My point is that the article uses "nature" in a very short-sighted and artificial sense. I do think that discussion of "nature" can be part of a broader teleology for human action, but that's obviously not what the author is attempted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "It would seem from the above that men prefer quantity to quality but the reality is somewhat different."

[http://www.chrisharding.net/wetherobots/comics/x2008-01-07-M...](http://www.chrisharding.net/wetherobots/comics/x2008-01-07-Misinformed.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Jr8ckChJQh.jpg)

<comment> apa-sl This part about differences in both sexes approach to dating services (guys going into quantity, girls being flooded with messages). It's 100% true. But Tinder is not the only solution.

Before Tinder we've started to work on Elimi project which blocks contact between girls & guys until the girl will allow selected guy to contact her. And how she does that? By simple task-based games with guys (from 1 to 4 in one game). It seems that people like the idea behind Elimi. You can try it on iOS and Android (beta): [http://www.ElimiApp.com](http://www.ElimiApp.com)

<comment><USER14> Thanks, I like the idea in principle. Unfortunately it doesn't (yet) support my old htc desire.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is like saying that using a heater will cool you down, because eventually we'll run out of gas. The article may have a point in one of many possible future realities, but not in the one we currently live in.

</comment><comment><USER16> > _Those of you who scoff at the idea that people will prefer to have sex with > robots rather than each other, be warned: the tipping point is within a > generation, and when that tipping point hits, the revolution will happen > very quickly._

Shoutout to the webcomic "Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life", which used this as a starting premise ten years ago (scroll right):

[https://web.archive.org/web/20040306080712/http://www.bohemi...](https://web.archive.org/web/20040306080712/http://www.bohemiandrive.com/nineplanets/episodes/2/)

</comment><comment><USER17> Proper love is not so easily sublimated, nor is proper sex

</comment><comment><USER18> A phrase you sometimes hear, especially in the context of the 1950s and '60s, is "Every generation thinks it invented sex."

Over-literate high-tech corollary: "Every generation thinks it will destroy sex."

That said, there is legitimate bad news. I don't doubt the numbers ascribed to Japan (25% of men and 45% of women having no interest in sex). In the U.S., among people over 25, you'd probably see similar numbers. And this is in spite of (or because of?) an over-the-top sexualized pop culture that is obsessed with adolescence.

In fact, extended adolescence is the problem. Humans have two sex drives. One is r-selective and peaks around 17. The other is K-selective and peaks around 35. Stereotypically, men have a stronger r-drive than women and women have a stronger K-drive. In practice, probably almost all humans have both, and age/gender differentiations are properties of the aggregate. (Differences within groups are greater than those between groups. There are K-heavy young men and r-heavy older women.) The r-selective drive wants variety, escape, and often not a small measure of depravity. It's socially unacceptable and people don't really admit to it, and most would rather ignore it. The K-drive is the wholesome one tied to long-lasting emotional bonds and that built civilization.

Negative stresses provoke the r-drive and squash the K-drive. This makes evolutionary sense, because the r-drive's purpose is to repopulate after a catastrophe, and the K-drive (quality over quantity) flourishes in stability. That's why extreme income inequality is actually _dysgenic_ , despite the love for it by "Social Darwinists". It encourages reckless, r-driven sexuality in rich (to assert power) and poor (to escape). It diminishes the K-drive because people look to the future and don't really want to bring children into it. The result is that you have more people born of r-driven couplings than K-driven, and the r-drive doesn't much care if the other person's intelligent... The good news (and if you don't think this is good news, you're not literate) is that, thanks to birth control, the r-driven couplings rarely produce new people. No one likes when girls go for bad boys (or when men go for useless ditzes) but _thank fucking Xenu_ that those couplings aren't producing new people at anywhere near the historical rate.

Japan actually has a low level of income inequality, compared to the U.S., but it has a hierarchical work culture. Being someone's subordinate for 8-12 hours per day just murders the K-drive. The stress of subordination stokes the r-drive which would, in 700 AD, be inclined to rape and pillage, and with probably less of the pillaging. However, modern society gives a plethora of healthier, legal and less dangerous outlets for that r-drive: pornography, video games, Internet trolling, prostitution, bizarre and often violent cartoon media, or a casual-sex "pickup artist" "Game" that, while still unhealthy and disturbing, is far better than the pre-modern practice of starting a war as an excuse for society to (a) kill off some surplus, low- status men, (b) acquire resources for the low-status men who survive, and (c) give those angry, low-status, otherwise sexless men a chance to rape people. These surrogate activities are much better than their ancient, barbaric predecessors.

In broad strokes, the picture we see is that the pervasive subordination (involuntary extended adolescence) inflicted by corporate dominion squashes the healthy, K-selective, sex drive and that, while it encourages the r-drive, that's one that is best met through means other than sex.

Is this going to kill sex? Nah. Society is sick, and the supposed "sexlessness" trend is one of the ways people are dealing with it. Technology is providing healthy replacements (and sublimations, like video games) for the r-driven sexuality that wasn't much good for human civilization in the first place. K-driven sexuality has been reduced (temporarily) by society's over- reliance on hierarchical work structures that (a) make the vast majority of people subordinates, (b) resulting in an epidemic of involuntary extended adolescence, and (c) make forward-thinking people disinclined to bring children into a broken, burning world. The picture looks bleak, and society _is_ really sick right now, but is society going to _die_? I doubt it (unless an environmental catastrophe intervenes). I think the culture is at or near a nadir. It might be worse (perhaps a lot worse, perhaps violently worse) in 5 to 10 years, but in 30 years, human civilization will be better than what it is now. And so is _sex_ going to die out? Not a chance.

<comment><USER19> Any references where this K and r drive distinction is put forward?

<comment><USER18> Wikipedia has a good synopsis of the concept in general: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_and_K_selection](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_and_K_selection)

Worth keeping in mind is that most higher animals (humans included) aren't one or the other. It's a continuum. Higher animals tend toward r-selective patterns of behavior when under stress (to repopulate after a catastrophe) and K-selective patterns in stability.</comment></comment></comment>


Will We Live On Mars? (Predictions From 2000) - <AUTHOR> http://www.time.com/time/reports/v21/science/mars.html

<comment><USER2> Things like this make me sad, because I fear that the optimism of my own generation regarding things like space exploration, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and other potential technological leaps forward are just as futile and fanciful as the last generation's were. Someone cheer me up :)

And also, how the _hell_ did we put men on the moon in the 1960s?

<comment><USER3> Futile? Look around, they're _happening_. Now.

Don't look on CNN, though. It gave up science coverage.

There's been a lot of progress made in the fields of "things journalists don't really understand", which encompasses an ever-wider range of stuff, including robotics, materials science, biology in general, private space research, and several other things.

Oh, your really fanciful stuff might be impossible, but the merely possible is happening. Just... _slower_ than you'd like, but still, happening.

<comment><USER2> Forgive my ignorance, but what are some good sources to read about stuff like this?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> an aside about mars plans. what is the deal with all these inflatable habitat and self constructing memory metal ideas? why would you build on the surface when one of the main concerns is radiation? there are lots of cracks int he surface of mars. with much less material you can simply roof off one of these and carve rooms into the walls of the fissure. Build down dummies.

</comment><comment><USER5> And to think the fears of the day were the Soviet Union was going to beat us to Mars.</comment>


Windows 10 – v20.04 released (May 2020) - <AUTHOR> https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10ISO <comment><USER2> Title should be build 2004 not v20.04

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, you're right!

It was a bit "à-lá-ubuntu" but it was intentional as i thought it would bring the topic more attention. :)</comment></comment>


Can your satnav do this? - <AUTHOR> http://edcooke.memrise.com/2011/03/how-to-build-satnav-that-doesnt-make.html

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll be the first to admit that the best ideas here aren't feasible in the foreseeable future.

But what I like about it is that this technology would make us more, rather than less, human.

</comment><comment><USER2> What a fantastic idea. Wikitravel may be a better source then just Wikipedia for this. I'd buy this app.</comment>


Clojure from the ground up: Macros - <AUTHOR> http://aphyr.com/posts/305-clojure-from-the-ground-up-macros

<comment><USER2> One of the most powerful uses of Clojure's macro system has been in the core.async library. This has enabled the construction of a library with operators similar to Go's Communicating Sequential Processes [Hoare 1978].

What is different about Clojure's implementation is that no changes to the compiler were required - 'deep walking macros' ([http://blog.fogus.me/2013/07/17/an-introduction-to-deep- code...](http://blog.fogus.me/2013/07/17/an-introduction-to-deep-code-walking- macros-with-clojure/)) were used - that actually restructure the code.

The benefit of this in the library is that when a process is blocked, the wait is converted to data and the thread is freed up and returned to the pool. You can have multiple processes talking to each other with a thread-pool size of one. (And still reason about the code in a neat way).

The benefit of this comes in the JavaScript environment, (via ClojureScript) where you can compile code that you would ordinarily coordinate with threads using CSP. (With Go-lang style operators)

You can see an example of this on David Nolen's pages here: * 10,000 processes [http://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/02/100000-processes/](http://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/02/100000-processes/) * 100,000 updates [http://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/02/100000-dom- updates/](http://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/02/100000-dom-updates/)

This is the power of macros in Clojure - things that would require a compiler extension in another language, are a library in Clojure.

<comment><USER3> That last sentence should more aptly be "This is the power of macros in a Lisp - things that would require a compiler extension in another language, are a library in a Lisp." as all the other Lisp's have the same advantage; Clojure is not special in this regard.

<comment><USER4> Clojure has other advantages which other lisps and go don't have such as immutable values and a prevalence of expressions (as opposed to statements), both of which give core.async certain features that go's implementation lacks.

<comment><USER5> False.

Please go read up on modern scheme. particularly racket lang.

In many respects, Clojure is Racket, but on the JVM rather than native.

<comment><USER6> Racket is one other good example but he was responding to the "all other lisps" claim. Racket pretty unusual in many regards, so I think the Dwightian "False" was unnecessary here. Or anywhere, really.

<comment><USER7> _Racket is a Scheme:_ _Racket is still a dialect of Lisp and a descendant of Scheme. The tools developed by PLT will continue to support R5RS, R6RS, the old mzscheme environment, Typed Scheme, and more. At the same time, instead of having to say "PLT 's main variant of Scheme," programmers can now simply say "Racket" to refer to the specific descendant of Scheme that powers PLT's languages and libraries._

[http://racket-lang.org/new-name.html](http://racket-lang.org/new-name.html)

<comment><USER6> Indeed. Now name all the other Lisps and Schemes in wide use that are based on immutable data structures.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> These articles tend to miss a new development in JavaScript: sweet.js ([http://sweetjs.org/](http://sweetjs.org/)), hygienic macros for JavaScript. It is essentially scheme's syntax-case/rules completely for JS, and it's done _really_ well.

<comment><USER9> Sweet.js is really cool, but it's not really a new development in JavaScript per se. It's a preprocessor. You can't actually use it in a JavaScript program any more than you can use CoffeeScript in a JavaScript program — instead, you have to write a Sweet.js program and have it create your JavaScript for you. It's a great addition to the JavaScript ecosystem, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Code-walking macros are very powerful, but there's a performance caveat:

[https://code.google.com/p/chibi- scheme/issues/detail?id=114#...](https://code.google.com/p/chibi- scheme/issues/detail?id=114#c3)

For most macros, this won't be an issue. But if you wind up with code-walking macros than can be nested, you need to be mindful of the nesting or your code might take a while to compile.

</comment><comment><USER11> Superb set of examples, thank you very much :)</comment>


Hydrogen car to be 'open source' - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8103106.stm "improvements will be sent back, so that what the company refers to as its "network of manufacturers" can contribute to the overall development of the product line." - so, an open source development model for engineering. <comment><USER2> Hydrogen cars: still 100% nonsense.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Open source engineering that is, rather than software.</comment>


Slashathon - <AUTHOR> http://www.slashathon.com

<comment><USER2> Since it's almost impossible to read the font on the landing page, it says:

Slashathon is a hackathon where developers create applications and technology within twelve hours. The music-oriented event offers developers a unique challenge to create solutions for artists to engage with their communities around an album release.</comment>


Our continuing commitment to your privacy with Windows 10 - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2017/01/10/continuing-commitment-privacy-windows-10/#T1XtoToOrXLdUWvE.97 <comment><USER3> I'm uncomfortable sharing the amount of time I have games running with Steam; I certainly don't want MS to have information about which applications I'm running and for how long.

MS and I have radically different expectations about what privacy means in the context of a personal computer.

In particular, I run applications I've written myself. You could easily figure out what I'm doing from knowing which application was in the foreground at any given time.

Contents of files etc. is at the extreme end of privacy violation. I strongly object to the thinnest end of the wedge.

<comment><USER4> Thank you for bringing up the invasive and crazy anti-privacy policies of Valve/Steam, it boggles my mind that so few people have problems with it.

Could you imagine if Facebook pushed a notification to all your friends when you visit a new page?

If Microsoft sent an email to your entire contact book every single time you opened a program?

And yet, that's precisely what Steam does. Insane.

<comment><USER5> Hmm. For the most part I only play games in a social setting - <USER2> multiplayer or online - so it may be different for me. When I join an IRC channel, every other user sees "wallacoloo has joined" and I've never heard anyone complain about that. It's an open invitation, "hey, I'm here now - message me!" Similarly for Steam, the notification serves the purpose of saying "hey friends, I'm playing Rocket League now if you want to join".

Isn't the whole point of friending people on Steam so that they can play games with you? In that case, this behavior seems pretty intuitive to me. Though from that angle, broadcasting this announcement for single-player/non- networked games doesn't really achieve anything and should maybe not be the default.

<comment><USER4> "When I join an IRC channel, every other user sees "wallacoloo has joined" and I've never heard anyone complain about that."

I'm okay with Steam saying "Soandso has logged on" but not "Soandso has moved their mouse 400 pixels, double left clicked, and is starting new software... stay tuned!"

"Isn't the whole point of friending people on Steam so that they can play games with you?"

The whole point of steam is a distribution platform. It has a defacto monopoly on computer gaming with some 3/4 of the entire market through the platform.

Sure, I play the occasional multiplayer game, but the other 80% of my behavior doesn't need to be publically broadcast against my will at all times.

It's ridiculous: I have to click "appear offline" then log into the Steam Chat website just to play a game and not have my steam account announce that to everyone I know. Sometimes you just don't want to push notify everyone you know about your every behavior.

Also -- why be friends on steam? "Dude you didn't friend me yet" "Dude i sent u my info a week ago" "Dude i thought you said you wanted to friend me" "Dude" "dude"

You have to friend people or they get offended. Social networks and psychology man. I just don't want a f'n social network in my video game launcher. Crazy. Not every single computer endpoint has to be a social network.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This comes across as: "Now that we've got all your private data, there's a diminishing return on maintaining a system to collect it again, so we'll go for some positive PR by putting this interface up and let you secure a false sense of privacy"

They've been collecting "telemetry" through an opaque encrypted collection system [1], and after a year of this collection, comes a "deep commitment to privacy"? This is very difficult to believe. Am I needlessly cynical here?

[1] As far as I know, nobody has decrypted the "telemetry" streams, so we don't actually know what MSFT is collecting, so nobody can be sure that it doesn't collect your sensitive documents, private keys, keyboard logs, etc.

<comment><USER7> Your subjective opinion is noted, but I'm confused how someone with this read would ever be appeased.

Sequence of events:

1\. Microsoft ships an OS with signal collection roughly analagous to OSX. 2\. Microsoft is raked over the coals for this. 3\. Microsoft scales it back a bit. 4\. People demand more. 5\. Microsoft actually makes a UI and offers even more cutbacks, with less collection by default and a more thorough set up experience. 6\. People claim this is a PR stunt.

What the hell do you actually want other than a black hole to swallow the Redmond you learned to hate in high school? That ship has sailed. They're already gone.

<comment><USER8> I want a way to completely opt-out. That's it.

Is that so unreasonable?

<comment><USER9> You can already do that. Just block their servers.

<comment><USER10> You can't. They whitelisted IPs and Domains in kernel mode part of Win10. Good luck, and I hope you carry a hardware firewall with your notebook.

<comment><USER8> Wow, is that right?

I do block searchui.exe at the network level, and that works. Unless you block it, Win10 talks to MS with every local filesystem search, even with Cortana and web search integration disabled.

Only telemetry and windows update is whitelisted in the kernel?

<comment><USER7> I couldn't find any corroborating evidence to back that claim up, for what it's worth. It's sort of true for the insider editions (but those are a semi- private beta program).

<comment><USER8> I hadn't heard of that either. I think he was probably incorrect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's telling that the lowest telemetry level is considered a premium "Enterprise" feature [1], and there's no way to disable it entirely.

[1] [https://technet.microsoft.com/en- us/itpro/windows/manage/con...](https://technet.microsoft.com/en- us/itpro/windows/manage/configure-windows-telemetry-in-your-organization) CTRL-F "windows 10 enterprise"

<comment><USER12> Thanks for that. I _still_ can't tell, from looking through it -- are they going to stop harvesting wifi access point passwords? That alone (along with many of the other items) is a non-starter.

<comment><USER13> It seems misleading to describe Wi-Fi Sense has harvesting passwords - that's a side effect and not the purpose.

That said, I'm not sure if Microsoft still stores Wi-Fi passwords at all; if they do, they removed the primary benefit: Wi-Fi passwords can no longer be shared. The Wi-Fi Sense privacy page only talks about open networks now. _If_ they still store Wi-Fi passwords on their servers, it must be only used for profile sync. I can't find any information one way or another.

[https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10-about-wifi- se...](https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10-about-wifi-sense)

<comment><USER12> A lot of what Microsoft does regarding privacy is misleading.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> That's funny, it's a web-based privacy dashboard that only works when you link your Windows 10 account with your Microsoft Live account. In other words: the opposite of privacy.

Your bing search history shouldn't be linked to your identity in the first place. Same for cortana and edge. So Microsoft isn't getting any kudos for allowing users to see what kind of data is being collected on them (which they have to do by EU law anyhow).

I applaud any serious projects that advance privacy but this ain't it.

<comment><USER15> The web-based dashboard is for your MS account. Keep reading and you'll see what's coming to desktops.

<comment><USER14> Except they're still collecting everything by default and shifting the responsibility to review the privacy settings to the consumer.

They conclude:

> When it comes to your privacy, we strive to make choices easy to understand > while also providing clear visibility and control over your data.

This is entirely the wrong approach. Just don't harvest the data in the first place. Have opt-in measures if you must. That's it. That's what a serious commitment to privacy looks like. Anything else is a serious commitment to get away with harvesting as much data as possible while minimizing PR backlash.

<comment><USER16> (disclaimer, ms employee here and the below is just my opinion).

> Just don't harvest the data in the first place.

for better or worse, I just don't think this is feasible anymore. Telemetry is, by now, a fundamental part of the engineering process. Products that don't incorporate it are going to be clobbered by products that do. Microsoft didn't start this paradigm, but I think they had to incorporate it in order to stay competitive.

If you can't avoid telemetry, I think the next best thing is to be transparent about it (with respect to what's being collected, how it's being used) and allow the user some control over it (by letting them 'clear' data that's been collected, and opting in/out as needed). In that respect, I don't think the steps taken today are sufficient, but they are headed in the correct direction. I also think they are being more open/transparent than many other tech companies (who do similar things without receiving nearly as much negative press as MS).

<comment><USER15> Telemetry is important if you've gotten rid of, you know, the QA teams MS had in the past

<comment><USER16> Can't tell if you're being tongue-in-cheek, but that was kind of the problem. The cost it took to do QA for Windows was immense, and even with an army of testers, there were still highly embarrassing (and very expensive to fix) flaws in the product _all the time_. Windows had to find a cheaper solution or die a slow death in the market.

Earlier I said "Products that don't incorporate [telemetry] are going to be clobbered by products that do". High QA costs are the biggest part of this.

<comment><USER17> > The cost it took to do QA for Windows was immense

As it should be when you're developing an OS for 90% of the market across a huge variety of hardware. There's really no way around that, and jettisoning QA teams as a cost-saving response is incomprehensible to me.

Trusting telemetry alone to ensure the robustness of your product will result in a "good enough to ship" focus on mainstream work-flows and leave corner- cases unaddressed since they're rare. And corner-cases are where the bad, system-breaking things happen.

Telemetry should help QA people write mundane automated test-cases to cover the 99% and then enable them to go and spend the _constructive_ part of their time focusing on breaking the system. But it's absolutely not a replacement for QA.

<comment><USER16> I'd say that 'jettisoning QA teams' is a mischaracterization. The role is still filled, it's just evolved a lot since the windows 8.1 (and prior) era. Similarly, I'd say that 'Trusting telemetry alone' is also a mischaracterization.

From where I sit, both roles are combined. The output is a far smoother engineering process and a higher quality OS. You mentioned 'corner cases [being] unaddressed' but I've witnessed the exact opposite: most of the criticism I hear about Win10 has nothing to do with quality.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Having the default position of gathering everyone's personal information and requiring them to learn more about your policies before manually opt-ing out is a huge problem, and it's one of the major reasons why I upgraded my personal Computers from Windows 7 to Ubuntu. The "GWX" thing didn't help either.

How about you take a page from your own book and go back to an O/S that strictly runs my programs and doesn't look for analytics in my computing habits? Honestly, taking payment for a product and still using the client as a product through gathering analytics is double-dipping. It's monetized twice over and provides no added value to the user.

</comment><comment><USER19> I regret ever using Google or Facebook services so extensively. I'm on Windows 7 and intentionally never upgraded to Windows 10 due to the privacy issues. From this announcement it doesn't sound like there's anyway to 100% remove any tracking for all applications. Am I mistaken?

<comment><USER20> Microsoft mistake was to mark telemetry as such. Everyone where happy with win 7 and 8 where this was hidden from user...

<comment><USER8> Windows 10 telemetry collects far, far more data than the customer experience program did on Windows 7 and 8-- and you could opt out of the CEP.

(Note that Microsoft patched Win10-style telemetry into Win7 and 8 in 2016, so this is no longer the case. But it was when those OS's were current.)

<comment><USER7> But Windows 10 doesn't collect much more than Apple and Safari do. It collects substantially less than iOS and Android do. And of course, all of this ignores that individual 3rd party software is actually the real culprit (along with websites).

<comment><USER8> That's immaterial, because MacOS allows users to opt-out of data collection. Windows does not.

Mobile operating systems are a completely different animal.

<comment><USER20> I very much doubt osx let's you disable all data collection and still allow you use the store and its apps and iTunes content and all that.

<comment><USER8> You can't use their store without any data collection because the core functionality of a store entails sending data to Apple. That's fine and I don't count it as telemetry.

Like I said elsewhere in the thread, I expect Spotify to know I listened to "Bring Me to Life" by Evanescence when I streamed it via their program. That's perfectly fine. I don't expect MICROSOFT to know that.

<comment><USER7> > That's perfectly fine. I don't expect MICROSOFT to know that.

Why do you think they do as it stands? Unless of course you use the media player from their store. iTunes has a nearly identical setup.

In general they're only collecting the outer edge of application usage. I hope people realize Apple effectively has the exact same data via their bundled store solution? The idea that MS is unique or even first here is wrong.

<comment><USER8> According to Microsoft, on "full" telemetry they actually could know I listened to that song if the Spotify program crashed.

Note that Enhanced is the default today, but Full will be the default telemetry level in the update this thread is actually about.

Anyway, that was just an example illustrating the difference between an application talking back to its server to deliver core functionality and OS telemetry.

<comment><USER7> Apple collects the crash reports for App store apps too. They just continued to use the brand testflight. But it's all Apple now.

If the app developers elect to use testflight to manage crash reports (which they're suggested to do, and it's a good service for devs), then yeah, Apple owns that pipeline. So yeah, they do end up handling that data.

<comment><USER8> Apple allows you to turn it off.

[https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202031](https://support.apple.com/en- us/HT202031)

Again, I have no problem with telemetry being on by default, so long as the user is permitted to opt-out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > We are continuing this commitment to make it as easy as possible for you to > make informed choices about your privacy with Windows 10

Can I choose to keep all of my data private? Why is there no opt-out?

They like to talk about the benefits of the sharing the data with them and I think that's great. They should make it so compelling that I _want_ to share my data. So far, they haven't. I feel like I'm giving up far too much for what I'm getting in return.

</comment><comment><USER22> "We also recognize organizations have different needs than individuals when addressing privacy."

Translation: in our opinion, individuals don't need that much privacy. So we won't give them any.

<comment><USER23> In contemplation of those "news", I recommend a refreshing lecture about free software from Richard Stallman:

[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more- impor...](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more- important.html)

Excerpt: "With free software, the users control the program, both individually and collectively. So they control what their computers do (assuming those computers are loyal and do what the users' programs tell them to do).

With proprietary software, the program controls the users, and some other entity (the developer or "owner") controls the program. So the proprietary program gives its developer power over its users. That is unjust in itself, and tempts the developer to mistreat the users in other ways."

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> >At Microsoft, we are deeply committed to protecting our customers' privacy. This includes providing clear choices and easy-to-use tools that put you in control of how your information is collected and used.

LOL here I stopped reading this FUD. Do they still re-enable telemetry when updates to them are installed?

<comment><USER8> Yes, they do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> My god this is painful to read with all the cold and opaque corporate speak. When they start referring to everything as 'experiences' my brain switches off

<comment><USER26> Under Ballmer, you never had a Microsoft press release or any other statement without the word "innovation" sprayed all over it.

It seems that the new Microsoft are now using the word "experience" for the same effect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I do like how the "simplified" privacy controls conflates sharing choices you would want to make with sharing choices that don't benefit you in any way. E.g.: Share your location with the weather app and microsoft? Yes/No. Share your location _only_ with the weather app? Sorry, that's not possible.

<comment><USER28> To be fair, if the weather app is developed by Microsoft, then you are sharing your location with Microsoft.

<comment><USER29> There is no need for the weather app to identify you as the user. It only needs to fetch the weather data for a given location.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Windows 10 vs Android vs iOS data collection. Has anyone written up a good comparison? (I guess I am thinking of these in their mobile OS form).

</comment><comment><USER8> This is standard Microsoft BS.

"Basic" telemetry is absolutely not required for Windows to function. How do I know that? Because I turned it off using a 3rd party program (link below) and Windows still functions.

Windows Enterprise and Education can set telemetry to "Security" which is ACTUALLY a minimum reasonable setting for Windows to function. They explicitly block Windows Home and Pro users from setting telemetry to "Security".

It's outrageous that MS gets away with this. If only videogames released on MacOS, I would have switched years ago.

O&O Shutup10: [https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10](https://www.oo- software.com/en/shutup10)

"Security" telemetry description: [https://technet.microsoft.com/en- us/itpro/windows/manage/con...](https://technet.microsoft.com/en- us/itpro/windows/manage/configure-windows-telemetry-in-your- organization#security-level)

<comment><USER31> "It's outrageous that MS gets away with this. If only videogames released on MacOS, I would have switched years ago"

MacOS collects this same telemetry data. Do you trust Apple over Microsoft? It's non-identifying data that is used to make their products better and track crashes. Now they are going above and beyond other products and letting you turn even that non-intrusive feature off.

<comment><USER8> I don't trust anyone.

Apple allows MacOS users to opt-out of their telemetry. Microsoft doesn't.

That includes this change, too, by the way. Users still are not permitted to opt-out of telemetry on Windows 10 Home or Pro.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> "Continuing" implies that it was there in the first place, and I don't believe that to be the case. Between

\- The telemetry,

\- Spying on kids by default ([https://boingboing.net/2015/08/10/windows-10.html](https://boingboing.net/2015/08/10/windows-10.html) \- I helped my kid disable this on his new Christmas laptop), and

\- The "share your Wi-Fi passwords with your friends" feature

I just don't have any confidence that Microsoft isn't analyzing everything I do and sharing all my metadata with anyone who wants it. Say what you will about macOS and Linux, but at least with those I'm the customer and not the product.

</comment><comment><USER33> I just built my father a new computer and while I know that Windows 7 has some related issues they are nowhere near the level of Windows 10 (and that bit about forced restarts sounds a whole lot like an involuntary bsod 'crash' from about 1996...). Thus I went out of my way to get a license for W7 Ultimate... which cost more than the equivalent for W10. Makes me wonder.

<comment><USER34> Iirc, in an update end of 2016 the full telemetry weapons have been pushed to W7 and W8 by default. All three OS now include the same level of telemetry. Just wanted to let you know.

<comment><USER33> Sigh. Thanks for the reminder.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> > _Continuing commitment to privacy with Windows 10_

MWAHAHAHAHA... Jesus. Just read it word by word.

That's some Grade A newspeak. Such a strong wiff of Orwell.

</comment><comment><USER14> Recommended for Windows 10 users, although you may want to review every change carefully.

[https://modzero.github.io/fix-windows- privacy/](https://modzero.github.io/fix-windows-privacy/)

</comment><comment><USER36> On the surface, I'm glad Microsoft is doing this. However, it's hard for me to ignore the idea that with these positive changes might come hidden, negative changes. That is, I don't think I can trust Microsoft to just do what they say they're doing in this announcement; I won't fully believe this is better for privacy overall until people have been over the new version of Windows with a fine-toothed comb and confirmed it. Plus, there are indicators (like the language around the switching off of invasive settings) that Microsoft's goal is still to collect way more data than seems reasonable.

</comment><comment><USER37> _My_ continuing commitment to my privacy means that I continue to stick with Windows 7, and only for those things that I must use Windows for. Everything else is done on Linux.

I acknowledge that this alone doesn't guarantee my privacy, but I refuse to make it _easy_ for corporations to rifle through my personal documents and watch me like a hawk.

Aside from that, I object to having a "free" upgrade option shoved down my throat so often and aggressively that I've got to hack the registry to shut it up. It's clear that Microsoft _still_ doesn't give a damn about what I want as a user.

<comment><USER8> Microsoft added Win10-style telemetry to Win7 in 2016. You're running it right now!

<comment><USER37> And like I said, I realize that avoiding the upgrade to Windows 10 doesn't guarantee my privacy...but I'm not making it easier for Microsoft. I'll continue to disable that nonsense by removing specific updates.

And I'll continue using Linux. Redmond can double-down on their Orwellian fantasy while calling it the opposite, but in the long run it will cost them dearly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> As long as Windows 10 continues to establish unsolicited tcp connections on boot, there is ZERO privacy.

<comment><USER39> Many OS' and apps create unsolicited TCP connections on startup to check for updates, seems a touch harsh to equate that with "Zero Privacy", also kind of hard to see how they do product updates without them...

<comment><USER40> _kind of hard to see how they do product updates without them..._

It's very easy to see how they do product updates without them. Simply have the user do "software update ..." at his convenience.

What you meant to say is it's kind of hard to see how they FORCE product updates without them.

<comment><USER39> For non-technical users, it seems pretty likely that a product without automatic updates, users won't update frequently.

This results in users getting compromised... a lot... that's why pretty much every heavily used piece of consumer software now does automatic updates, from Apple, to Google to Microsoft.

Decrying automatic updates as "zero privacy" seems a bit daft in that context.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> So, still no way to opt out.

I expected Microsoft to realize how much trust they've burned, and that the data from 5% of users who bother to change their settings aren't worth the bad PR. As a result, I expected that after however long it takes for a big company to react to feedback, they'll do an about-face and try to salvage what they can. Seems like I was wrong (or they need another year or two to come to that conclusion).

</comment><comment><USER42> As a user I don't feel save enough to trust my operating system with its word, that if I'm going to dissable shit it stays off. I'm still on Win 7 and still sometimes don't feel sure, that it does what I say it should.

</comment><comment><USER43> Brilliant double speak. If Micrisoft cared at all they would have one big button called turn off all collection.

<comment><USER44> Yes, and without having to make an account to do it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Oh finally, Microsoft tackled _NONE_ of Windows 10's privacy problems. I can't believe the most common PC operating system in the world tracks you by default and prevents you from completely opting out.

If only Linux ran Overwatch as well as Windows does, I'd never boot this spyware again.

</comment><comment><USER46> I didn't read the article, but the title makes me assume that I have no privacy. Good news doesn't get delivered with titles like that.

</comment><comment><USER47> "commitment to your privacy with Windows", says the data collecting PRISM program member.

It's so surreal that there are no words for it anymore.

</comment><comment><USER48> I'm using the O&O ShutUp desktop software to disable all of the invasive telemetry, phoning home, etc.:

[https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10](https://www.oo- software.com/en/shutup10)

There's also a few scripts on GitHub like win10-unfuck:

[https://github.com/dfkt/win10-unfuck](https://github.com/dfkt/win10-unfuck)

<comment><USER49> Saw this on hacker news the other day [https://gist.github.com/alirobe/7f3b34ad89a159e6daa1](https://gist.github.com/alirobe/7f3b34ad89a159e6daa1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> Can't use the privacy manager without a Microsoft account.

I just threw up a little in my mouth.

</comment><comment><USER51> IOW, not enough committment yet to make Windows 10 suitable for the internet.

I understand.

This is by design.

</comment><comment><USER52> Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me for the 10,000th time...

</comment><comment><USER53> continuing?

I stopped reading. Marketing bull does that.

</comment><comment><USER54> ('Our continuing commitment to %s with Windows 10', s)

</comment><comment><USER55> I hate hearing my hard drives grinding away only to find its windows fucking telemetry. I keep trying to shut it off to no avail.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think this is great, they are pretty upfront with what they are collecting and why they need that

What's with all these negative comments here? Does any other os give you so much information about what is going on behind the scene?

<comment><USER56> Seriously? Linux and BSD, for example, give you complete control over all the information harvested from you.

<comment><USER20> Most of the time. Do you remember Ubuntu amazon search? Their geolocation database?

<comment><USER57> Yeah, one distribution tried this a few years back, got grilled to a char by the community for it, and swiftly trashed the idea. This is nothing like Microsoft turning Windows into one giant dark pattern and trying to convince the world that it's progress while showing no signs of backing down despite the overwhelming backlash.

Ubuntu's Amazon integration was a failed experiment in an ecosystem with literally hundreds of other players to choose from while Microsoft's Windows telemetry is an inescapable dogma forced upon all Windows users.

<comment><USER20> Ubuntu is still doing some questionable things.

At least on 16.04 gvfs-http would sometimes create hundreds of connections to the mothership even with all privacy settings maxed out.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Job board that promotes diversity and equal opportunity - <AUTHOR> http://equalopportunity.work <comment><AUTHOR> Trying to build a different kind of job board and make the world a better place. Please let me know what you think, any feedback is welcome!

Right now this website is aggregating the jobs from other job boards by certain keywords. The idea in the long run is to completely remove the scraper component and only feature jobs that get submitted directly on the website.</comment>


A Startup is Like Mass "God Gets Mad if You Don't Show Up - <AUTHOR> http://jrodthoughts.com/2012/11/21/a-startup-is-like-mass-god-gets-mad-if-you-dont-show-up/

<comment><USER2> My word that looks awful. If you're trying to write seriously, drop the smilies. They clash with the fake stitching.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for feedback. I am pretty sure I've been writing seriously for years but I welcome your feedback regardless.\

JR</comment></comment>


Show HN: RentMyCPU – Rent your CPU power and get rewarded - <AUTHOR> https://www.microsoft.com/fr-fr/p/rentmycpu/9nr0k759tvqq <comment><USER2> English page, though for the US market it says "not available": [https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/p/rentmycpu/9nr0k759tvqq?sou...](https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/p/rentmycpu/9nr0k759tvqq?source=lp&activetab=pivot:overviewtab)

I think there isn't enough information on the page to make an informed decision before buying. No information what software run, how it is kept in check (sandboxing, maximum CPU load limits etc) and what kind of rewards are available.</comment>


Hacker who launched DDoS attacks on Sony, EA, and Steam gets 27 months in prison - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/hacker-who-launched-ddos-attacks-on-sony-ea-and-steam-gets-27-months-in-prison/ <comment> ga-vu Good riddance</comment>


Show HN: A programming language that uses only parentheses - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/cammckinnon/Parenthetic

<comment><USER2> See also CPAN's Acme::Bleach module (language written only in whitespace).

As a bonus, the Acme::Bleach module will take an existing perl program and convert it (overwrite it) with a version written in whitespace.

"The first time you run a program under use Acme::Bleach, the module removes all the unsightly printable characters from your source file. The code continues to work exactly as it did before, but now it looks like this:"

[http://search.cpan.org/~dconway/Acme- Bleach-1.13/lib/Acme/Bl...](http://search.cpan.org/~dconway/Acme- Bleach-1.13/lib/Acme/Bleach.pm)

<comment><USER3> Interesting & related post on Perlmonks yesterday... _The History of Acme::Bleach and Acme::EyeDrops_ \- <http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=967004>

Also relevant is Damian's Rod::Logic module. Unfortunately this hasn't reached CPAN (yet!) but examples can be found in his talks (for eg: [http://blip.tv/open-source-developers- conference/temporally-...](http://blip.tv/open-source-developers- conference/temporally-quaquaversal-virtual-nanomachine-programming-in- multiple-topologically-4466153))

</comment></comment><comment><USER4>
      Error handling

      If your program has a runtime error or a compiletime error the interpreter
      will print "Parenthesis Mismatch" to standard output and then exit.

Priceless. The sad thing is that most "modern" programming language offer basically identical erro reporting.

<comment><USER5> _A friend of mine in a compiler writing class produced a compiler with one error message 'you lied to me when you told me this was a program'._ —Pete Fenelon

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Considering how numbers are represented, I'm reminded of John Horton Conway's article on _Surreal Numbers_ , wherein he starts with an empty set and one rule, and derives the totality of all numbers. Could make for an interesting basis for a language.

<comment><USER7> <http://www.oocities.org/qpliu/conser/>

<comment><USER6> That...is awesome. Will take some time to wrap my head around.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This looks like somebody made a mistake using sed on lisp code accidentally deleted everything but the parenthesis. I don't know which is cooler, this or brainfuck.

<comment><USER9> It could be an interesting problem to write a piece of code that performs one task when run as a Lisp program and another when run as Parenthetic. Or the same task even.

<comment><USER10> Bonus point if you also use interleaving whitespace [1] to hide yet another program.

[1] <http://compsoc.dur.ac.uk/whitespace/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> In pure functional programming, so well mentioned in some PG's articles, you have only functions - no numbers. You can make numbers from functions, though. Then, you may have a basis - a set of functions which are sufficient to represent arbitrarily complex algorithm, i.e., Turing complete set; see here - <http://dkeenan.com/Lambda/> .

Such a set may consist from only one function. So, the whole program is a structure of calling that function. Writing down such a program, we obviously don't need to write the function - it comes by default; we only need to write the structure, which can be represented by ( and ) . In a different way, than what I see here, but still - one bit per parenthesis, very simple processor, lots of memory and lots of steps for simple operations - a Turing tarpit...

</comment><comment><USER12> I have two related ideas for a useless language, this is very close to the first one.

The first idea is that you normally use at least 2 symbols for a programming language, but you can in principle get away with just one. The "vanilla" form of this idea is to use the length of the processed string as the instruction itself -- that is, it has a bit pattern which gives you two symbols to play with in principle. Of course that's pretty ugly so you can instead do something slightly more "advanced" and use a non-character as a delimiter; the most obvious choice is file boundaries on a filesystem, but in principle any data structure boundary can be used.

The second useless language that I want to create is one which I'm not even completely sure works. The idea is that you have some number of nodes -- let's say 256 -- which each contain some number of bytes -- let's say 4. Those bytes represent two (node pointer, instruction) tuples. These get initialized to a definite 1KB prelude, and the computer starts at node 0. The instructions can also manipulate registers and a much larger memory space, and can load ints from that memory into other nodes, but the 1 KB is needed for the interpreter.

The idea for this useless language is that, the computer chooses one of the two tuples randomly, performs its instruction, and then goes to the node it points to. >:D

The basic idea is that all esoteric languages seem to be about "how do you program familiar thing X if you don't have Y?", but I have 256 instructions so I'll give you all sorts of wonderful functions to call on your registers. The problem is really just that the computer does not natively want to follow a deterministic path, and you have to "herd it" into that mentality.

<comment><USER13> You might be somewhat interested in my esoteric language, DevPerc: <https://github.com/TazeTSchnitzel/DevPerc>

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I can pass subtle messages to astute readers by carefully crafting parenthesis in blog posts. This should be fun.

</comment><comment><USER15> If this is Lambda Calculus Tarpit like Turing Tarpit[1]? It seems like that to me.

[1][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_programming_language#T...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_programming_language#Turing_tarpit)

</comment><comment><USER16> My programming language that uses only ellipses got buried last week. Yes, a programming language with one character, and no whitespace.

<http://listrophy.github.com/ellipsis/>

</comment><comment><USER17> Last week there was the semicolon language (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3854130>), now parentheses. My guess is next week we'll see the tilde language.

<comment><USER16> See Ellipsis: <http://listrophy.github.com/ellipsis/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Cool. A Brainfuck-ish langauge, but more powerful.

I initially thought it would have been a pain to write just the test programs, but I guess they were just programatically search-replaced from Lisp programs?

</comment><comment><USER19> I am impressed by the purity. Takes homoiconicity to the next level.

</comment><comment><USER20> Clojure 2

</comment><comment><USER21> Hey! I made a programming language that only uses 1s and 0s... oh wait, never mind.

</comment><comment><USER22> Wow. The first ever modern langage I have seen in years. :+p

</comment><comment><USER23> You are a complete idiot :D (good fun thumbs up)

</comment><comment><USER24> Whats the point!!

</comment><comment><USER25> (.)(.)

<comment><USER26> exactly my thoughts, now I want a programming language that uses only boobs :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This made my day

</comment><comment><USER28> .-less

</comment><comment><USER29> (Why?)

</comment><comment><USER30> Seems like a "how can i design a bad intermediate language" project.</comment>


Why Asparagus Makes Your Pee Smell Terrible - <AUTHOR> https://www.seriouseats.com/2020/09/asparagus-pee-asparagusic-acid.html <comment><USER2> I knew that Asparagus had this effect, and I knew that some people couldn't smell it.

I didn't know that there were some people who did not have this effect happen to them.

And I didn't know the names of the specific chemicals involved.

Although, I did think that the chemical they added to natural gas to give it that unique smell was called Ethyl Mercaptan, not what was stated in this story.

<comment><USER3> Ethyl mercaptan is just another name for ethanethiol. So both you and the story are correct.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think most of us knew this?</comment>


Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - <AUTHOR> https://med.stanford.edu/chronicfatiguesyndrome.html <comment><USER2> A New Yorker article on this topic has also been on HN today: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18321230](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18321230). Both threads are good.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been diagnosed with CFS. I had a diagnosis of Kawasaki disease, autoimmune vasculitis, at age 3. And reoccurring fevers and sore throats every three months (coresponds with lifecycle of EBV). Pneumonia and mono as a teenager. I've had a mild case of CFS for a little over six years that became more severe three years ago, both following mono infections. I'm unable to work without a recovery period that lasts for days. During a year long infection with the Epistein Barr Virus I lost my sense of smell, started losing my hearing, have problems with depth perception/driving, and the sustained focus required for reading. I lost my ability to do circuit analysis and BASH. I used to be a high level athlete and lost half my strength. I got very lucky and discovered that iodine can treat Epistein Barr Virus, otherwise the prognosis for a EBV infection of longer than 6 months (CAEBV) is death. The requirements to get disability in the United States for the disease of CFS basically requires a diagnosis of CAEBV plus a impossible to prove "subjective" criteria that basically guarantees you will have to go in front of a judge and be subjected to their opinion of the condition. When shopping for a lawyer I was refused to even have it on my application as a disabling condition despite it being listed in the social security "blue book."

I'm also missing 10% of my mitochondrial DNA and have a gene which is the single largest risk factor for MS (also caused by EBV).

I lost my mind during the last infection.

The virus is interesting. It's one of the most common viruses and has an ability to cause the body to "forget" adaptive immunity. It reproduces in response to low vitamin B12 levels or mitochondrial dysfunction.

<comment><USER4> That's a tough situation, I feel for you. Not implying this is the solution, but I'm curious if you've tried ketogenic diets/fasting? They induce mitochondrial biogenesis, and appear to affect immunity positively.

*edited spelling

<comment><USER3> I eat a low carb diet. I don't think ketogenic is a good idea due to liver and kidney damage. I do intermittent fasting everyday. I keep meaning to go on a longer fast every now and then...

I recently got food stamps so I've been enjoying food more :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> A personal anecdote: recently I came quite close to being diagnosed with CFS or fibromyalgia but luckily found out I have primary hyperparathyroidism. I have no idea how all the doctors could have missed it, I had to figure it out myself.

"Of all the missed diagnoses of ME/CFS and fibromyalgia, primary hyperparathyroidism proves to be one of the most tragic simply as a result of how treatable the condition is relative to the suffering it can cause." [https://phoenixrising.me/archives/23988](https://phoenixrising.me/archives/23988)

<comment><USER6> How did you figure it out, did you look at the results of your blood test and do a self-diagnosis from there?

<comment><USER5> I've been trying to diagnose myself for a long time (about a year) before I figured it out. By that time I've been to my doctor multiple times, to two orthopedic doctors, one gastroenterologist, had 3 spine MRIs, gastroscopy, abdominal ultrasound, chest X-ray, a bone scan, lots of lab tests incuding lyme disease, probably other tests and physical therapy. I was to the ER twice where they also had no clue. Someone even advised a psychiatry referral which I did not go for. I got on the right track when I was studying endocrine diseases and happened to include calcium on a panel of blood tests I ordered for myself (presumably because I stumbled upon hyperparathyroidism). Once calcium came back high, it was clear after 2 more blood tests, and the doctors at the Norman Parathyroid Center (where I'm having surgery) confirmed it based on my lab reports. I'm having surgery in 2 days.

<comment><USER7> Good luck. Just wanted to chime in that my Dad had similar (albeit milder than yours) issues and ran across the Norman Parathyroid Center website while researching his problems. He had surgery there about 6 weeks ago and indeed they found and removed a dime sized tumor.

He has high praise for the docs there. And he's had an excellent recovery. Energy and alertness has returned full force! Hope your results are similar.

<comment><USER5> Thanks. Indeed I read only praise of this place, and their web site is an excellent source of information. It is now quite certain I have this but until I get the surgery and see the problems resolving I still worry a _little_ bit if we're right :)

Supposedly it is rare in young people (I'm 29), maybe that had something to do with nobody seeing this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My father started suffering from ME/CFS about 20 years ago. Fortunately it is not so severe that he can't enjoy life, but he had to stop working (and the authorities didn't support early retirement because it's not a well understood condition).

I remember my father was initially off work with a virus, and then subsequently was diagnosed with some sort of thyroid condition which required lifelong prescription drugs to treat. But he never fully recovered (complained of constant fatigue, muscle aches in the morning, and a flu-like feeling) and eventually was diagnosed with ME, although there is no test to prove it definitively, whatever it is.

</comment><comment><USER9> My wife suffers from CFS, and for the first two years, she was pretty much bed ridden. The first six months she couldn't even read in bed because she was so exhausted she couldn't concentrate enough. Lucky we had a dog to keep her company.

We tried various techniques through the years including modafinil (and sleeping tablets at night to counteract that), but nothing really worked beyond a temporary solution.

These days (7ish years later) she can work full time as long as she maintains her energy envelope. So doesn't do much on weekends, needs to rest up.

</comment><comment><USER10> Is there evidence of a well-defined physiological mechanism rather than merely being a symptom cluster that might be purely psychological? Some brief Googling suggests that CFS is sometimes precipitated by various viral or bacterial infections, which is a step in the right direction, but I haven't read anything yet that rules out the alternative hypothesis that this is a (cluster of related) psychological disorders that is sometimes prompted by a life event. The dozen patient organizations campaigning for recognition is a bit of a red flag.

<comment><USER11> First I want to say that determining something as Psychological doesn't put you in much better of a position than just saying something is a somatic condition we just don't understand yet. Secondly, to sufferers who are upset by this idea, please don't be. Yes, when the vast majority of people hear that a condition is psychological, they somehow think it's easier to deal with, less real, madeup or somehow not physical. This is wrong and any good physician will treat you with the exact same empathy and respect whether they believe something is psychogenic or somatic.

Ok, with that out of the way, the answer to your question is yes and no. Some folks emphasize the comorbidity of ME/CFS with depression to try and establish ME/CFS as a psychogenic illness. Some cases of CFS improve with the introduction SSRIs. Which further embeds this belief. But its entirely possible that the depression is a result of the day-to-day suffering. And the improvement reported with SSRIs isn't just a result of the sufferer's generally improved disposition.

The main difficulty with CFS is that it is currently a bucket diagnosis. So, you end with people in that bucket that have other diseases. For example, there are probably a good number of people in the CFS bucket that have an autoimmune disorder like Rheumatoid Arthritis or Spondylopathies because the mechanisms of diagnoses for these are somewhat unreliable and the effects of treatment are purely subjective if blood tests are consistently normal.

Without some differentiator, it's really difficult to study the condition with confidence. Any effect or symptom sampling will be diluted if our bucket has multiple diseases in it. It's because of this that I think sufferers should resist the temptation to pitch their tent around the CFS flag. But I do understand the yearning to have a name by which to call your affliction.

<comment><USER12> "Comorbidity" \- but which causes which? Depression can absolutely lead to fatigue. But if you were healthy, and suddenly you have absolutely no energy, and your brain is fuzzy, and you're sleeping 14 hours a day and still don't have any energy the other 10 hours, well, _that 's depressing_.

<comment><USER11> This is why I wrote...

> But its entirely possible that the depression is a result of the day-to-day > suffering. And the improvement reported with SSRIs isn't just a result of > the sufferer's generally improved disposition.

Though I meant is where I wrote isn't there.

<comment><USER12> Note to self: Read more thoroughly next time...

Mea culpa.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Montoya is still prescribing Valcyte for patients even though his own study found that there was no significant difference between Valcyte and placebo (even though the Valcyte arm had more symptoms at baseline):

[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/jmv.23713](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/jmv.23713)

</comment><comment><USER14> Ron Davis, also at Stanford, has been working on some diagnostics on severely ill MECFS patients. It is a severe disease that has been underfunded and under researched for many years. My son got sick steadily over years, and luckily his is not as severe as others, but it got me very worried.

</comment><comment><USER15> For HNers with ME/CFS (or an interest in it) I can recommend last year's documentary Unrest by Jennifer Brea: [https://www.unrest.film/](https://www.unrest.film/). It's available on Netflix.

It's a confronting look at the human side of severe ME, and a call for greater recognition. If you've had people around you struggle to understand what you're dealing with, showing them Unrest could help a lot. Check it out.

<comment><USER13> While it's a good movie, I found it very negative in that it didn't show any recovery stories. Jen herself seems to have recovered a lot, and has been travelling around the world to talk about Unrest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think in several cases the cause can be traced to taking multiple courses of ciprofloxacin or other fluoroquinolones which have been known to be mitochondrial topoisomerase poisons for decades. The drugs are super dangerous for public health and should be reserved for last resorts and the medical industry is finally catching on.

If you ruin the mitochondrias ability to reproduce you will develop latent muscular and neurological dysfunction.

<comment><USER3> There was a study in 2008 that showed the majority of people with chronic fatigue had mitochrondrail dysfunction that corelated with the severity of symptoms.

<comment><USER13> If you mean Myhill, her studies haven't been replicated. More recent studies have shown similar mitochondrial ATP between patients and controls.

[http://www.biochemsoctrans.org/content/early/2018/04/16/BST2...](http://www.biochemsoctrans.org/content/early/2018/04/16/BST20170503)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Anyone tried BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) for Epstein-Barr Virus or CFS? It is claimed to be active against lipid-containing viruses like EPV:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butylated_hydroxytoluene#Healt...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butylated_hydroxytoluene#Health_effects)

</comment><comment><USER18> Related longform article from a first-person perspective:

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/07/07/a-sudden- illne...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/07/07/a-sudden-illness)

Edit: Weird...this article now also on the first page of HN.

</comment><comment><USER19> Sleep apnea at the surface looks like CFS since you aren't consciously aware that you stop breathing in your sleep but still feel tired all of the time when you wake up in the morning.

<comment><USER20> Lots of things look like CFS on the surface, including depression. I expect there will turn out to be many distinct physical diseases responsible for what we call CFS, as well as simply depression. I remember first reading about CFS over a decade ago when most of the information available on the internet was on sufferers' blogs and forums and being struck by the prejudice against mental illness. There were a lot of comments to the effect that, "The doctors said it was all in my head, but then I learned that Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is a real disease! It totally changed my life knowing that I was sick and not crazy! I don't have to hate myself anymore." A lot of anger was directed at doctors who suggested psychological explanations. Even saying, "We can't find any physical cause, so maybe you should talk to a psychologist as well," (which sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me) was treated as a disrespectful, belittling, arrogant, and sexist. Which I suppose it was in many cases — there's certainly enough prejudice to go around. But for me as someone seeing a therapist for depression it certainly made me look at the people around me differently, having that unguarded glimpse into the revulsion that some people feel.</comment></comment>