Rural residents' DIY 1Gbps fibre project - <AUTHOR> A community in Lancashire, England, has taken it upon themselves to dig, lay and build a complete 1 Gbps FTTH network. Members of the community have been able to buy shares to finance the project, and then they've mucked in to carry out all the leg-work themselves, with farmers digging trenches and other locals installing the technology. I find it very inspiring: especially given I live in London and still can't get FTTH. Business plan, videos and info on their website: http://b4rn.org.uk<p>EDIT: title changed from "...DIY Google Fiber project" to "...DIY 1Gbps fibre project" <comment><USER2> This may actually be much easier in a rural area, as opposed to urban/suburban.

Rural landowners have large tracts of land, and the land is in fewer hands. You need less individuals to buy-in, since a single buy-in on the project can mean miles of line.

You don't need a jackhammer to dig up sidewalks and streets, and you (presumably) don't need as many (if any) permits; you don't need to take as much care not to disrupt existing utilities, and you don't need to worry so much about noise and other regulations.

<comment><USER3> Shouldn't this be a very attractive market for commercial ISPs then?

<comment><USER4> Of course not, the expense of the fiber and equipment itself is the same but the number of customers and thus the maximum revenue is far lower.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Communities like this were a factor in accelerating the broadband buildout in Sweden as well.

Here, when we broke up the telco monopoly, instead of splitting it up regionally (like AT&T), they were split into roles. So after the splitup, the ownership of all the POTS copper and related infrastructure (buildings, backhaul etc) ended up as a separate entity[0] who had to treat everyone the same and couldn't favor a single telco.

Come DSL. To get DSL, this company obviously has to upgrade the local switches for DSLAM operations, and for this operation they would charge the first telco to request a DSL connection for the upgrade. In the DSL buildout rush at the turn of the century, the big telcos obviously focused on densely populated areas. So people who lived on switches that were too small to be attractive to any big telco would start up a coop like this to save up to pay for the upgrade themselves, and there were several small broadband operators who would take care of the technical, broadband-providing bit. And once your switch was upgraded, suddenly you could get your pick of any of the DSL providers.

There were/are also a ton of small, local wireless providers who use directional antennas to service people who live too far away from a DSLAM.

[0] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanova>

</comment><comment><USER6> B4RN is using burial, which is a great approach for reducing long-term maintenance, but the extra costs of burial may or may not work in other localities.

Burying wires in gravel, or burying below the usual furrow depths in farmer's fields is fairly easy, and trenchers are commonly available. (And if you bury your wires outside of the growing season, you won't disrupt the farming.)

In an area of the US that I'm familiar with, the granite ledge and glacial erratics (big rocks) would make burial problematic. Nearly all electric and telecommunications distribution wiring is accordingly overhead; on poles. With the problems that brings; ice storms, trees, etc.

Rural distribution does have some advantages in terms of not digging up existing infrastructure, and the ability to easily trench connections across the gravel-surface roads, but the cabling distances are usually (much) longer, and the numbers of and densities of houses and potential subscribers are (much) lower than in urban areas.

This means that the survival economics of the installation are fully in play; how many subscribers you'll gather, and how much to join, and how much to maintain the (overhead) wiring. This is why many rural areas of the US will tend to have DSL broadband, at best. DSL is cheap(er), and it uses the existing copper.

As with the rural electrification and rural telephone efforts that preceded this in the US, the stumbling block for rural broadband is the (large) installation costs; they're not a financially viable undertaking for commercial entities.

Incumbent telcos are seeing their business go to cellular, and wireline subscribers are dropping. Some of the telcos have been in and out of bankruptcy. Because of the budgets and the wireline subscriber trends, incumbent telcos also aren't inclined to install wiring ahead of a requirement; dark fiber isn't commonly installed during repairs in this area.

Yes, you might hope to see some of the incumbents build out broadband as a way to stay relevant. But in rural areas, that build-out involves greater distances and lower (potential) customer densities, and with higher on-going maintenance costs. And around we go...

<comment><USER7> We build a fiber optic link of 10 miles in rural areas for less then $400 per house. I think many of the assumptions you make are incorrect, as we find no rural area that is to expensive to service. Just don't ask the incumbents.

<comment><USER8> The problem with incumbents is there already making money selling the old product which means Fiber instillation needs to be paid back on their 'extra' profits from running Fiber.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here in the U.S., the local monopoly would have had the law changed to make this illegal :)

<comment><USER10> Like this?

[http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/22/time-warner-and-embarq- ca...](http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/22/time-warner-and-embarq-cant-compete- with-city-owned-isp-trying/)

See also: <https://savencbb.wordpress.com/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> What I really like about projects like this is the fact, that local communities organize themselves and get things done, that the bigger entities are not able to tackle.

The more I read about such endeavors and the more I think about it, I believe, that local communities in a connected world have more power than

a; they thought for a long time, due to the fact, that a lot of things are decided far away. b; a lot of bigger players would like them to have.

They might not be as "efficient" or as "moneymaking" but that might be actually a good thing.

For example, building this network underground is much more resilient, than on poles. But I also believe, that the bigger players, will try to enforce their role, as such initiatives get more common.

The same might happen, as power generation becomes much less centralized or as food production (hopefully) returns to a much more local situation.

I really hope to see more such initiatives, not only in Britain, or Europe, but on planet-scale.

</comment><comment><USER12> Interesting project, thanks for sharing.

The link, <http://b4rn.org.uk>, should have been directly used when submitting this.

This is not digg, nor slashdot, nor reddit. A description of, or commentary about, what you are submitting is not required, as the content should speak for itself.

</comment><comment><USER13> How is this "Google Fiber"? Can't we just call it fiber?

edit: title changed, thanks!

<comment><USER8> I think they meant "Google Fiber" as "Google class Fiber" meaning that 1Gbps standard. But, I agree "1Gbps Fiber" is clearer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I applaud the effort but not the method.

The last video on their website shows the trenching, laying and backfill operation. IMO, it's better to lay a 2" or 4" continuous PVC pipe between the access points rather than lay the outdoor fiber directly into the trench.

It's better for protection, diagnostics, additional capacity, and if needed, other types of cable (twisted pair, coax) can be run alongside.

I think what they are doing is great, but seeing the workers walking all over the fiber while backfilling the trench made me shiver. Isolating and repairing a break is going to be difficult downstream.

<comment><USER15> Trenching a conduit is multiple times more expensive than laying fiber direct. More than likely using conduit would not be cost effective.

With a conduit you have to: (i) purchase the conduit, which is more expensive than the fibre cable itself, (ii) install the conduit, (iii) blow the fiber cable into the conduit and (iv) install all the support infrastructure required for a conduit system, such as manholes and cable wells.

Furthermore access points have to be installed at close enough intervalls to make air blowing or water jetting possible. In rural settings this might well be far more often than otherwise needed for a direct burial network. In all the steps along the way, a conduit based network drives up the cost, resulting in a multiple on the buildout cost.

Protection, diagnostics, additional capacity and other media. None of the aforementioned are necessary any better or easier in a ducted network. A duct does not protect against backhoe fade any better than a proper direct burial cable. Diagnostics are done the same way in a ducted and a direct buried network. However direct burial cables with metallic streng members are easier to find than a non-metallic ducted cable. Adding more cables to a small diameter duct is not always easy, feasible or straightforward, especially if the duct was not properly or professionally installed. As to other media, such as metallic cables, the whole point of installing a fiber network is to only need to maintain one outdoor plant, not multiple legacy networks.

In addition to the extra cost, there is a lot of fun and games to be had if you install ducts in regions with subzero temperatures. Water is going to get into the ducts and then you are going to have giant icicles with cable in the middle and duct on the outside.

Walking on a proper direct burial fiber optic cable is not even going to register. Anything less than a backhoe is unlikely to even leave a mark. On the other hand if you even look funny at a ducted cable, you might have problems.

Repairing a ducted network or a direct burial network is basically the same. You excavate the problem area and you replace the faulty parts. The main difference is that in a ducted network, you are going to spend most of your time fiddling and fixing the ducts, less time with fixing the fiber optic part.

Now, what a ducted network gives you, is flexibility, but at a greater cost. If properly built that is. A ducted network means you might not have to retrench later, but this might not be an issue in a rural setting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> There is some financial trickery going on here. It's buried in Section 6.1.3 of the business plan (pp 23-24).

Any resident who invests £1500 or more can nominate a property for free connection and one year's free service. The tax authority gives a tax credit of 30% of that £1500, and the investment can be sold back in year 4 (2016?) at full value.

So, pay £1500 (or more) in 2012, get £450 in 2012 tax credit, then sell for £1500 in 2016. That's a 9.2% ROI plus free Gigabit Internet service. Of course, there's risk involved, just like any startup investment.

</comment><comment><USER7> We run a couple of startups like B4RN, one in the US, one in Europe en one in South America. We build our own 10 GBps routers.

Come join us, we have room for extra founders. info at buurtnet dot org

<comment><USER17> I see nothing on that site about the US. Where would I find such information?

<comment><USER7> I'm not displaying any info on the US on our sites, as we are still in stealth mode and have fierce (but toothless) competitors. If you want info, email me at info at buurtnet dot org

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> As someone who grew up in a rural part of the UK, I can empathise with how annoying it is to be limited to a 56k connection with daily timed limits (usually around 3 hours or so) to be connected when all of your city dwelling friends have 1mbps broadband.

I wonder if this is as much to do with property values as anything? It must be very difficult to sell a house with no option of fast internet and the modern internet must be basically unusable on 56k.

<comment><USER19> I live in rural Yorkshire, and there's a village about five miles from me where broadband is not available - at all. There's no FTTC/H, no ADSL, no 3G coverage from any network, nothing. Residents still use either dial-up, or expensive, high-latency satellite connections from an outfit called Tooway.

It's a beautiful little village, not bad for commuting into the nearby city of Sheffield, but last time I looked, there were several houses to rent, that had been up for rent for over three months each, in a rental market that's generally red-hot. The lack of broadband is surely an issue. I'd move there if broadband was available, and I'm sure a lot of other people are in the same boat.

The issue here is that the rest of South Yorkshire has now been wired into a publicly-funded FTTC operation called Digital Region (<http://www.digitalregion.co.uk/>) which I'm using right now. The connection quality is good, I get a full 40Mbps with the option of raising it to around 110Mbps for more money - but the network is failing financially, because they've wired up places that are already connected to BT "Infinity" FTTC, instead of those areas which don't get broadband/fast broadband. My small town is one of the few places which has Digital Region and not Infinity, and I don't know anyone else with a DR connection.

<comment><USER7> If you tell us the name of the beautiful little village, we'll be happy to come build our 1-40 Gbps fiber in this village. Finding a local contact to help us get started would speed up that process.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> If you go active ethernet, not GPON/EPON...

This is now particularly economical for two reasons, aside from the cost of the fiber to the home itself (either aerial or buried, which is going to cost more for labor/bucket trucks/trenching than for the fiber itself). Why?

1) Inexpensive good quality 24-port 1U switches from Taiwan (Planet.com.tw) with 24 1000Mbps SFP ports, 10gigE uplink.

2) Inexpensive $65 1000BaseLX SFPs

3) CPE routers like the Mikrotik RB2011Ls which have a SFP port.

</comment><comment><USER21> I helped build a couple in Finland back in 2003. The lack of bureaucracy and city infrastructure in rural areas likely helped, but the driving force was my uncle - a CS professor/farmer who retired from teaching and had to find something else to occupy his time ;)

</comment><comment><USER22> This is a great initiative. I wonder if there are any plans to bridge sections with WiMax or similar and/or break out from 1G fibre to Copper GigE or wifi in population points to reduce the client-side install and equipment cost.

<comment><USER7> We use some of these tricks to reduce cost for people who don't need 1 GBps. But serious users all want 10 GBps fiber. We deliver that over 4 redundant connections of 10 Gbps each.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Haha, I just got a picture of "There Will Be Blood" 1Gbps version :)

</comment><comment><USER24> One notable thing I don't see mentioned anywhere on the site: where do they plan to get their upstream bandwidth from, and for how much?

<comment><USER7> We buy our transit and our peering at neutral not-for-profit internet exchanges.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Thnk you for sharing. The business plan is a very eloquent document, that helps.

</comment><comment><USER26> Power to the People!</comment>


Amazon Losing $10 on Every Kindle Fire - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2393947,00.asp#fbid=wv21ok3cKmV

<comment><USER2> Previous HN discussion:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3058207>

By the way, HN Search was an epic fail at finding this earlier thread, but it easily turned up in a site-restricted search on Google.

</comment><comment><USER3> Well, this just exemplifies what everyone has been saying; that amazon's business model isn't the hardware, it's what's sold after that initial buying of the hardware.

So they lose $10 per tablet, but people buy a lot more then that in merchandise.

</comment><comment><USER4> Razors and blades. They'd give them away if they had guarantees people would purchase enough stuff through them.</comment>


Girlboss – trailer for a Netflix original series - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-U2G280kmI <comment><USER2> Wow. Now you too can vicariously live a life of entrepreneurship from the comfort of your couch.</comment>


Having lots of friends and socialising makes intelligent people miserable (2016) - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3504132/Why-smart-people-tend-loners-Having-lots-friends-socialising-makes-intelligent-people-miserable.html <comment><USER2> Wikipedia has an article about one of the authors of the study, Satoshi Kanazawa, that explains why he is so controversial - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Kanazawa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Kanazawa)

<comment><USER3> It's unfortunate to find that someone serioulsy holds such views, especially an academic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Much though I hate voting up a Daily Mail article, this is interesting.

I've posted the abstract of the study behind this story at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13836648](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13836648) but that is just the abstract.

</comment><comment><USER4> I see we've reached peak HN early today.

</comment><comment><USER5> The Daily Mail's science reporting is just about the worst there is.

They've spent years sensationally classifying almost everything on earth into things that either cause or cure cancer (often the same things).

</comment><comment><USER6> tenuous.</comment>


Ask HN: Non-social media startup, 40+ founders seeks support and funding - <AUTHOR>

Greetings,
When I asked a friend of mine to introduce me to the folks at Y Combinator, he essentially said that I'm about 20 years too old, and way too experienced, for Y Combinator. Further, I'm not doing social media, mobile apps, HTML5, etc - another strike against me. After reading through Hacker News for awhile, I'm inclined to agree with him.
Are there Y Combinator like environments for high tech startups working in other spaces? (ediscovery, in our case.) I've submitted to Angel List but am interested in seeing if there are other opportunities.
One major issue is that I moved out of the Bay Area three years ago to Central Illinois. I'm wondering if I need to move back for a few months simply to get access to the in-person opportunities.
Insight would be welcome. <comment><USER2> _After reading through Hacker News for awhile, I'm inclined to agree with him._

Maybe you should just apply and see what happens? Why are you coming to an apparent foregone conclusion and then actively trying to make it reality?

Remember what Henry Ford said? "Whether you think you can or can't, you're right."

Also, if you look at the list of things YC actively say they are interested in, you'll find that it's far larger than just social media, mobile apps and HTML5. <http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html>

<comment><AUTHOR> Greetings,

Oh, we applied to Y Combinator, I should have made that clear. I'm just trying to evaluate our chances, and seek out other opportunities in case YC doesn't pay off.

<comment><USER2> Ah, OK. The original post made it sound like you had decided to not even bother applying.

Good luck on the application!

 _Are there Y Combinator like environments for high tech startups working in other spaces? (ediscovery, in our case.)_

I don't know of any that specialize in ediscovery, but there are absolutely other "YC'ish" incubator type programs, of various types, around the country. Somebody was compiling a list a month or so ago, search the old posts a bit and you can probably turn up that post.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> There are quite a few groups in Chicago. The talent and money is starting to come with the booming growth of Groupon. You have lightbank but they focus on social media, there is also excelerate which is a yc type incubator also in Chicago. I think they do bi-yearly funding classes.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for the information, 'tis appreciated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> yes, move back to sfo.

mindcrime is right - whatever you focus on will come true. your biggest enemy at this point is negative belief. Lots of 30 and 40 year olds start startups and do very well.

stop talking to your negative friend - people like that are to be avoided like the plague.

You should be first getting a lot of insight and then applying. If your state of mind while applying was similar to what it is now you might not be able to put together the best pitch.</comment>


Porsche Unveils Taycan Interior - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/22/inside-the-porsche-taycans-minimalist-911-inspired-interior/ <comment><USER2> Nothing but touchscreens.

Ignoring the issues with safe operation of touchscreens while driving, buttons and dials are just far more tactile and fun to use than a touchscreen. In something like a car aimed at visceral driver experience rather than practicality it makes even less sense. I want to feel like a fighter pilot while driving a Porsche, not like I am installing an email app on an ipad.

<comment><USER3> If you can get to an aviation museum that lets you inside a fighter plane cockpit the variety of buttons and levers is a real delight. Because they're designed for a pilot who might be flying supersonic inverted with a Russkie on his 6 every single switch is of a slightly different position or type so they can be distinguished by feel. Dieter Rams would barf but the functionality is perfect.

Also, sitting in a fighter plane cockpit will make you realize how cramped and uncomfortable it is. Not nearly as glamorous as the movies make it seem.

<comment><USER4> Huh? Dieter Rams would be fine with traditional aircraft cockpit controls. His work was strongly supportive of the notion that form should follow function.

<comment><USER5> But Luigi Colani certainly would certainly barf a lot.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I don't think that Korova Milk Bar motif of his would play well at the Pentagon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I am a huge fan of knobs I can feel without looking to see if I got the right part of the smooth glass surface.

"The elevated center console stretches down from the horizontal central screen to two air vents that are not the mechanically operated louvres found in most vehicles today. Instead, the direction of the airflow is controlled digitally via an 8.4-inch touch panel located just below the central screen. This touch panel houses the climate control system and includes a track pad with haptic feedback."

Way to make something perfectly simple and reliable for the last 50 years in to a pile of hot garbage.

<comment><USER7> It needs to be said that car makers still manage to fuck up dials when leaving them in (as digital) e.g. I was watching a car review yesterday, the "driving mode" selector was a clicky 5-position dial (so far so good). It wouldn't "cycle around", from the center point (normal driving) you could go two ticks to the left or two ticks to the right, but not "through" to the bottom. However _the dial would keep turning_ , that turning just wouldn't do anything until you started turning the other way.

An other such experience was the same driving mode selection idea on an other car I rented a few months back, one of the modes would (I guess) only be available when stopped. However it would not tell you that. The dial would still stop every 1/5th of a turn, but instead of selecting the next mode it would select the one after that, moving the selector 1/5th ahead of the dial every turn with no idea why the 2 stops you felt had moved the selector ahead 3 places (and to the wrong mode).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The 1989 Buick Reatta had a CRT touchscreen computer to replace the knobs for A/C, fan speed, radio and stuff. It added no value to the experience, was prone to malfunctioning and, subsequently, wasn't very popular. (More: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Reatta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Reatta))

Form will always follow function to some extent. I'm not saying screens are inherently a bad thing in cars, but screens that mimic a physical button instead of, well, physical buttons? That's just stupid.

<comment><USER2> I found it interesting that the HUD didn't take off until recently. HUDs where available in consumer grade cars in the 80s, but fell out of fashion the next year mode of cars.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wow, they took _the_ touchscreen and added like, four more. Not surprised, because electrics cars ought to have them (!), but also surprised given the recent decision by Mazda to exclude them from future vehicles.

</comment><comment><USER10> > Earlier this week, Porsche announced it will integrate Apple Music into the > Taycan

I didn't know that. I disagree with my choice of car being linked to any specific music subscription service.

<comment><USER2> I have always found the juxtaposition a bit funny. Car manufacturers spend years engineering the latest release in a lineage of top of class design and performance vehicles. Machines that are a true marvel of engineering. In this case, a revolution in performance vehicles. But the big news is whether or not it has a particular app.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Everything is easier on a large display: navigation, browsing through music/podcasts, changing settings. Speed and range are really the only "gauges" you need and take up very little real estate. Doesn't make much sense to have multiple small screens you have to glance around at. Just makes everything more difficult

</comment><comment><USER12> I hate the trend in cars that there are no or few physical buttons. Tactile feedback is still important. It is so unsafe to take one's eyes off of the road. At least give me some function buttons and a joystick--my current car has that and I use it all the time.

</comment><comment><USER13> Missing the HUD at launch.

Very much out of my price range but it's become clear to me now that the make or break feature for my next car will be whether or not it has Apple CarPlay or not.

<comment><USER13> Wish I could go back and edit the redundant second "or not"

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I like how the article doesn't mention Tesla once! I wonder if that is part of the agreement.

</comment><comment><USER15> The dark mode (marketing) is neat:

> The dark mode [...] should let drivers enjoy the road and escape the > annoying "blue light" that emanates from so many vehicles these days.

<comment><USER16> And yet, all the accent lighting in that top photo is blue. Why not red?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> That's not minimalism.

<comment><USER18> No, you get what you pay for with Porsche.</comment></comment>


Here's how self-driving cars could catch on - <AUTHOR> https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/5/8/17330112/self-driving-cars-autonomous-vehicles-texas-drive-ai <comment><USER2> I'm past ready for driverless cars. My quality of life would improve dramatically. No more stress caused by people who drive insanely. Assuming they don't hit my driverless car, that is.</comment>


How to Write an Opening Sentence - <AUTHOR> http://author-zone.com/write-opening-sentence/ <comment><USER2> One thing that bothers me a lot about modern writing (in news, mostly), is that people tend to break logical ideas into teeny tiny paragraphs. The author of this article does this, taking what is essentially a list and making it much harder to read, reference, and track the flow of ideas. To my dismay, it seems that the trendier the publication, the more the writers tend to do this (although this appears to be standard style for Reuters, and I can imagine a few good reasons for that).

I sincerely hope that good writers put more emphasis on organization and flow than hooking readers with oversimplifications and straw men. On one hand, the surge of sites like BuzzFeed make me think we're all doomed in this regard. But then people like John Oliver (and his writers) who consistently deliver thought-provoking stories give me hope.

</comment><comment><USER3> Notice what an insipid first sentence the author chooses, for this of all articles!

New Yorker articles are a good place to learn about how to pull people into your writing quickly. No disrespect meant to the _Mother Earth News_ , of course.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm all for articles like this, but I'm not for this article. If saying that gets me downvoted, as seems to be happening to idlewords, then so be it. Some of the advice in here is really questionable. For instance:

 _" Make an exaggerated statement, then tone it down. "In Prohibition days, alcohol could be purchased illegally on just about every street in America. Actually, that may be a bit of an exaggeration, but in fact it's true that . . .""_

No. Please do not do this. This may be the oldest cliche in the book. Actually, it's not the oldest, but...

 _" Set up a strawman and knock it down"_

No. This insults your reader's intelligence with a trite opening, which is precisely what the author suggests we avoid.

I don't mean to be overly harsh. The author means well. What he's really talking about are thought-starting techniques: hacks you can use to break your initial blockage and get something workable onto the page. That's fair. I just wouldn't follow 50-70% of the practical suggestions, though.

Here are some thoughts:

\- Know what you want to say before you start saying it. This sounds obvious, but it's not. A lot of writers trap themselves with cute openings, from which they have to back out abruptly, because the openings bear no real connection to the rest of the piece. This jars or confuses the reader. Your opening should set the stage for what's to come. It shouldn't drag the rest of the piece around with it. Know where you're taking us before you launch the ship.

\- Think about the most interesting, provocative, or sensuous thing about your story. Could that thing serve as a strong lead?

\- Think of your story as a movie, or as a series of scenes on a timeline. What would be the most interesting "opening scene" of your piece? Does it make logical sense as the opening? If so, great.

\- Challenging or provocative openings are great _when they work_. Degree of difficulty is high. Room for error is vast. Fall short, and you tumble into the "set up a strawman and knock it down" cliche. Succeed, and you present a wonderful fact, image, or statement that had never occurred to your readers.

\- Your first graf (paragraph) is where most readers will either bounce or continue. Focus on a strong opening _paragraph_ or point, and less on a strong opening sentence. Work backwards toward the strongest opening sentence.

\- A successful novelist once gave me this advice, which I'll paraphrase: 'Assume your readers are highly intelligent. Bad writers assume the opposite.' Want to avoid cliches? Assume your readers _hate_ cliches, and that they'll call you out on them.

<comment><USER5> Agreed, this wasn't great (and as idlewords points out, how could he use such a lackluster opening of his own?). The straw man and exaggeration approaches both struck me as poor suggestions in particular.

Here's my main suggestion -- the "shitty first drafts" strategy is important with openings in particular. Take a stab at an opening, and probably fail (but start your brain thinking about it). Write the rest of the article, polish your ideas as you go and gain a bit more insight into what you're talking about. Think how it looks from the perspective of a reader. THEN you'll be in a much stronger position to go back and write a good opening.

Of course, you may realize that your inspired opening also implies a different structure for the piece, but so be it.

<comment><USER3> This is really good advice. Another technique that sometimes works is to chop off the first few paragraphs of whatever you wrote. Writing can be like making whiskey-better if you throw the first and last parts away.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is great! The hardest part about writing is getting started, and many times it's hard to come up with a non-cliche, interesting introduction. I wish our English teacher taught stuff like this.

<comment><USER3> Often it's easiest to start in the middle and leave the introduction for last, when you have a very clear idea of what you've written, and why.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> "It was a dark and storm night."

You're welcome!

<comment><USER8> It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...

Call me Ishmael.

Anybody have any more?

<comment><USER9> It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.

<comment><USER10> The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full- summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Easier Way to SFTP/SCP to S3 Buckets Than Amazon SFTP - <AUTHOR> http://couchdrop.io/sftp <comment><USER2> Uh, no.

SFTP == Secure File Transfer Protocol

It doesn't have anything at all to do with SSH, other than the fact that both protocols have the word "Secure" at the beginning.

Feel free to go back to the drawing board and choose something that doesn't cause confusion with another protocol that is decades old.

<comment><AUTHOR> It was designed by the IETF as an extension of the Secure Shell protocol (SSH) version 2.0 to provide secure file transfer capabilities... potentially you should check your facts.

Did you know, it is also sometimes referred to as the SSH File Transfer Protocol?

Also if you need further clarification, it might pay to check the default port for both SSH and SFTP.</comment></comment>


.NET Transactional Document DB and Event Store on PostgreSQL - <AUTHOR> https://martendb.io/ <comment><USER3> I've been using Marten for maybe 3 years now, and I absolutely love it! It's extensible too, so you can do just about anything with it - for example, I use it with views, multi tenancy, a base for aggregate queries and all sorts, and it works great.

The core team is really responsive on both GitHub and Gitter too, and are happy to both accept and help with PRs - it's ( _almost_ ) the model of a well run OSS project.

One small thing tho... the original developer, Jeremy Miller, can be a bit... spiky; like you ask a question and he just _assumes_ bad faith and will snark at you. I imagine this behaviour has put at least a few people off contributing and using Marten. I almost feel bad about mentioning this, because I'm a fan of his work, but OTOH I kind of hope Jeremy reads this comment and takes it constructively.

<comment><AUTHOR> I came across Marten on someone's blog where they were talking about their ups and downs with RavenDB. It looks interesting.

Since you're using it, I'd like to know more about it's performance profile. Can't really find any performance/speed comparisons online. And what kind of scale are you running.

I'm right at the beginning of a project for a client and I'm roughing out the foundational code with pgsql already, so it would be a perfect time to take a look at it.

Thanks!

<comment><USER3> We're not running at scale, at least not the kind where performance of the library is likely to be an issue. We have around 50 tenants with a handful of users each. Tenants have up to 100's of millions of rows in Postgres - <USER2> exactly big data levels, but pretty big still.

I don't have perf numbers anymore, but I did some performance testing before I started using it a few years ago, and even back then it was much faster than EF/EFCore. The team have made many performance improvements since then. Considering the ease of use, and the fact you get NoSQL-style JSON documents that work alongside regular relational tables, basically the performance impact is as good as neglibible, IMO.

If you want to work with JSON documents, I highly recommend Marten.

It does have a Benchmarks project if you'd like to run some tests[0], and I'm sure the team would be happy to answer any questions over in Gitter[1].

[0] [https://github.com/JasperFx/marten/blob/07d99ed80a1f0c436c4f...](https://github.com/JasperFx/marten/blob/07d99ed80a1f0c436c4f1817421dd8831efe73c0/README.md)

[1] [https://gitter.im/JasperFx/marten](https://gitter.im/JasperFx/marten)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> We used it for a production project which I inherited.

Honestly I'm not a bit fan of anything Orm like, as such there is some magic, I believe out of the box it will literally just create tables and keys for you.

For what it is, it's very fast for prototyping things out.

I would personally just use the in built jsonb functionality of postgres and build out my own repositories. Saves confusion from all of the magic.

My 2 pence

<comment><USER5> Multi-tenancy, soft delete and duplicated properties for NoSql add a lot of value :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is interesting in that it seems to organize tenants into their own database.

I've built a few SaaS products with on the order of a few thousand customers per application. Performance can sometimes be a problem when each customer can have millions of rows but no relation between those customers. I believe this is pretty typical.

What's the purpose of mixing different customer rows? You rarely aggregate them all together. A million rows is easy for a database but when there are billions together, it starts requiring deeper optimizations.

The idea of each getting their own separate database makes intuitive sense to me but most tools for dB access aren't built with this in mind.

</comment><comment><USER5> I've been using this for a while now and absolutely love it.

Just go through the documentation of MartenDb and I'll bet you'll like it.

Note: If you are interested in DDD/microservices on. Net, you probably know Mass-Transit.

But I would advice you to check out everything under JasperFX ( [https://github.com/JasperFx](https://github.com/JasperFx) ), which MartenDb is a part of.

Fyi: they hang out on gitter.me

</comment><comment><USER7> We used EventStore [0] as an Event Store in a previous project (yes, this does get tedious to explain).

I'm quite curious who this is aimed at. .NET shops are often so deeply invested in the Microsoft ecosystem. In that previous project, needing to run/administer PostgreSQL instead of SQL Server would have been a significant administrative detriment to getting the project greenlit.

(The fact that EventStore doesn't use any RDBMS as a store at all paradoxically helped. At least that meant we weren't getting DBA split-brain problems between SQL dialects.)

[0] [https://eventstore.com/](https://eventstore.com/)

<comment><USER8> > .NET shops are often so deeply invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

Nobody likes MS's SQL License fees, however.

If you're going all cloud, then you can't get away with using unlicensed/insufficiently licensed RDS instances.

The delta between Postgres an SQL Server instance pricing per hour doesn't take much to add up to a salary for a mid range DBA.

<comment><AUTHOR> No kidding. I remember back in the .NET 4.5 days and SQL Server was per-socket pricing while Oracle and whatnot were per-core. It was an amazing deal.

Then SQL Server went per-core and our pricing went up 8-fold.

Been using PostgreSQL ever since.

<comment><USER8> SQLs socket/core pricing is a pain.

We wanted some instances, had to get our hosting provider to dig up previous generation CPU machines so we could have a lower core count. They were like "We'll give you the extra cores for free", Until we explained that it was for SQL License reasons.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> What I absolutely miss from Postgres is Column store support. For many analytics related workloads, columnstore beats traditional row store. I really wish they can add this soon.

<comment><USER10> [https://github.com/citusdata/cstore_fdw](https://github.com/citusdata/cstore_fdw)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I have been hoping to find this for nodejs one day :( sad. I really miss my .net days

</comment><comment><USER12> Can somebody explain why this is only for .NET developers if it's running on PG?

<comment><USER13> There's a nuget package linked, so I'm guessing this is achieved via some kind of tight coupling with a clever db client library</comment></comment>


Fracture Putty - <AUTHOR> http://www.darpa.mil/dso/thrusts/materials/biomat/fractureputty/index.htm

<comment> a-priori If this pans out, it could be revolutionary. They mention facial reconstruction in passing. I once knew a woman who was in a car crash and had to have one side of her face reconstructed a few years earlier. The surgeon did a wonderful job, but it was still a long and painful process for her.

Another use I can think of is for after heart bypass surgery, or other surgery where they have to crack the sternum. This putty could be used to fuse the sternum back together, which would probably speed healing.

</comment><comment><USER2> This will help not only soldiers but also those civilians who are prone to fractures. I have a friend BTW who because of bone disease has experienced over 100 bone fractures.

<comment><AUTHOR> What torture, I hope some crazy medical innovation is made that helps your friend.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> More information:

[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127212101.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127212101.htm)

</comment><comment><USER4> Lots of upside here and little downside.

<comment><USER5> Potential Downsides of the "Magic putty that fixes compound fractures in days rather than months, and stops you needing to have your limbs amputated".

\- less hospital time, thus less time spent talking to pretty nurses

\- less crippling, thus less chance of lucrative disability claims

\- increased activity level, thus risking further injury to the affected limbs (and limb fragments that would otherwise have been amputated and rendered safe from further harm)

\- (possibly) increased risk of some minor form of cancer due to chemical side effects of the Magic Putty That Makes It So They Don't Have To Chop Off Your Legs

As you say, it's all about measuring the risks. Nobody can make the decision for you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> So they are going to try to research something. Yea, well, let me tell you some of the things I'll research (once my multi billions of dollars of government funding roll in, like darpa).

A device that will tell you whenever you are in danger. It will be very challenging, the ultimate convergence of electronics, sensors and psyonics. When it is achieved, however, you will just have to wear a little necklace and it will beep whenever you are in danger or someone is plotting against you.

A chemical fertilizer/insecticide/fungicide/candy that when applied to crops kills all pest insects and increases growth 100000% with no harmful side effects. It is also a delicious candy for children. Also the test scores of children exposed to it will go up and they will be more polite.

<comment><USER7> Do you make fun of cancer research too? I find your comments to be in poor taste.

<comment><USER6> There is no way to communicate, over the internet, how I feel about your response here. You obviously did not understand the point of my post _at all_. I have just typed a very long response, trying to explain my point, but I became disgusted, because if you didn't get it the first time, you sortof aren't ever going to.

I wasn't making fun of _what_ they were researching. I was making fun of the fact they were making these incredibly grandiose claims about what they intended to develop. Hey, anyone can make grandiose claims about what they want to develop, it isn't interesting or news.

<comment><USER7> Ah, I misunderstood your point in that case, apologies. As to what you where intending to communicate, I definitely see where you are coming from on that one. It's easy to make claims, but execution of an idea is always the rub. This particular project does seem a bit more down-to-earth than a lot of the other projects that seem to be getting defense funding these days.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Classic Krugman: The Accidental Theorist - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/id/1916/

<comment><AUTHOR> See also the classic that Slate chose to republish, macroeconomics in one lesson, Baby-Sitting the Economy:

<http://www.slate.com/id/2202165/pagenum/all>

</comment><comment><USER2> This is the first Krugman article I've read, and while I don't know much about the economy, his points all seemed pretty logical. Krugman's also an amazing writer. That's probably the first economics article I've read and enjoyed.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> And, Marginal Revolution has the best overview of why Krugman won the prize:

[http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/10...](http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/10/paul- krugman-wi.html)

[http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/10...](http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/10/what- is-new-tra.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow. It's like Fermi with a 2000 word essay explaining the number of sides on a triangle: Three.</comment>


Routed Gothic Font - <AUTHOR> https://webonastick.com/fonts/routed-gothic/ <comment><USER2> For a newer font in this vein, I'd look at B612, a font designed in cooperation with Airbus specifically for visibility inside cockpits: [https://github.com/polarsys/b612/blob/master/docs/B612-Leafl...](https://github.com/polarsys/b612/blob/master/docs/B612-Leaflet.pdf)

<comment><USER3> I'm also quite surprised that the symbols for "O" (capital O) and "0" (zero) are very similar, even in the monospace version of B612.

<comment><USER4> Cyphar, two years ago you posted:

"Well, there is a port of glibc to UEFI, so one could very easily "boot into Emacs". Strangely I've not seen anyone do this."

Can you hook me up with that link :) Cheers.

<comment><USER5> Very off-topic but hilarious.

Back to topic: inability to distinguish O and 0 seems pretty terrifying for avionics. Related, I love SF Mono, but it's so hard to read 0000080 in small fonts (try it).

<comment><USER4> Yeah, very off topic, terribly sorry. My brain won't let me write 0's without strikethrough anymore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Sort of related, there's DIN 6776, a German standardized font used for technical drawings:

[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normschrift](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normschrift)

[https://www.typografie.info/3/uploads/99b804cee64ef8c64ad900...](https://www.typografie.info/3/uploads/99b804cee64ef8c64ad900e80d7cf1a9.jpg)

I had to learn that one in drafting class in middle school.

<comment><USER7> _DIN_ standards are local derivatives of _ISO_ standards.

There are few widely used _" Technical lettering"_[0] standards: «ISO 3098»(EU/International), _«ASME Y14.5»_ (US) and _«GOST 2.304»_ (ex-USSR).

There are few FLOSS fonts which cover _«ISO 3098»_ [1,2,3], _«ASME Y14.5»_ [3,4,5] and _«GOST 2.304»_ [6,7,8] technical lettering standards.

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

[1] [https://github.com/hikikomori82/osifont](https://github.com/hikikomori82/osifont)

[2] [http://peter-wiegel.de/TGL.html](http://peter-wiegel.de/TGL.html)

[3] [http://peter-wiegel.de/TGL_0-16.html](http://peter- wiegel.de/TGL_0-16.html)

[4] [https://www.fontspace.com/micronus](https://www.fontspace.com/micronus)

[5] [https://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/CommitteePages.cfm?Commit...](https://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/CommitteePages.cfm?Committee=C64041150&Action=40068)

[6] [https://bitbucket.org/fat_angel/opengostfont/](https://bitbucket.org/fat_angel/opengostfont/)

[7] [https://github.com/Metrolog/Font.GOST2.304-81](https://github.com/Metrolog/Font.GOST2.304-81)

[8] [https://github.com/MishkinIN/Font_GOST_2.304](https://github.com/MishkinIN/Font_GOST_2.304)

<comment><USER6> Seems like ISO 3098 is significantly newer than DIN 6776, so it's the ISO standard that's derivative of the DIN one.

<comment><USER7> Well, you are partially right, because most of "DIN" standards already replaced by "ISO".

But there are still many "DIN" standards that now replaced by "DIN EN ISO", e.g. German (local) version of «ISO 3098» (which replace «DIN 6776») is «DIN EN ISO 3098».[0]

[0] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DIN_standards#DIN_6000_to_DIN_6999

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Thank you for posting this! I've been looking off and on for this for ages and ages.

Trivial factoid: my understanding is that the Gorton pantograph fonts came first, and that the Leroy lettering sets were manufactured using the Gorton fonts. But I don't have a good source for that, so I could be completely wrong.

<comment><USER9> I had not heard of those brands, I had Rotring [1] lettering stencils to match some of their pens.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If people aren't familiar with the Leroy Lettering system here is a video of it: [https://youtu.be/GZRvQDMBEOE](https://youtu.be/GZRvQDMBEOE)

This font was also used by EC Comics (their comics included Tales From the Crypt). Here is another font based on that which is more fuzzy: [https://caseyburns.com/artwork/font- design/](https://caseyburns.com/artwork/font-design/)

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm pleased to see he implemented the vital U+1F4A9 code point.

<comment><USER12> [bottom of [https://webonastick.com/fonts/routed-gothic/unicode- coverage...](https://webonastick.com/fonts/routed-gothic/unicode- coverage.html)]

<comment><USER13> Ah, a mainstay of technical drawings and engraved office signs.

<comment><USER14> Certainly required in the description of the accuracy of many of them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I learned to write in this style by hand in an engineering graphics / drafting class in college.

I too find the high concentration of upper case fonts, especially Courier New, in engineering and especially EE, to be kind of relaxing and pretty.

</comment><comment><USER16> It's not ugly, it's beautiful.

<comment><USER17> At the risk of sounding "out of touch with reality" and "retro nostalgic", I strongly believe that a lot of clean, sterile work took place in the 1965-1985 era. From UNIX to SR-71, everything mankind did in the technical space was minimal, purposeful, clean, legible, durable, maintainable, modular and many other adjectives that would compound on the idea of creating a truly better product or service. Marketing took a backseat, science and data mattered and advertisement was truthful.

Today's world seems broken, fragile, noisy and unmaintained. May be that humanity needs to unwind, rewind back a couple of decades and try again. If you play the scenario of human evolution multiple times, I am sure a large scale system such as global society would end up in a different state... every time.

Reminds me of the story that Kyoto, Japan didn't get ruined because one of the military commanders in charge of the nuclear bomb drop locations, had a soft spot for Kyoto... and instead chose Nagasaki and Hiroshima. [1]

If we were to replay human progress, I want us to go back to that era and relive the engineering life. Must have been amazing to work in a technical field in the 70's and 80's. Now we have AI and Quantum and all these fucking buzzwords, largely perpetuated by people who have no clue - marketing and PR folks.

[1] [https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/hi...](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/hiroshima- nagasaki-atomic-bomb-anniversary/400448/)

<comment><USER18> Perhaps what has survived into the 21st century are simple designs and less so complex ones.

<comment><USER19> Survivorship bias at work.

Unix was a reaction against failed complex designs. So was the F-16, maybe a better example in military aviation because the SR-71 had such a unique purpose.

Popular and complex things from that era have been forgotten: PL/1, the VAX instruction set, overuse of manifold vacuum to power car accessories.

One can hope that simplicity comes in waves. Complexity is popular right now.

<comment><USER20> SR-71 was indeed extremely complex and expensive to operate. They got rid of it as soon as they could.

There are good free books available of the subject. Just looking at the amount of heat management and the required systems and heat exhchangers...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It may be the size on the page, or glyph rendering artefact but this font doesnt look... consistent. Dont get me wrong the font is brilliant, however atleast for me there are some points at which the rendered glyphs are over cut. Another way id describe this is the antialiasing is not consistent. Its like layering the same text on top of the other multiple times.

<comment><USER22> The author mentions that there's no hinting, which may explain what you're seeing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Wow, this is triggering some kind of memory cascade in the back of my brain that I simply cannot place. I know this font, but I really can't say from where.

The closest guesses I can come up with is the Commodore 64 Programmers Reference Guide, or maybe an old terminal or computer magazine. But I could easily be wrong.

Either way, I love it.

<comment><USER24> Perhaps Forrest Mims of Radio Shack Engineer's Notebook fame?

[https://hackaday.com/2017/01/18/forrest-mims-radio-shack- and...](https://hackaday.com/2017/01/18/forrest-mims-radio-shack-and-the- notebooks-that-launched-a-thousand-careers/)

<comment><USER23> Wow. I think that might be it!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I like how under unicode coverage, the one emoji that is covered is the poop emoji. Human universals I guess.

</comment><comment><USER26> I love the feel of this font.

</comment><comment><USER27> > "I created this font by purchasing a Leroy Lettering set, using Inkscape to > trace the scanned letterforms of one of its templates, and some FontForge > Python scripting."

How does this work from a copyright/legal perspective?

<comment><USER28> Guess why so many Helvetica impersonations/clones exist:

The thing is called "tracing" and quite common.

The actual code (which means the ttf/otf) is protected under copyright. The shape of a letter isn't and can't be by any form of IP.

So: You're not allowed to redistribute the font file but creating your own font which just happens to look alike is perfectly fine.

<comment><USER29> Thanks.

So, a given "specification" (how a font looks to the human eye) can have many different "implementations" (ie. TTF files). The specific "implementations" themselves can be copyrighted, but somehow not the "specifications"?

If so... assume one TTF file which is copyrighted, pay-per-use license. Assume another TTF file, which is open-source, free to use and redistribute. The files both implement the "Helvetica" specification, rendering the same letters to the human eye. How "different" must the free implementation be from the paid one, for it to not be considered an infringement?

<comment><USER28> Since the shapes afaik can't be copyrighted: Your selfdrawn font has totally the right to look the same.

They probably won't however, since you might be able to copy the shape, but for being displayed on screen you need a process called "hinting". That is the term for making pixels out of the shapes. Professional fonts are hinted by hand, making it look neat even in small sizes. There is auto-hinting, but it only gets you so far.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> This is pretty much the same as Comic Sans, except Comic Sans is a bit more curvy and fun. Routed Gothic is what Comic Sans should have been.

<comment><USER31> You should check out Comic Neue. [http://comicneue.com/](http://comicneue.com/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Related to this one, has anyone identified an equivalent font for what was used in the Apollo CSM and LM cockpits?

<comment><USER33> Wasn't this just Futura?

<comment><USER32> Oh hey it might have been. I dunno how I missed that. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Why does it implement just a few of the superscripts, but not all?

<comment><USER35> 1, 2 and 3 are in the Latin 1 block, 0,4-9 are at U+2070-U+2079.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I've been on the look for this for a long time. Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER37> KiCAD 6's font support can't come soon enough!

</comment><comment><USER38> Would love it in monospace variant.

</comment><comment><USER39> Brick Hect would be proud.

</comment><comment><USER40> An OpenType tabular numbers feature would be a nice addition, for numbers in tables. I think it would mostly be a matter of adding a hook to the 1 like other similarly-proportioned industrial fonts.</comment>


Android's 'weak gravity' means users drift away to iPhone, study finds - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/17/android-gravity-iphone

<comment><USER2> > The data emerges from a study carried out in September 2013 of 450 British > owners of smartphones

A thousand is generally accepted as the minimum significant sample for statistics, so this study may not be representative of the whole UK market.

However I'm typically in the case they describe : I'm a first time Android buyer and my next phone may well be an Apple.

There are a lot of apps that I see on iPhones that are not ported on Android.

Android particularly lacks a good GTD solution like Things and Omnifocus.</comment>


Techno Gender Assumptions - <AUTHOR> http://blog.baugues.com/assumptions

<comment><USER2> You acknowledged it, so forgive yourself and move on. If you're over 35-40 I think a slip is understandable.

I've been in computers (IT, data analysis, programming) for 25+ years and although women have made inroads they're still quite the minority. Same thing goes for hunting, which is one of my sports but in socializing it was frequently assumed it was my husband's. Also the idea of the female's career moves driving the rest of the family is still in the minority.

Not saying that this is acceptable these days, just that a mistake is understandable.</comment>


Cool new way of looking at hiring - <AUTHOR>

Who here on hacker news doesn't need something like this in their life? What are they doing, I don't know! But I'm super excited about it.
This sounds like it's perfect for the startup that needs to hire talent or entrepreneur that get's leads all the time.
signup.friendsume.com <comment><USER2> I don't get this. Is the point of it to recommend friends to a stranger?

When I recommend my friend for a job, it's to an employer that I know personally. I use email. It happens a few times a year, so I don't care to automate it. I can't imagine any other scenario in which I would recommend my friend for a job (partly because I'm not famous).

Also: you obviously created this. Just be genuine and tell us about it. Don't give us a bullshit ad.

<comment><USER3> I think the idea is if say you know John and Paul, who don't know each other. John is hiring, Paul is looking you can bring them together.

However I can't see it taking off for the reason than yes you can just email your friends. I mean if you know someone who is hiring and someone who is looking you are going to just phone or email them both if you are a nice friend anyway :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Funny "This Sounds" implies you stumbled across the site rather than being the creator (or creators mate). :-)

</comment><comment><USER4> This is a fake account = "fifa8a" We know you made this!

</comment><comment><USER5> Friend Su Me? ;)</comment>


Lopsided income growth in the United States - <AUTHOR> http://www.epi.org/multimedia/unequal-states-interactive/

<comment><USER2> More socialist propaganda.

The Economic Policy Institute was founded in 1986 by Jeff Faux, who was previously the co-director of the National Center for Economic Alternatives (NCEA). As its name suggests, the NCEA specialized in offering "alternatives"—alternatives characterized as "radical" in The New York Times—to mainstream U.S. domestic policy.

NCEA's co-director was Gar Alperovitz, now a University of Maryland professor and author of America Beyond Capitalism. Prior to working at the NCEA, Alperovitz co-authored the essay collection Strategy and Program: Two Essays Toward a New American Socialism, where he advocated using socialist ideas to make the United States a "fairer" nation.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Curious as to how your state is doing? This page allows you to choose a state and see what has happened to the top 1% vs. the other 99% over the past years</comment>


Robomongo – 10 days left - <AUTHOR> http://robomongo.org/ <comment><AUTHOR> Not sure how I should have titled the OP, since it's to the very informative front page of Robomongo's site, but the important part is that they need funding.

Funds are being raised through [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save- robomongo#/](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-robomongo#/)

I don't currently use Robomongo, but someone recently mentioned it as a useful tool and, well I'm a sucker for high-quality, open-source projects - _I want them to be able to succeed or fail based on the product 's merit not on the team's ability to raise funds!_ So, I'm trying to do my part and bring them a bit of HN visibility.

<comment><USER2> They need funding alright. So much that I nearly stopped scrolling down before getting to the part where they told me what the funding would be even for. How many GitHub stars they have apparently is more important.

It seems to be a database editor/GUI for MongoDB.

Upvoted anyways, seems like something people might be interested in.</comment></comment>


MIT's new robot fish is eerily realistic - <AUTHOR> https://thenextweb.com/artificial-intelligence/2018/03/21/mits-new-robot-fish-is-eerily-realistic/ <comment><USER2> I just love how they used a SNES controller as the, well - controller.

</comment><comment><USER3> Dupe - being discussed at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16644860](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16644860)

</comment><comment><USER4> I bet it's still very loud, which is why we don't get to hear it in operation. This, along with the ugliness of motor-based motion and electromagnetic profiles is why these artificial fish aren't very convincing to anyone, be it aquatic life or humans.</comment>


Why We Might Be Stuck With Passwords for a While - <AUTHOR> http://time.com/3088934/password-alternatives-biometric-federated-two-step-sign-in/ <comment><USER2> Where is PKI-based sign-in? Why the heck every-fucking-one is so obsessed to move your identity to third parties (email, domain or webpage providers) and disregards one of the most sane, obvious, flexible and secure (if implemented properly) concept out there?

Added: My points are:

\- (Security) They are immune to attacks on websites. All attackers would extract is a public key.

\- (Flexibility) They are social, yet privacy-respecting. When you want to keep your identity across multiple services — you use the same key. When you don't want so — you just generate a new one — it's free. Some variants (like OpenPGP) have web-of-trust out of the box.

\- (Flexibility) They are supported on almost every modern system out there — if we're considering X.509 client certificates (probably not the best option, but). Just polish the damn UI for those already, please.

\- (Sanity) They are something user actually possesses, not temporarily leases like a Facebook account, email address or domain name.

\- (Flexibility/security) They could be stored as securely as one wishes. Keep those in a file (your OS or browser's keystore, actually) if you don't care, and HSMs are already here for those who want them.

\- (Flexibility/security) They could be easily synced across the devices. Just escrow the key material with other key — derived from a password, if you wish.

\- (Security) They could be mass-revoked. Not easy and not flawless, but there's OCSP. There're CRLs, too (although those suck). Certainly better than running across multiple sites if one had used the same (compromised) password with them.

<comment><USER3> I'm pretty sure that's what was being referred to when the author mentioned corporate drones carrying around fobs. Generally those fobs contain the keys for PKI auth in secure-hardware form.

However, having had to deal with using these myself, I'm not sure I would agree that PKI auth is "sane", "obvious", or "flexible".

As for your other points, without a hardware-secure token, I don't think PKI is secure in the least. You're one zero-day browser crack away from revealing your private key. The solution to that of course is to require a passphrase, and oops, we're back to the original problem.

<comment><USER4> > You're one zero-day browser crack away from revealing your private key.

You're still better off than any password scheme, which is often attacked from the server side. And the lovely thing about the PKI method is that you can invest as much or as little as you want into protecting the private key and have the server not care even a little. On the weak end is the unprotected private key file on your hard drive, followed by a private key that's passphrase-protected (and even with this, there's a spectrum of configurable behavior governing how long it stays decrypted), followed by private keys on a physical device, followed by a physical device that requires two-factor access.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Some of this seems fairly uninformed, which is surprising because of the author's background.

"First, it's easy for programmers to deploy a standard username/password setup. They more or less just push a button in their app-building toolkit."

"Two-factor sign-in: ... The problem, and it's a big one, is that you can't really carry a different doohickey around for each of your passwords."

<comment><USER6> I agree.

"Another good practice is just to ask for passwords less often. If you're signing in every day from the same computer in your basement, you'll notice that Google hardly ever asks you to prove who you are."

I'm not sure if he's referring to Google asking for a second form of authentication when you log in from an unknown location (such as sending you a text message with a random number in it, which is unrelated to entering your actual account password) or if he doesn't understand state management with cookies. You obviously won't be asked to reenter your password if the session cookie has been set in your browser and you have a valid session on the server.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Yes, passwords are awful and don't work.

Passwords are awesome. A bigger, better solution is immanent, but a password does the job just fine for most uses. Passwords get a lot of flack for a problem that isn't the concept of a password's fault, but the fault of those who use poor passwords or reuse them across dozens of applications.

Either way, I'm excited to see what comes next.

<comment><USER8> "The concept of a password" has two big problems:

1) They're symmetric. I need to protect the thing I need to provide. If we can contrive to make sure that the thing I need to provide it to can be safely trusted, then this problem only manifests itself in the face of password reuse, but assumptions break sometimes.

2) Enough entropy to be uncrackable is starting to be enough entropy to be difficult to remember.

Password safes and similar address both of these - at the expense of increased exposure to slightly different threats but for a net win. They're a slight departure from "the concept of a password", though, I'd say.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The article reads like a straw man argument in favor of begrudgingly accepting password auth for the time being. It's disappointing that he has omitted mention of things like Persona, browser certificates, or even the Google Authenticator app (which completely solves his problem with 2FA).

<comment><USER10> I actually have a problem with things like Google Authenticator. I use it to secure the login for my Digital Ocean account. Worked great, until my phone broke. When I signed into Digital Ocean with a new phone... well, of course Google Authenticator doesn't know how to generate a new compatible code. That part is controlled by a QR code when you enable 2FA, and you can't get back to it without logging in. Same thing with securing the admin login to a site I run. When I switched phones, I lost my login.

Sure, there's a way around it. Digital Ocean lets you disable 2FA with an SMS code. Then I can just log in, set up 2FA again, and have it working on my new phone. But then I fixed my old phone and switched back. So I had to do it all over again.

Clef worked great, until someone with a Windows Phone joined the team and needed to log into the site. Suddenly our authentication method of choice, one we were really happy with, wasn't an option because Clef doesn't make a Windows Phone app.

These are the problems the author seems to try to point out. Passwords at least work every time you type them in, from any platform. Passwords aren't tied to Google or Apple, passwords don't shun Microsoft platforms simply because there aren't enough users. If your users have to buy an iPhone just to be able to log in, or if they lose the ability to log in because they replaced their phone (something that happens _all the time_ ), it isn't a solution at all. They're going to end up going back to passwords (like we did) because nothing else works as well as passwords.

And that's not a high bar to get over!

<comment><USER11> Any method of authentication that's more secure that simple passwords is going to be more inconvenient. 2FA is no exception.

<comment><USER10> It doesn't have to be though. Clef is 100x easier than using a password, and dead simple to implement. Nothing to remember but your phone, and nothing to change at regular intervals. Google Authenticator is a little more inconvenient, but not by much.

Of course, as my first comment pointed out, both of those became _very_ inconvenient for me. But they don't have to be. What if Clef, instead of being proprietary, was a public property? Anyone can write a Google Authenticator application, which is why one exists on Windows Phone. Google has written zero software for Windows Phone, yet Authenticator works.

2FA doesn't have to be more inconvenient. In fact, it should be more convenient than passwords, because passwords need to be remembered and changed. There's no excuse.

<comment><USER12> > 2FA doesn't have to be more inconvenient. In fact, it should be more > convenient than passwords, because passwords need to be remembered and > changed.

The second factor (the "thing you have") in 2FA doesn't need to be remembered or changed. The first factor (the "thing you know"), which usually _is_ a password, has to be remembered. (It may be somewhat less important to change it than in a single-factor password-only scheme.)

<comment><USER10> With a good 2FA system, you can use a junk password because the chances of someone having both factors is next to zero. Using hunter2 as a password instead of gEtRAn8s_dr6Spepe doesn't matter because guessing the password is impossible unless they have your other factor, and even then it's going to slow them down quite a bit. Especially if your other factor is stored on your phone, which itself requires a password or fingerprint or both to get into.

<comment><USER12> > With a good 2FA system, you can use a junk password because the chances of > someone having both factors is next to zero.

If you use a junk password, then the chance of them being able to secure both factors is essentially equal to the chance of them being able to secure the other factor. Whether slowing them down matters really depends on context -- for most applications that may be an acceptable risk (if either the value of the access goes down with a delay or you will be able to report the loss in a way which prevents a slowed attacker from gaining access -- and its unlikely that an attacker will be motivated enough to prevent you from doing so -- this makes sense. This is not always the case.)

<comment><USER10> You make good points. What I'm really trying to say is, someone sitting in Russia can't really take my phone while I'm here in the US. That's not the case with passwords. And it's not plausible to think there's someone who can both steal my phone _and_ has access to my password for a given account, unless that person knows me. The only hope they have is using a rainbow table or dictionary attack. With most sites these days rate-limiting the login process, that's hardly plausible either.

What I'm saying is, even basic 2FA makes it almost impossible for someone to steal your credentials in the fashion that we are used to. It doesn't just put us on par with the criminals like most security does, it puts us one step ahead for the first time in over a decade. And it can be easy and convenient, because you don't need billion-character passwords since the attacker needs to be physically near you to steal your second factor. There are easy ways to make it better, just no one has done it yet (because there's no money in it).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The shallow writing of this article aside, I think it overlooks a rather promising authentication scheme by Steve Gibson. [https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm](https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm)

</comment><comment><USER14> Another important point is that users already consider passwords to be a hassle and have little patience for anything that makes it harder to access resources online.</comment>


Ask HN: Social Media Management for NPOs?  - <AUTHOR>

So my friend and I have this idea. We want to provide social media management services to nonprofits to improve their public relations and meet their goals (fundraising, recruiting volunteers, increasing awareness, etc). Currently, I provide web services to NPOs, but we are thinking of expanding this service to include support for social media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. The individual organization's needs would steer what specific type of services they would want (as in, if they are really in need of volunteers, we'd concentrate on expanding their volunteermatch profile and local, community-specific forums for volunteers).
The problem we see is that a lot of small and medium sized nonprofits don't have the capacity to manage a successful social media program. At best, a lot of nonprofits think its sufficient to set up a facebook or twitter account with minimal maintenance or updates. We would argue that it takes a lot more than that for a nonprofit to successfully engage constituents on the web. Our solution is to provide these types of services to nonprofits.
I can give more details as needed, but basically we're wondering if this would work. Do you see this as a need in the sector? How should we consider tweaking our idea to improve our services or make them more appealing? How much would you pay (or think is a fair price) for this service?
Any help or advice is appreciated. <comment><USER2> I worked on a startup in this space for about 6 months last year which might explain if my answer is a little cynical.

It's great that you've been able to build a business providing web services for NPO's. It can be a very rewarding experience.

From my time spent in the space I've found that few of the small to medium NPO's (which we call not-for-profits or NFP's in Australia)I've found that there is a heavy cost in terms of education to demonstrate the benefits of social media activities. Many times the benefits are medium to long term whereas these organisations need solutions which work a little faster than that in order to justify the expense to their boards.

It may be an obvious thing to say but I would be focusing on presenting solutions with a clear ROI for both yourselves and the non-profit.

After we shut up our startup I've since gone into the for-profit online marketing space. The returns are a lot greater and there are a lot more companies willing to spend money to test new ideas. I hope to come back to the non-profit space one day, but probably not until I've got some clout to make real change (ie networks or capital).</comment>


It's time for Entrepreneur University/Startup Ninja School - <AUTHOR> http://blog.nosnivelling.com/2010/04/its-time-for-entrepreneur-university.html

<comment><USER2> I've always wondered if Y Combinator is modeled after the English university system. As I understand it, at a school like Oxford, you:

1\. Work independently on your research

2\. Meet once a week or so with your tutor to discuss your progress

3\. Attend lectures during the week, but this is less formal than in the US, where you have to register for classes and get a grade at the end

At YC, you:

1\. Work independently on your startup

2\. Meet with Paul Graham once a week or so to discuss your progress

3\. Attend 1-2 talks each week at YC that are germane to your company

</comment><comment><USER3> Adding "Ninja" to the descriptors of the school isn't particularly useful or accurate. Certainly I'd never attend any ninja school that didn't provide me with an accreditation in ninjitsu at the end.

Also, we already have this. It's called Y Combinator.

</comment><comment><USER4> How many would actually go to this? I would argue most people don't want this. The perception for many people is still - be a lawyer or a doctor or go work at a big company. There's a reason that when my company goes recruiting at Northwestern U (we're a relatively small consulting company that gets pretty cool projects) nobody wants to work for us. Rather, they flock to the Accentures, IBMs and the GEs of the world.

</comment><comment><USER5> Great post. If a prospective MBA student thought about their 150K as seed capital, they'd already be better off in terms of networking and learning if they started a company instead of going to school for 2 years. It would be even better if a small part of that budget could help get entree to your proposed ninja school just to take some of the inefficiency out of figuring out things alone

<comment><USER6> > If a prospective MBA student thought about their 150K as seed capital

You can't get a student loan to start a biz. And many employers seem to think that a degree says something different than a failed biz. (The concerns are different wrt a successful biz.)</comment></comment>


"Dark Money" Funds Climate Change Denial Effort - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort

<comment><USER3> I don't care where the money comes from. I care about the science. And nobody seems to be able to explain it to me (at least not since my simplistic - <USER2> wrong - environmental science class in high school).

Catalytic ozone depletion is a result of chlorofluorocarbon pollution. Molina, Crutzen, and Rowland won the 1995 Nobel prize in chemistry proving that [1]. CFCs are now banned, and the ozone depletion is reversing with a full recovery expected around 2050 [2].

Maybe there's something super obvious I'm not seeing because I don't get it. All I hear about is intrigue, conspiracy, and vague references to consensus. Hopefully we have a real climate scientist among us because I've studied ozone depletion and I'm just not convinced that there's a problem. If the Koch brothers want to pay me to hold that opinion my emails in my profile. Cash only, please.

[1] [http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1...](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1995/press.html)

[2] [http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol)

<comment><USER4> I suspect the intrigue and conspiracy is the dark money at work.

Water vapor traps heat very well. CO2 does too. If enough CO2 gets into the atmosphere to heat Earth enough that more water vapor collects in the atmosphere, there's a feedback effect which will cook the planet a bit.

Try proving that, though. Unlike ozone depletion, which can be shown in a laboratory, only one Earth exists, and it is rather complex. The basic mechanism is well understood but the non-linear feedback mechanisms of the world are not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> If these guys are really spending billions to deny global warming, there ought to be more than a few people who have become millionaires doing the propaganda work. Know of any?

Blogging is free, so they really spending billions on television? Have you heard lots of TV ads denying warming?

I'm skeptical about the "Billions" spent by the rich deniers. We're told they hide their funding, using big money. So how were they found out?

Could be true, of course. I just want some evidence. And I want to know who are the public figures getting all that dough.</comment>


Autodesk's wireless location services API/platform for developers - <AUTHOR> http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=7764394 <comment><AUTHOR> I believe these guys are the platform being used by Nextel, Verizon Wireless, and Vodafone for services tracking a user's location via their cell phone. Can anyone in the developers program using their API comment on the platform?</comment>


Heathrow third runway plans ruled illegal: not consistent with Paris agreement - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/27/heathrow-third-runway-ruled-illegal-over-climate-change <comment><USER2> The title is a bit misleading. The court ruled that the government failed to take their climate change commitments into account in approving the third runway. They can go ahead with the third runway if they redo their approval taking climate change commitments into account (unlikely to happen as I understand the Prime Minister is against the third runway).

<comment><USER3> The PM was against it when doing that brought him votes. He's long since wiggled out of any commitment. He could have scrapped it already if he wanted to. This is a PM who likes big infrastructure projects, he just needs to find half-decent political cover.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I live right next to Heathrow and am starting a micromobility company to tackle air pollution in this end of town, and hold an (albeit expired) PPL.

Air quality is bad here for humans on the ground due to the dilapidated 10 year old diesel buses that tfl allow in West London, and the vast amount of Single occupancy vehicles that commute to and from Heathrow every single day.

With the disaster that is Brexit on the horizon it's definitely not a good idea to scrap the expansion of LHR. I more than anyone want to clean up the environment in West London, but all things considered, it's not worth it to shoot ourselves in the foot and not expand Heathrow and a scrapping of the expansion is a hollow victory if all other issues impacting the West London environment are not addressed.

Cleaner buses, better incentives against SOV use, better alternatives to SOVs, steeper landing slope and other landing policies, properly maintained and seperated bike lanes, expedited and expanding plans for CS9, revised electric micromobility legislation (>500w & upto 20mph), more funding for local offsetting initiatives.

These make a difference for people on the ground, not not expanding Heathrow.

Edit: also right under the flight path. As most everyone else, got used to the noise.

<comment><USER5> You can clean up buses, trains, cars etc. It doesn't look like we will ever be able to make air travel carbon neutral.

<comment><USER6> You can get carbon neutral hydrocarbon based fuels from either direct synthesis or biofuels. Hydrogen is theoretically more efficient, but has significant hurdles.

Interestingly commercial aircraft are surprisingly efficient per passenger mile. Norwegian Air Shuttle is sitting at the top with 104 mpg‑US per passenger, _thanks to its fuel-efficient Boeing 787-8, a high 85% passenger load factor and a high density of 1.36 seat /m2 due to a low 9% premium seating._ [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft) And that's on top of generally being able to take more direct routes than land based transportation.

<comment><USER5> Meanwhile any efficiency savings are eaten up by huge increases in air travel. See Jevons paradox.

I'm also very sceptical that we can synthesise enough fuel to power even a fraction of the current fleet. We need to fix this problem now and that means relying on technology we have now.

<comment><USER6> As flying is frequently better for the environment than driving, increased flights might not be a bad thing for the environment. It really comes down to if their replacing existing travel or adding more travel.

<comment><USER5> _As flying is frequently better for the environment than driving_

You can't drive across the Atlantic or Pacific, this a rather silly argument.

<comment><USER6> Which is why I said: _It really comes down to if their replacing existing travel or adding more travel._

The majority of flights are between locations you can drive to. Even long haul flights often have at least one leg within driving distance ie: DC > NYC > Hawaii rather than a direct flight.

<comment><USER5> _The majority of flights are between locations you can drive to._

Not out of Heathrow they aren't.

<comment><USER6> Most people don't live near Heathrow but even then the number of direct flights is limited. You can fly direct from Heathrow to a tiny number of airports in China, but from those airports you can then get to most cities in China.

Basically, you can fly from almost any airport to almost any other airport. But, you can only directly fly between a tiny subset of those pairs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I for one have never understood (aside from the network effect and lack of choice) why anyone actively chooses to connect through LHR. The taxes on airfare are extortionate just because they can, you have to pay (!) for on- airport hotel shuttle buses, the facilities are dilapidated and designed with, um, British sensibilities, and transferring / security is an ordeal given how cheaply they choose to (under)staff the services.

It is pretty nearly the opposite of a SIN, MUC, or DXB, in my mind.

<comment><USER8> I've only ever flown into Gatwick and it surprises me that they haven't expanded it with the aim of taking more business from Heathrow. If you're operating as a transit hub, it doesn't matter that you're a train ride away from London. The network effect must be really strong.

<comment><USER9> Gatwick have their own plan for this: [https://www.gatwickairport.com/globalassets/publicationfiles...](https://www.gatwickairport.com/globalassets/publicationfiles/business_and_community/all_public_publications/second_runway/airports_commission/gatwick_sd3_engineering_plans_final.pdf)

But effectively it's centrally planned and only one of them is going to get the permission. Transport links between the two aren't as great as you'd like either.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> On the margin, compared to the alternative, this will: 1\. Make flights to and from, and connecting flights through, Heathrow more expensive. 2\. Move more flights to other neighboring airports. 3\. Reduce the volume of people flying to/from/through the Heathrow and the UK in general.

I am not sure how much of each effect is needed to absorb the change.

<comment><USER11> If you make things more expensive, less people will buy that thing. It will reduce emissions in the UK by reducing the airtraffic through the UK. Exactly the intended consequence.

<comment><USER4> Yeah no. LHR has one of the highest airport tax, yet still is a leading world hub and annual pax numbers keep going up.

<comment><USER3> That simply means, from a "prohibitionist" point of view, that the tax is not high enough.

<comment><USER4> Lol can't wait for 400% beef tax to save the planet /s

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> "Runways don't cause climate change; airplanes do."

I applaud the ingenuity of whomever managed to come up with and press home this argument but it feels like a stretch to me.

As someone who lives under the flight path of Heathrow I can't say I'll shed any tears if the third runway is permanently blocked by it though.

</comment><comment><USER13> People have gotten so used to flying they can't see how dependent and entitled they've become. When I share that I'm about to start my fifth year without flying, everyone tells me how impossible it is for them but they never try.

If they tried, they'd realize how much flying is spreading their lives and communities thin, undermining community.

A flight will bring you to a distant loved one. Flying in general disperses communities so you have to fly. Meanwhile we let our communities get covered with litter and garbage dreaming of escape enabled by flying.

<comment><USER14> Please tell me you're not driving the same journey?

<comment><USER15> Indeed. The mpg per person for a modern passenger plane is better than the average US car (assuming a single-person journey by car). The most important factor here is miles travelled, not the mode of transport used.

<comment><USER16> The fatality per mile rate is also wildly lower for commercial flight, so driving instead of flying is 750x [1] more likely to result in you never making it to your destination.

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Self-destructing greenie idiocy in action. The UK should get out of the Paris Agreement and watch the EU go back to windmill and horse carriage.</comment>


A Case Against Calculus - <AUTHOR> http://hardmath123.github.io/case-against-calculus.html <comment><USER2> The author writes: "I just finished my last unit of BC Calculus in high school, which gives me the ethos to talk about what I'm going to talk about." Ethos is the characteristic spirit of a culture, era, or community as manifested in its beliefs and aspirations, so this article focuses on the characteristic spirit of a student who finished high school calculus.

The author's point is that _we should not regard calculus as the pinnacle of high school math education_. I certainly agree. The Calculus should just be the beginning of a lifetime exploring and using mathematics as a tool. I am reminded of two points made by Hamming:

1\. The calculus is probably the most useful single branch of mathematics. ...I have found the ability to do simple calculus, easily and reliably, was the most valuable part of mathematics I ever learned.

2\. Understanding the methods of calculus is vital to the creative use of mathematics... Without this mastery the average scientist or engineer, or any other user of mathematics, will be perpetually stunted in development, and will at best be able to follow only what the textbooks say; with mastery, new things can be done, even in old,well-established fields.

Perhaps the educational system has failed anonymous blogger _ComfortablyNumbered_ by not demonstrating the beauty and utility of the Calculus (and of Mathematics in general).

<comment><USER3> When most American school's curriculum is based on common core, there is little room for demonstrating the beauty of math.</comment></comment>


Ex-blocker:  Hide your exes on the internet. - <AUTHOR> http://blockyourex.com/

<comment><USER2> Next up, find out if your ex still thinks about you! Or even better, auto emailed "Looks like your ex ___ still has you on their mind and has blocked you! Block them too here!"

</comment><comment><USER3> I wish this explained better what exactly it does. Ie: hide information? Present a interstitial? etc. Screenshot w/ before/after would be nice.</comment>


AWS Route 53 was misrouted for nearly 2 hours - <AUTHOR> https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/5adf2844ecbe40692e003ad2/ <comment><AUTHOR> The bad routes can be seen by agents: 219-YVR-Canana, 221-qeast, 16-TurboBytes, 6-VPS TH, 10-TurboBytes, 220-TurboBytes, 17-aks-seattle and 190-ATT-AS7018

From outages mailing list, following subnets were affected.

188.8.131.52 220.127.116.11 220.127.116.11 220.127.116.11 184.108.40.206

The issue has since been fixed, outage lasted for ~2 hours.

If you are still using a single DNS provider for your domain, you should consider having a dual-provider setup.</comment>


Technology interaction and ethics - <AUTHOR> http://boingboing.net/2012/02/15/technology-interaction-and-eth.html

<comment><USER2> This is how I want all my tools. I had lots of ideas for better tools popping up in my head while watching this video. The kind of paradigms that he talks about are applicable to most of the creative processes.</comment>