The 5 most ridiculous things the FCC says in its new net neutrality propaganda - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/28/16710450/fcc-net-neutrality-fact-sheet-is-total-nonsense <comment><USER2> I think the biggest tragedy is that media outlets are not discussing the misdirection of this whole thing.

The new "leaders" are billing this as "restoring internet freedom" by repealing "Obama Era" regulation as if things are being put back to some prior status quo that never actually existed. FCC enforced this rules prior, Verizon challenged on overreach and won, and the adjustments were made to bring enforcement within their reach. This article does a pretty good job of covering some of the history: [http://fortune.com/2017/11/22/net-neutrality- fcc-ajit-pai-ve...](http://fortune.com/2017/11/22/net-neutrality-fcc-ajit-pai- verizon-comcast-att/) .

The rest of the details are kinda moot IMHO when the foundation of their argument, that this is going back to some more free internet(free for ISPs) that never existed, is dishonest.

<comment><USER3> This is just another example of the American political discourse. You have two sides that don't even accept the same facts or reality. Most people don't bother to understand the issues but still passionately defend the talking points of "their side". See climate change or health care or guns. Impossible to have any kind of discussion.

<comment><USER4> > You have two sides that don't even accept the same facts or reality.

That is equivocation.

<comment><USER5> I mean, if one side is accepting reality and the other delusional, that statement holds. I don't think the grandparent was implying both sides held incompatible delusional ideas.

<comment><USER3> I meant that most people don't bother understanding issues but just vigorously repeat talking from points from "their side".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm afraid that debating issues like this with anti-neutrality conservatives is getting lost in the weeds.

Something they probably will respond to, if you can hammer it into their heads through all the propaganda they've been fed, is that a free market for ISPs doesn't exist, can't exist (last mile infrastructure can't support a free market even under ideal conditions), and won't exist under Pai's plan. A free market for internet providers probably doesn't even exist in Pai's dreams, unless he's as dumb as the propaganda the FCC is putting out.

Then ask them if they really think it's a good idea, in a low-competition market that's not free, to let ISPs do nearly whatever they want.

<comment><USER7> This is pretty much the playbook I tried with my father last night, to no avail.

You see, it's not about rational arguments - and if you try to fight it on those grounds, you'll have Brexit all over your hands, and it's a nightmare to clean up.

No - last night I explained how the proposed legislation would directly hurt him, how it would take away freedoms he currently enjoys. Everything looped back to "but Obama crippled the internet in 2015" and "but I want internet freedom".

When those didn't fit, it turned into generational crap. "My generation invented the internet. Yours just uses it for smartphones and twitter and facebook. We wouldn't even be having this argument if it weren't for millennials messing up the internet."

He's not stupid - he's just suspending the rational thought he's amply capable of in favour of comforting lies. No, he's broken, without hope.

The content, the detail, the logic, the impact - all irrelevant. What is relevant is picking at the feeling of trapped failure that pervades much of society, and providing the population with a facile solution to their complex problems. "Vote for internet freedom, imagine the flag flying in the breeze against a clear blue sky and an eagle flies by, just like the good old days, when pop would put you on his shoulders to see the marching band".

Problem is, when you try to argue either the immediate argument or the broader emotional trap they're in, they dig in deeper - nobody wants to be the fool who fell in a trap.

It's very nearly if not actually checkmate politics - I cannot see an out that doesn't require going through hell, and I'll be delightfully surprised if this doesn't pass into law with roaring popular support.

<comment><USER8> You want more government. We don't. Get over it.

<comment><USER9> Now what are you talking about? The only thing TFA wants, assuming they favor Title II classification for ISPs, is what the FCC has been doing since 2010:

* that ISPs do not discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic

* that ISPs do not block lawful "content, applications, services or non-harmful devices"

You're not "[not] want[ing] more government", you're wanting consumer-facing ISP control and monopolistic renting over all content.

<comment> en-us For anyone interested, this is here, section III A: [https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_publ...](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-15-24A1.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiKz8bHguzXAhVh4oMKHRSPDzkQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw1C-OuAir8QJb- zpfxl1lKv)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> ISPs have been caught blocking both before and after the net neutrality rules took effect, just in case you want to be sure the FCC is lying.

</comment><comment><USER11> > The Federal Communications Commission put out a final proposal last week to > end net neutrality. The proposal opens the door for internet service > providers to create fast and slow lanes, to block websites, and to > prioritize their own content. This isn't speculation. It's all there in the > text.

Great. Payola. Thanks Verizon!

Does the FTC have the agreement information needed to hear the anti-trust cases that are sure to result from what are now complaints to the FCC (an organization with network management expertise) being redirected to the FTC?

Title II is the appropriate policy set for ISPs; regardless of how lucrative horizontal integration with content producers seems.

</comment><comment><USER12> After Tom Wheeler (whom I thought was a shill at first), it's obvious how much of a skunk this guy is.

</comment><comment><USER13> ISP blocking would be the single best thing to happen to Internet privacy in the last 3 decades.

Since it became commonplace for ISPs to trace every single DNS query, HTTP and SMTP header, etc. and then record, analyze and data mine this information in perpetuity, and then leverage said analysis to inject advertising, and then provide real-time tracking information on this analysis, and then....

Basically 99% of the incredibly invasive shit that ISPs do today is legal, and remained legal under the "net neutrality" legislation we had. In fact, several laws require ISPs to keep and provide this information on request, and often without a warrant.

So please bring on the blocking, bring on the fast and slow lanes, bring on the _directly visible_ infringements of our privacy while using the so-called "dump pipes". Because only then will people be motivated to maybe seek out and utilize the myriad technologies available to prevent ISPs from deploying their prioritization and blocking and tracking schemes, and we will all be better off for it.

And while the ILECs continue to burn themselves to the ground, SpaceX can launch their ~10,000 satellites and I'll happily pay them $200/mo for better service in a competitive market unencumbered by regulations which increasingly don't apply to the majority of consumer internet usage (i.e. mobile) anyway.

IMO, the right angle to fight any change in "net neutrality" legislation is a quid pro quo which lifts network management and QoS restrictions on the ISPs in return for federal mandate that localities are guaranteed the right to provide their own local muni-service following a local election majority vote, as well as establishing a Federal fund for low-interest financing of those deployments.

<comment><USER14> Satellite internet is not an unregulated market in the US.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The Daily Wire (i.e. Ben Shapiro) has the other side of the Net Neutrality debate.

It's interesting that the verge article does not touch on any of these points. I've seen other comments mentioning debates getting lost in the weeds. Perhaps there are some presuppositions or matters of importance that are not being understood?

[http://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net- neutrality...](http://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality- idiotic-aaron-bandler)

<comment><USER16> >"Competition ensures that companies do not have the leverage to discriminate against particular websites," Shapiro added.

What competition? I've got the "choice" between AT&T or Comcast. Both suck hugely, but in different ways. I'm sure both will not hesitate to force companies to cut them checks to push their bits to my computer.

> It's crony capitalism in favor of web giants like Facebook and Google. > That's why they support net neutrality, since it targets their competitors.

How? My company can't afford to pay every ISP for priority access to fast lanes, but our larger, entrenched competitors can.

Maybe it's just my bias, but I only see these kinds of arguments from heavily right leaning sources, and to my mind they miss the mark every time. I don't understand how allowing ISPs to block or throttle companies that don't cut them whatever checks they ask for isn't anti-competitive, and how it could possibly promote competition in an industry full of natural monopolies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Let's try to make sense of Verge's points:

1\. Creation of fast/slow lanes

> If you read carefully, you'll notice the FCC isn't even trying to debunk the > creation of fast and slow lanes. It's just trying to debunk that they "will > worsen consumers' online experience." That's a matter of opinion, and > clearly, we all know which side the FCC lands on.

Verge says: FCC has stated an opinion and we all know what kind of people have an opinion that doesn't match ours lol.

2\. ISPs will block sites

> The FCC is trying to repeal a rule that stops ISPs from blocking websites, > so the commission absolutely can't guarantee internet providers won't do > that when the rules are gone. But despite saying this "won't" happen, the > answer goes on to say, okay, maybe ISPs will block sites. But hey, people > will get mad about it!

Verge says: The FCC says the free market will take care of any restrictions ISP try to place on their service. As if the free market ever worked!

3\. NN repeal will protect users' privacy

> On a really technical level, the FCC is correct here.

> The commission's privacy rules were struck down by Congress earlier this > year, so there aren't any privacy rules in place at the moment. But that > happened, in part at least, thanks to the current FCC chairman's campaign > against them. Had those rules been kept in place, consumers would have been > covered by much stricter privacy protections than what the Federal Trade > Commission will guarantee. That's because the FTC mostly has privacy > guidelines — not strict rules — whereas the FCC was able to define specific > behaviors that are unacceptable. Without net neutrality, privacy enforcement > will go back to the FTC's broader approach.

Verge says: FCC is correct. But that won't prevent us from making up some bullshit!

4\. NN is hurting broadband investments

> And if you only look at the numbers cable companies give you, that would > appear to be true. If you take a broader view, it's clear that broadband > investment had already been declining before net neutrality was put in > place. <link to [https://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says- > broadba...](https://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says-broadband- > investment-is-flourishing-but-their-own-data>)

Verge says: FCC is stupidly believing ISPs' own data. Here, take some data that proves them wrong. Oh btw this data is also provided by ISPs.

5\. Broadband providers will charge you a premium if you want to reach certain online content.

> What the commission is arguing here is that, because something didn't happen > in the past, it therefore won't happen in the future. But that's not how > anything works. And there's a good argument to make that, because the FCC is > explicitly giving ISPs the thumbs-up on this stuff, it's more likely to > happen than ever.

Verge says: The FCC is completely right. But fuck them for not supporting unneeded extra government regulation and oversight.

<comment><USER18> Whoa there, acknowledging that the FCC might not be purely an agent of corporate propaganda and might actually be stating what it believes is in everyone's best interest?

Watch out for the downvote brigade!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> You're preaching to the choir.</comment>


As Covid-19 Cases Surge Daily Deaths and the Case Fatality Rate Continue to Fall - <AUTHOR> https://reason.com/2020/07/06/as-covid-19-cases-surge-daily-deaths-and-the-case-fatality-rate-continue-to-fall/ <comment><USER2> This is great. People need to be careful about inferring certain details from headline numbers. I think hospitals are also incentivized to test and label patient Covid if they can, since they'll be reimbursed more. In any case, it seems like the reason fatality rate is decreasing is that at-risk people (i.e. old, obese, respiratory issues, etc) are taking more precautions and being smart. The young continue to be stupid.

<comment><USER3> Under 30, driving on the highway is more likely to result in mortality than covid is. Risk adjusted, cocooning strategy is actually safer than quarantine, because quarantine forces multi-generational households. E.g. Opening universities leads to safer outcomes on balance than closing them.</comment></comment>


Open Source Tools from the Warren for President Tech Team - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@teamwarren/open-source-tools-from-the-warren-for-president-tech-team-f1f27d2c7551 <comment><USER2> These are not tools, they are applications, and it looks like they are just open source mirrors of internal code that hasn't seen any updates since first post.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not really sure what the distinction between "tools" and "applications" is. But yes, they're mostly mirrors of their internal tooling (or applications, if you prefer?) that they developed. I love the fact that political campaigns are developing software and are willing to give it away!</comment></comment>


Devilution – A web port of the original Diablo game - <AUTHOR> https://diablo.rivsoft.net/ <comment><USER2> What's also amazing is how someone ported Nox to the browser. Similar but more arena-style game (by Westwood) that was unfortunately overshadowed by Diablo at the time.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Nox/comments/bkvc0s/nox_in_a_browse...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Nox/comments/bkvc0s/nox_in_a_browser_take_2/)

[https://playnox.xyz/](https://playnox.xyz/)

Even multiplayer works. Insane amount of work.

I highly recommend at least trying the campaign (not the "Quest" mode). It's like a faster Diablo.

It's under active development, and sometimes the initial download can't complete on my crappy connection.

<comment><USER3> Nox! What a treasure. One of my personal favorites. Its so similar to many other dungeon crawlers but somehow strikingly unique and unreasonably fun.

<comment><USER4> the abilityo reverse most spells was fun. my favorite was teleporting an enemy to my teleport marker instead of myself. o courses my marker was in a lava lake...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Hello My Friend, Stay awhile and Listen_ :D

But the first question that springs to my mind when I was reading the web page, what happened to Shareware? 30 days trial.

We used to have games that we could play a little to decide whether we want to buy it. Now it is like a money bet hoping for the best.

<comment><USER6> Maybe it's a cultural shift, that is, people can get information about a game - reviews, etc - a lot more and easier than back then when you depended on just the right issue of gaming magazines. Alternatively, the best you had was looking at the back of a game's box to get the gist of it.

But with shareware you often went in blind, especially once CD-ROMs became a thing (attached to magazines) with dozens if not hundreds of shareware games and applications. The culture was one of browsing and trying stuff out.

Nowadays it's more about being able to build up hype and brand / name awareness over time, with peak moments being e.g. the E3 conference. More recent even is streaming on Twitch and let's plays on youtube, allowing people to see the game before buying it themselves. And of course there's free-to- play or low cost games with in game purchases and/or live services.

<comment><USER7> I don't find reviews to be a substitute for demos; there's always a strong element of "if you like games like this then..."

I pretty much only buy Steam games on sale now, not (just) because I'm a skinflint, but because I've learned the expensive way that I'll uninstall most games within half an hour or so or starting them. Even well-reviewed ones. Even ones that won Game Of The Year.

<comment><USER8> Are you sure you like video games?

<comment><USER9> _" Liking video games"_ is like _" liking books"_. Typically people prefer certain kinds of games or books, and may find any particular example enjoyable or not.

Nobody questions whether I "like books" when I say _The Lost World_ was a lackluster sequel to _Jurassic Park_ , right? Because there is no expectation that somebody who enjoyed one particular book should like _every_ book, even within the same genre or franchise.

<comment><USER8> I was referring to mrec's behavior of returning _most_ games he buys, including critically-acclaimed ones. That's not a case of disliking a certain work, but of either not knowing your own taste or disliking the medium itself.

<comment><USER9> I wager you don't like most critically acclaimed books, but that certainly doesn't mean you dislike books. Rather, it's just a reflection of the fact that there is such wide variety of books that _anybody_ is unlikely to like most of them.

<comment><USER8> Sure, but I like most of the critically acclaimed books _that I buy_ , which is more analogous to mrec's comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Now someone just needs to port the BoBaFeTT trainer(s) and the anti-hacks, anti-anti hacks, etc. Can't wait to see people shooting arrows from their swords, getting PKed in town (and the town being covered in infinite fire and portals), level 1 loincloth guys suddenly equipping King's Sword of Haste and Godly Plate of the Mammoth when a duel starts etc.

<comment><USER11> Someone in this thread who played diablo!

Do you think the game would have had the same staying power if it was harder to cheat?

<comment><USER12> I wasn't a Diablo cheater, but I was a Diablo 2 cheater. Frankly, it was what made the game playable for me; I wasn't cheating to dupe items or anything like that, but making the damn map functional. It was definitely a huge part of the staying power of the game, IMO.

<comment><USER13> and crazy rare runewords, ubers, grinding for sets, etc. We learned a lot about planning content for "end game" in that era of gaming.

Diablo 1 had... I don't really remember. What did I do sinking hundreds of hours into the game?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm very happy for every web port. Old games, old OSes emulated, old apps. Please, port / emulate everything! I've recently bought one of my childhood games (Pharaoh, released 1999) from GOG and struggled for hours to run it in Windows without errors and glitches. Eventually had to give up.

I'm quite confident that JavaScript/Web runtime will be sufficiently maintained for decades to come -- HTML websites from early 2000s run the same now as they did 20 years ago. The same can't be said for Windows runtimes.

So please, port everything you can to Web. It's the best way to preserve old stuff.

<comment><USER15> > HTML websites from early 2000s run the same now as they did 20 years ago.

Well, apart from the tens of thousands of flash games and videos that are being killed off as we speak.

<comment> mr-ron You can still install flash right? So the flash experiences aren't getting lost necessarily.

Lots of Shockwave Era stuff getting lost though I agree. Also flash games that require a server backend

<comment><USER15> Both Chromium and Firefox will be removing it in 2020.

Once it has been removed, legacy websites hosting flash media won't really be able to fund themselves, so I imagine in the absence of a large archiving programme, we'll just lose it all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Shareware download produces a 404 message. I don't see it in the github repo in the public/ [1] folder either. Maybe it was taken down recently?

[1] [https://github.com/d07RiV/diabloweb/tree/master/public](https://github.com/d07RiV/diabloweb/tree/master/public)

<comment><USER16> Resolved via work-around:

Simply download [https://d07riv.github.io/diabloweb/spawn.mpq](https://d07riv.github.io/diabloweb/spawn.mpq) and drag/drop the file onto the start screen to play.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Perfect opportunity to plug one of my favorite Diablo 1 mod projects. I am in no way affiliated with this project, just like the work that was done.

[https://mod.diablo.noktis.pl/features](https://mod.diablo.noktis.pl/features)

</comment><comment><USER18> Dupe trick still works, this is the good stuff

</comment><comment><USER19> Only prints "Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token <" in the console on Chrome under MacOS.

Edit: Same in Firefox

<comment><USER20> Works for me, MacOS 10.13.6 and Chrome 75.0.3770.100.

<comment><USER19> MacOS 10.14.3 and Chrome 75.0.3770.142 here. Not sure what's the issue.

<comment><USER21> I'm getting the error on Windows. Chrome 76.0.3809.87, Firefox 68.0.1, and Edge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This version fails on a JS error for me, but this one works: [https://sergi4ua.pp.ua/diabloweb/](https://sergi4ua.pp.ua/diabloweb/)

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm really tempted to launch this. But I'm in an open office, so no going to happen right now

<comment><USER24> You have to find a technical basis for it. Like inspecting new reverse engineering strategies.

<comment><USER23> I like this idea, but I'm not sure it's going to fly here. And reverse engineering is way out of the scope of our work. Oh well it can wait this evening.

<comment><USER25> Wanna come work for us? We don't care if you have a game open on your laptop, just that you get your work done.

<comment><USER26> I don't play games and i am proud of my work, but i pretty like the mentality of your workplace.

<comment><USER25> You know, I am surprised I am saying this, but I think I do too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I can't find a description unfortunately - is this done via emscripten, or some new wasm magic, or something else?

<comment><USER28> Looks like a wasm compilation of Devilution, which is a decompiled / reverse engineered version of the original game (they left debug symbols in in some releases apparently).

It definitely violates their copyright if you were wondering. I doubt they care though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Doesn't work on Linux Manjaro, tried using both Firefox (68.0.1) and Chromium (75.0.3770.142)

<comment><USER30> On my Ubuntu 18.04 LTS and FF 67.0.1 it have launched fine after a second try, while the first one just froze

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Silly question, if we can port this to web could we port it to Mac?

<comment><USER32> Run it in an Electron wrapper?

<comment><USER33> genius

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Clicked on the "Play Shareware" button and received a pretty message in a red box: "Request failed with status code 404." That was fun.

</comment><comment><USER35> I will pay good money for System Shock 2 on the browser!

</comment><comment><USER36> Request failed, error code 404. Did we kill it boys?!

<comment><USER37> It's some bug - tries to load [https://d07riv.github.io/spawn.mpq](https://d07riv.github.io/spawn.mpq) while actual working url is [https://d07riv.github.io/diabloweb/spawn.mpq](https://d07riv.github.io/diabloweb/spawn.mpq)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> For some reason this only works for me if I'm not using a Private tab in Firefox.

</comment><comment><USER39> Better than this only letting us download the savegames!

</comment><comment><USER40> Works better than on Wine :D (nearly)

</comment><comment><USER41> Ahh fresh meat!

<comment><USER42> Still vividly remember the first time I met this bloodthirsty bugger!

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> hugged to death?

</comment><comment><USER44> Super nice

<comment><USER44> I only have a concern about how this works : Is it a client-side computation of the loaded file OR a livestream of the game with only a check on the uploaded-file to verify if no copyright enforcement is bypassed ?

<comment><USER45> It's running in your browser on your computer.</comment></comment></comment>


Bill targeting H1B visas reintroduced in US Congress - <AUTHOR> http://www.deccanherald.com/content/589917/bill-targeting-h1b-visas-reintroduced.html <comment><USER2> Minimum salary requirement raised to $100,000 which means the end of any hopes for those graduating from US colleges to get a job in the US, if the bill passes.

You aren't going to get $100,000 salary with just a Bachelor's degree straight out of college even in Bay Area, let alone in the rest of the US

This will adversely affect the talent pool that American companies can hire and will almost certainly negatively impact the productivity of tech companies who rely on anywhere between 25-40% of their tech workforce from other countries especially those graduating from US colleges.

There is also a provision to eliminate the Master's degree exemption meaning that the same pool of 65,000 (or so) visas will now be competed for by an even bigger group of candidates. Obviously those with Master's degrees will command a higher salary than those without. It still won't reach $100,000 even with a Master's degree.

Long term effect will mean that if students cannot find jobs that can pay them $100,000 with a Bachelor's or Master's degree (and they won't) then they will stop coming to US universities. By restricting the best talent from coming to US, leaning and contributing to its academic system, it will definitely negatively impact the US education system.

I hope lawmakers have the sense to reject this bill but we've seen worse.

<comment><USER3> I thought those graduating from US universities qualify for other visa programs. H1B is mainly for people from abroad, no? And AFAIK, $100,000 is something large corporations do offer CS graduates from abroad.

<comment><USER2> Computer Science is not the only profession that H1Bs come from. A lot of journalism students, for example, would never make the $100k cut.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Reverse Geocode REST API - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/marshallford/reverse-geocoder <comment><USER2> If it's at all useful, here's the polygons for all the countries as of last January: [https://raw.githubusercontent.com/daveross/offline- country-r...](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/daveross/offline-country- reverse-geocoder/master/src/polygons.properties)

Could be handy as some sort of fallback when one of your providers isn't available. That repo has the code to reverse geocode from a lat/long combo.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmmm you bring up a good point, having a file based provider type might be useful as the last fallback.

Also, the tool already supports fallbacks, so if a provider is offline or what have you it will try the next provider in line and so on.</comment></comment>


How do you protect your IP in beta stage? - <AUTHOR> I am building an app and I want to launch as quickly as possible so I can get some user feedback, but I am paralyzed by fear that someone "bigger" with more money will scoop up my idea/methodology and build the same thing more quickly than I can. How can I protect against this? <comment><USER2> I wouldn't worry about it. If you're at the beta stage then the app is already ahead going to market that it would cost significant time/resources for a competitor to catch up. By the time they do, you'll have already iterated further.

Release, iterate, repeat.</comment>


Fluid Paint Simulation - <AUTHOR> http://david.li/paint/ <comment><USER2> You can compare this to what I believe is the state of the art system, "Wetbrush":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwyqh4d-WU8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwyqh4d-WU8) (SIGGRAPH Asia 2015)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ndr3qDXKo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ndr3qDXKo) (Adobe demo)

<comment><USER3> Of commercial applications, Corel Painter remains the professional natural media paint tool:

[http://www.painterartist.com/en/product/painter/](http://www.painterartist.com/en/product/painter/)

It's been around for about 25 years and some of the UI is a bit creaky, but on the upside, it's pretty fast on modern desktops and it still gets regular updates. Brush strokes with 3D depth ("impasto") were introduced a long time ago, maybe late '90s.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> His other work is cool too: [http://david.li/](http://david.li/)

<comment><USER5> the green Vortex Spheres maxed out my gtx 1070 what the heck

<comment><USER6> I have a 1080 and didn't even turn on the fans. Something is wrong.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This seems obvious but somehow I never considered that you need three dimensions to replicate the feel of most paints.

<comment><USER8> If you are accustomed to seeing prints and photos and computer scans, it's easy to overlook how oil paint is like a sculpture. Watercolor, not so much.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Another "natural paint" painting program is ArtRage [1]. They have, bar none, the friendliest, most supportive discussion forums I've ever seen on the internet.

Oh yeah, the painting program's pretty good too :-)

[1] [https://www.artrage.com](https://www.artrage.com)

</comment><comment><USER10> This is very cool. One thing that I think could be improved: It looks like the model is treating the white background as if it is also paint. This leads to some weird results when painting over existing strokes.

Really awesome work though.

<comment> fake-name This could be intentional. It's a fairly common technique to paint on top of a wet white basecoat[1].

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-on- wet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-on-wet)

<comment><USER10> Hmm, good point. I'm guessing it also makes the model a lot simpler.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I loved it, I feel like it could make some nice backgrounds and decorative paintings will a little more tries: [http://imgur.com/a/XBUgn](http://imgur.com/a/XBUgn)

And it's open source: [https://github.com/dli/paint](https://github.com/dli/paint) (I posted my issues there)

</comment><comment><USER12> Fantastic. One criticism. On click please make the paint "dip" and paint, and the paint on the brush should wear out. Then it'll really feel like painting. Click again is to re-dip in the color of choosing.

This will even let for mixing of colors like on a painter's palette.

:) Very nice tool.

<comment><USER13> To "really feel like painting" for me it would have to simulate spending hours with blue tape, spilling on my shoes, making multiple trips to home depot... sounds like a job for VR... ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Great stuff! Reminds me of Verve Painter[1], which is a fleshed out fluid- simulation-based oil painting app

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBO2hNv_tTE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBO2hNv_tTE)

</comment><comment> Ono-Sendai Cool. Something like this could combine nicely with my automatic painting algorithm: [http://www.forwardscattering.org/post/42](http://www.forwardscattering.org/post/42) [http://www.forwardscattering.org/post/44](http://www.forwardscattering.org/post/44)

</comment><comment><USER15> 20 seconds of drawing with default parameters and laptop temperature went from 40 to 70 °C. Not bad :D.

Nice work though, very beautiful and realistic.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is awesome. 3D work really have the wow factor. This is definitely at the WOW level.

Edit: I would say couple this with VR and it would be a truly awesome experience.

<comment><USER17> Like MS Paint, but for VR. Interesting, the "websites" of VR will be worlds... I can totally see people throwing in this kinda stuff "just because wow new technology" in the same way that websites back in the 90s threw in snowflakes falling on the screen, custom pointers, epileptic lighting, audio, flash, etc.

<comment><USER18> I really hope web concepts move gracefully into VR. I suppose "immersive location" is just like a URL and full-VR experience is just another Content- Type.

<comment><USER17> pls no

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Looks sweet, but the paint definitely continues sliding in the direction of the stroke for too long. Paint basically just sticks immediately where you put it, it doesn't have that type of momentum. Even at the lowest fluidity level.

</comment><comment><USER20> A similar app without opengl (for ipads and such) [http://ba.net/util/finger- oil-painting/](http://ba.net/util/finger-oil-painting/)

<comment><USER21> iPads support WebGL / OpenGL just fine

<comment><USER22> Interface doesn't seem to work on an ipad ( maybe because of event handling though)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Touch event support please!

</comment><comment><USER24> Here is another eastern watercolor painting tool "Expresii"[1].

[1] [http://www.expresii.com](http://www.expresii.com)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Source code: [https://github.com/dli/paint](https://github.com/dli/paint)

</comment><comment><USER25> So bizarre: I saw this post last Saturday, loved the site and David.il's other pages, showed some friends... Then I could not find the HackerNews post again. Here it is now, yet it says it was posted within a day, with no history of being posted before. Odd...

<comment><USER26> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13589074](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13589074)

Not surer why it's not showing when you search. I got here by using HN search for the URL and picking the one with more comments--both showed up for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Amazing how well it handles painting on top of previous strokes.

</comment><comment><USER28> See a history of fluid sim applied to watercolor-like painting: [http://www.expresii.com/blog/innovations-in-digital- painting...](http://www.expresii.com/blog/innovations-in-digital-painting- tech6607339) A quick look at David Li's source code seems to suggest Li's work is based on Mark Harris' GPU implementation (with Jacobi iteration) of Jos Stam's method.

</comment><comment><USER29> My MacBook Pro sounds like it's taking off a runway :P

</comment><comment><USER30> Doesn't have dark colors. The darkest paint is brown.

<comment><USER31> the box in the middle of the color picker is saturation and lightness, drag towards the left on the top of the box to reduce the brightness downward.

<comment><USER32> The darkest color comes out as brown for all colors though.

<comment><USER31> You're right... I hadn't tried black.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Reminds me of Verve. I watched the author's channel on Youtube religiously, hugely enjoying his video demos with each new release. Sad to say there hasn't been one in like 2 years.

[https://www.youtube.com/user/333taron/videos](https://www.youtube.com/user/333taron/videos)

<comment><USER34> Oohh! i was looking for this! i remember seeing this a few years ago and being really impressed. It looks pretty good, although im not much of an artist so i dont know how it compares to the paid competition. The UI could use some work though.

it took me a while to figure out but im having a lot of fun with it. performs surprisingly well for me on only an intel integrated card.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Did you mean to use the term fluidity rather than the term viscosity? I believe they are mathematically inverse.

</comment><comment><USER36> Reminds me of [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/project- gus...](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/project-gustav- immersive-digital-painting/) with later became Fresh paint.

</comment><comment><USER37> Quite nice, though the paint colors don't combine like they do in this kind of oil painting. Can't make bob ross art without that. Also when you try to paint on the edges, the brush goes away, so its difficult to make a full picture without making it larger, and then cropping down.

</comment><comment><USER38> This reminds me of Bob Ross and his "Happy Little Trees". I think I could paint some on here if the canvas were bigger, and there was an area off to the side to mix the paint.

</comment><comment><USER39> I can't seem to create anything beautiful worth sharing with this. But damn, it is soothing and relaxing to play with. It feels almost therapeutic! Thank you!

</comment><comment><USER40> I can't paint or draw worth beans - but I like it!

</comment><comment><USER41> See also FreshPaint on any version of windows > 7

</comment><comment><USER42> Is this using Navier-Stokes based fluid simulation?

</comment><comment><USER43> Very nice. Lots of fun. The only thing missing is that the paint doesn't mix, ie. yellow and blue don't turn greenish etc.

</comment><comment><USER44> At first I was like, "Wow, this is a cool effect, let's try a different col-- HOLY SHIT". Color me impressed!

</comment><comment><USER45> Amazing. It seems like it'd be really useful to be able to zoom in and out as well.

</comment><comment><USER46> This is oddly therapeutic and calming. My Macbook CPU was just fine as well. Very cool!

</comment><comment><USER47> This is great for calligraphy with surface pen - can't find the black ink though.

</comment><comment><USER48> With Opera 43.0.2442.806 (PGO) i cannot do a stroke at all it seems. Just reporting.

<comment><USER49> Hitting a bandwith limit?

<comment><USER48> Hardware Limit it seems, doing this on a Lenovo minimun laptop, maybe OGL is outdated.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Like that, though I wish it would work with FF/Win10/XPS13 touch screen.

</comment><comment><USER51> Pretty cool. Next step is mixing colors and different thicknesses like real oil :)

</comment><comment><USER52> This is pretty impressive. It'd be really neat if the paint slowly dried!

<comment><USER53> Who would like to watch that? ;)

<comment><USER16> Computer can always speed that up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Was playing with your other projects too. Great stuff and super fun. Sharing.

</comment><comment><USER55> I feel like you deserve the nobel prize for this or something. Mind = blown

</comment><comment><USER56> Cool! Any idea what model or method is used here (or is it heuristic)?

<comment><USER28> A quick look at the source code seems to suggest Li's work is based on Mark Harris' GPU implementation (with Jacobi iteration) of Jos Stam's method. Ref: [http://www.expresii.com/blog/innovations-in-digital- painting...](http://www.expresii.com/blog/innovations-in-digital-painting- tech6607339)

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> This is more of a 'mop' than a 'paint brush'.

</comment><comment><USER58> Holy moly! Awesome work. It looks very realistic. Congrats!

</comment><comment><USER59> Very nice work. Reminds me a lot of Corel Painter.

</comment><comment><USER60> Very cool!

Man, does it peg the hell out of the CPU though! :P

<comment><USER61> It was hogging about 60% of one CPU core (Skylake i7) on my PC. Seems like it's re-drawing the screen at 60 fps even though nothing is happening. Should be an easy fix.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> so cool, consider adding an option to remove paint from the brush so you can scumble the fluid to blend.

</comment><comment><USER63> What primitives is this using?

</comment><comment><USER64> Color me impressed

</comment><comment><USER65> Wow !

</comment><comment><USER66> This is too slow to use on my MacBook... I like the idea though, and it seems really cool.

</comment><comment><USER67> Very cool, but please change the color selector. It is not intuitive, and it's very hard to pick even the most obvious colors.

<comment><USER68> That's a pretty common HSL-style color picker. It's great for artists and designers who think in those terms. Curious, do you have much experience in graphic design, or no?

<comment><USER67> I have zero experience in graphic design, but I do not think the simulation is made for designers.

<comment><USER68> It makes sense for artists, designers and painters included. This simulation looks like oil paint, and this type of color picker is like mixing pigment to get a hue and then mixing in black and white to change the saturation and value. I guess that makes sense seeing as this is a paint simulation!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Austin-based tech firm Digby.com raises $2M in its $3M equity offering - <AUTHOR> http://austintechgeeks.com/2010/07/31/s3-ventures-backed-30-second-software-raises-2m-in-its-3m-equity-offering/

<comment><AUTHOR> Congrats!

<comment><USER2> As an RIT alum and lifelong NYS resident, where Digby was born, I have to say I'm a little disappointed that the NYS business/tech climate wasn't appealing enough to stay in our state.

<comment><AUTHOR> Austin has a great startup scene, I guess some companies just look for places where their changes of success are greater.

<comment><USER2> That's kind of precisely my point. NYS business climate sucks for startups and small biz.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Yand – task management made easy - <AUTHOR> https://yand.app <comment><AUTHOR> Please check out our new project and task management application. Still in early stage, so all feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Yand is a task management application centred around fast and effective collaboration in agile product development.

Yand supports KanBan and Scrum workflows and is the perfect solution for distributed or colocated teams

<comment><USER2> Will give it shot. One offtopic question: The explainer video on homepage is made in ScreenFlow or something else ? Thanks

<comment><USER3> It's created in iMovie :) Here is a better explainer than the one on the website: [https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alanhcraig_startups- productiv...](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alanhcraig_startups-productivity- business-activity-6664333791462592513-BC4r)</comment></comment></comment>


U.S. Will Track Secret Buyers of Luxury Real Estate - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/us/us-will-track-secret-buyers-of-luxury-real-estate.html?_r=0 <comment><USER2> "Under the U.S.A. Patriot Act, the Treasury is already authorized to require real estate companies to scrutinize real estate buyers, but the department has in the past faced fierce lobbying against issuing such rules"

This article leaves out some important background details about why this was ever a thing to begin with. Real estate professionals have lobbied for and gotten an exception to the FinCEN reporting requirements that were passed under the PATRIOT act in 2002. The exception is a 'temporary' one but it has been continuously renewed since 2002. That is largely why this problem exists at all.

The 2002 law imposed reporting requirements on businesses that accepted cash in transactions over $10k. The exemption for real estate left it as one of the only practical ways to make a large cash transaction that wouldn't end up in a so called 'suspicious activity report' being submitted to FinCEN.

<comment><USER3> Real Estate lobbiests have a lot of power, and are surprising effective.

In CA a few years ago they wanted Gov. Schwartzeneger to sign a bill requiring all Realestae sales persons to be working for a broker for two years before striking out on their own to become Brokers. He saw the their wasen't a need to change the system, and vetoed it. He said, "Why decrease supply? We haven't had one instance where a new broker screwed up."

We all know what it takes to peddle Realestae. Eight courses and a lot of networking, and a lot of advertising. It's not rocket science. It's such a joke--I'm astonished the profession haven't been gobbled up my an app yet.

Well, out of stupidity, or lobbying Gov. Brown signed the bill. If you want to become a broker, and split you commission with the top cheerleader, you need to work two years in order to peddle houses.

It bother me, because I saw the easy money years ago, but draged my feet on finishing my last class, and taking the easy test.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> London's Mayfair and other areas are going dark from empty residences and local retail businesses are suffering from lack of walk-in trade, caused by foreign officials laundering billions, stolen from their governments.

<comment><USER5> How to do something about it:

[http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2015/04/land- val...](http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2015/04/land-value-tax)

Of course, keeping an eye on the money flows themselves will help.

<comment><USER6> As an additional interesting (?) link, a (UK-focused) blog featuring rebuttals of common arguments against a land value tax: [http://kaalvtn.blogspot.co.uk/p/index.html](http://kaalvtn.blogspot.co.uk/p/index.html)

<comment><USER5> Thanks. A very interesting page. Alas, their proposal is too reasonable to ever get traction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> There are actually plenty of good (and legitimate) reasons to buy property in such a way the keeps the owner relatively private.

1\. Keep your asset from appearing in a quick asset search. 2\. Keep John Q. Public from finding your address via Spokeo, or similar data aggregators. 3\. ..?

Same applies to a lease, be it commercial or residential. Most of the cheap background checks used by property managers are cheap because the company (say Experian, etc) receive your information for their product in return. The way around that, is to rent the property through a shell, or to a trust.

<comment><USER8> LLCs in particular are a very convenient minimal-fuss-required way to get "an entity the system knows how to interface with" spun up abroad. The US economy welcomes investment by foreigners and foreign corporations. The simplest way to do so is to establish an LLC. These LLCs are often established by lawyers. Breathless reports to the contrary, this is actually _very common_ and _not in itself indicative of money laundering_. This gives you an entity which can trivially ( _trivially_ \-- fill out a form online, get emailed it in a minute) get a US tax ID issued and be used to fill in any boxes required by a bank, secretary of state, county office, etc etc etc.

<comment><USER9> Most articles go out of the way to have some boilerplate agreeing with what you just said ("of course there are perfectly legitimate uses" etc), but the fact remains that property bought in this fashion has caused enormous money laundering issues. I wouldn't call the recent articles on this hysterical at all. Furthermore this is requiring confidential reporting to the US financial intelligence unit, not public reporting.

<comment><USER10> This is a little bit like saying that money has caused enormous money laundering issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Odd,

      In Manhattan, the initiative requires buyers in sales of
      more than $3 million to be reported; in Miami-Dade
      County, it requires reporting on sales of more than $1
      million. In Manhattan, 1,045 residential sales cost more
      than $3 million in the second half of 2015, worth some
     $6.5 billion in aggregate, according to PropertyShark, a
      real estate data company.

So now illicit money laundering in will effectively shift from luxury real estate into the normal real estate markets..?

      In its investigation, The Times found that nearly half of
      homes nationwide worth at least $5 million are purchased
      using shell companies. In Manhattan and Los Angeles, the
      figure is higher.

<comment><USER12> > nearly half of homes nationwide worth at least $5 million are purchased > using shell companies

If one does not need a mortgage, this is actually the recommended way to transact on a high-value property. It makes estate planning easier, it somewhat protects privacy, and when it's time to sell, one simply sells the underlying LLC, which ironically is a much simpler business transaction in most states than selling a piece of real estate.

<comment><USER13> Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that you can get a mortgage using a LLC, but you do need to go to a private bank and arrange a custom deal for it.

(I seem to recall Zuckerberg doing this for his Palo Alto home with a variable interest rate loan that started with 2% or so)

<comment><USER14> Interesting, how come he had to get a loan at all? Is all of his wealth tied up in investments and Facebook stock?

Or is it that the loan is such a low interest rate that it makes more financial sense to keep making money with his cash through investments, say at ~10% return, to offset the loan interest?

<comment><USER12> I doubt it's _all_ tied up, as his last recorded sale (in 2013) [http://www.secform4.com/insider- trading/1548760.htm](http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1548760.htm) must have left him with quite a bit of cash. So motives are not perfectly clear.

On a macro level, the government penalizes selling of assets at 23.8% (current long-term capital gains + ACA surcharge) and on the other hand encourages borrowing by keeping the rates low and allowing the interest portion to be deducted as an investment expense, so what's a rational person to do?

<comment><USER15> You borrow against your stock, of course, so you don't have to realise the capital gain yet get access to the cash. If you're worried about downside protection, you can always buy a put option for the stock you pledged at its current value.

<comment><USER16> Many publicly traded companies prohibit their employees from buying puts or selling calls on their stock, as it misaligns incentives, similarly to how shorting the stock causes you to benefit from a decline in price.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The biggest problem with the U.S. economy is housing prices. Why not ban foreign investment in U.S. real estate?

<comment><USER18> That won't lower the cost of housing (I.e. rent and owner equivalent rent). All it will do is reduce asset prices and investment in real estate.

The real solution is to allow development. Asset prices are high because its mostly illegal to build new housing in coastal cities.

<comment><USER19> In Manhattan, you can't really do much more development. So what happens is the foreign investments basically buy out a large portion of available apartments and the people have to move elsewhere. To other boroughs mostly.

Sometimes this results in very inefficient transportation/location for actual legitimate companies that operate there and people who live there because of the dead weight real estate.

<comment><USER18> Sure you can. Lots of Manhattan is only 3-4 stories tall - its just legally impossible to build bigger in many places. (E.g. east village, full of the most entitled activists outside SF.)

Foreign investments in Manhattan are usually rented out and are part of the housing supply.

<comment><USER19> Close to permanently rented out to foreign/domestic investors not living there.

Also, lots of the medium-height buildings are historic in nature, so demolishing them is not a very good option.

I agree that there could be some further development, but there should be some sort of regulation to avoid ghost-town status.

Had all of the apartments been rented out to actual residents, the picture would have been much better.

<comment><USER18> Why would an absentee foreigner rent a flat? Unlike buying it, that's not even an investment. It's just throwing money away.

If this is common we should build more and take the money of these stupid foreigners. If we build enough, regulation is unnecessary - why prevent foreigners from giving us their money?

<comment><USER20> Because in some locations (c.f. London) this makes the asset far more liquid. Having renters requires you to engage a property management company and the presensce of tennants makes it harder to flip the property quickly if you need to get access to your stash of ill-gotten gains.

It is not just stories and anecdote, there are large portions of high-end London real estate sitting empty because foreign buyers often do no want a tennant.

<comment><USER18> Until you cite some statistics (specifically the residential vacancy rate), you are in fact just repeating stories and anecdotes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Two good articles - One a long form and one One-pager:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/nyregion/stream-of- foreign...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/nyregion/stream-of-foreign- wealth-flows-to-time-warner-condos.html?_r=0)

One-pager - [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/real-estate- goe...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/real-estate-goes-global)

</comment><comment><USER22> London could benefit from anti-money laundering policies around real-estate transactions as well. There are plenty of stories of corrupt elites parking their money in London real-estate to keep it safe in case the regime gets overturned in their country.

</comment><comment><USER23> It will be very difficult unless they change the laws. These properties are purchased by the attorneys of corporations owned by other corporations with multiple owners which are other foreign corporations and communicated by a non-owner party. Is it worth it to spend a lot of money tracking the true owners down into foreign countries through this complicated web of corporate companies?

</comment><comment><USER24> Not sure this will accomplish much. The people sheltering this wealth have attorneys and 'henchmen' who are more than willing to put the assets in their name. Its a massive thing here in Miami Beach (I think half the sales here are all cash and of those, half are from foreign investors)

</comment><comment><USER25> This is the kind of "bulk collection" they should've been doing in the first place that might have actually busted some crooks. Instead of red flag criteria, they seem to be watching everything else most of the time. (rolls eyes)

</comment><comment><USER26> Absent from the article is any explanation of how buying real estate is money laundering.

<comment><USER27> I would assume that it's a quick way to turn cash into an asset. You buy the house to keep your money safe, then sell the house when you need money.

I'm curious if this could also work in a foreign setting. Like buying a house in another country.

<comment><USER26> Turning cash into an asset is not money laundering, even if the cash is dirty. Laundering is making it look like you received income from legitimate activity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> So instead of buying a $1.1m house in Miami-Dade, I'll be two at $750k each. Bravo.

</comment><comment><USER29> Henchpeople, you rank sexist

<comment><USER5> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_\(word\))

<comment><USER30> The meanings of words can change.</comment></comment></comment>


Startup or Big Company after graduating? - <AUTHOR> http://www.jeanhsu.com/2011/05/19/startup-or-big-company-after-graduation/ <comment><USER2> Work where you will be the dumbest person in the room.

In order to become great, it will really speed things up if you learn from great people. A great team can be anywhere, startup or large company. But, it is very difficult to estimate the quality of the team just from interviewing - especially as a fresh graduate.

Regrettably, chances are you are more likely to find a great team at companies such as Google than in a startup or a medium sized company. This is simply because startups find it much harder to recruit candidates, especially in early stages. So you are risking less going to Google or Microsoft.

With that said, if you find yourself agile enough to switch jobs quickly if things aren't the way you expected. Or if you have other information (such as friend's recommendation), going the riskier route may be more rewarding.

<comment><USER3> I think this is true. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find such a team yet. Of course it would be nice to believe, that I'm quite talented. But really, I think, it just shows, that it is very hard, to find a team that is stellar in the things that you find the most interesting.

Or, maybe, I just have a weird taste... Would be interesting if somebody has been successful in finding such a team for him. Sounds like you, _tomerico_ , found one after you graduated, no?

<comment><USER4> In big companies, talented people leave programming to do architecture and project lead - you're likely to find these guys in teams that are bound to executives and senior managers.

If you work for a big comp, get a clear idea of what role you want to have: support? IT? development? tech consulting? From there try to find single persons that do well, they probably have interesting connections.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for the advice! I'm actually a Mechanical Engineer and have mostly worked for R&D so far. Also, me and most people in robotics spend most of their time programing, they are not trained programmers. Unfortunately many use this as an excuse to keep writing crappy code instead of trying to catch up with the state of the art. Heck, right now I'm the only one in my group who uses version control ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My take: I worked for a startup as one of their two devs/IT guys at the time (2 business partners who definitely I'd say saw everyone else as employees, three-four customer service types). None of us knew a great deal about dev at the time (no version control, no ticket system, live changes in prod etc..), so we hacked by, but it was only once I worked for a much larger company that I learned a lot of important dev stuff (in my case, I wasn't coming from a CS degree; perhaps more appropriately educated types wouldn't have gained so much). Not all startups are equally tech focused / good at that aspect of things (this one was online retail).

But having said that, the learning payoff tails off really quickly - you gain much more in 3 months on role than the next 3 years etc..

I'd say main thing is to try and switch jobs/roles before you're too comfortable.

Also - focus on what you're gaining right from the start. The thrill of actually having money coming into your account sometimes means you can overlook when you're stagnating. You have to lead your own learning at companies - and if you push for it, you can gain a lot. But generally managers have other things to worry about and if you don't, they'll assume you're happy.

</comment><comment><USER6> I recommend working at a larger company. If you join a startup right after graduation, chances are you're going to have to find out about a lot of real world stuff, best practices, technologies and so on on your own. There's a good chance you'll miss out on a lot of good practices and do things the harder way (or do them the easier way, which will prove bad in the long run). If you join a large company, you get the benefit of being able to draw from experiences of senior developers, and you'll likely get one of them as your mentor. After a while (and 'a while' may be two years, three, or even more), you'll start feeling that you've learned as much as you can. Then is the time to join a startup (or start your own, if you can).

</comment><comment><USER7> Working for a company will give you the ability to make contacts and also get mentored from some senior developers. In my first I.T. job I was mentored by a guy who had been writing software for 20 years, and in 3 months with him I gained more skills than I did through education, and also some practical advice that still echos in my mind daily.

Working for an existing startup would be OK too -- though you might not necessarily get the mentor in that case.

I wouldn't recommend you start your own startup though -- because you're still new and the cost of learning would be a cost _you_ would bare ... pick up some real world skills for a year or two, then jump

</comment><comment><USER8> The one rule I've never broken is this - don't work on bad code. There's tons of really shitty code in "enterprise software" type places - IBs, banks & such. Its not too hard to get a 6-figure job at these places, but then the real fun begins. If you get assigned to work on a trading system that nobody wants to touch because its super-brittle, you should run for your life; unless a. you have an immigrant visa issue, or b. you badly need the money. Some of my colleagues in IBs fell into both those buckets :( So they simply stayed put.

Other than IBs, I've also worked at 2 startups - very clean code, and very fun code as well - like a homegrown 3D API in Java to draw & rotate the globe & locate your city on it - way back in 1996, when Java was 1 year old & had no 2D API even! The best even Sun could do at that time was this tumbling duke animation on netscape ( <http://bit.ly/jnZFwz>), and this startup headed by 2 smart computer graphics experts from MIT rewrote their graphics engine in Java to rotate a whole geographically-accurate globe in netscape!

Nowadays you see a protovis demo ( <http://bit.ly/imMuSE> ) & think, Hey, I can think of a dozen places where the data could be modelled that way. Why don't they ? Cause they're "Big Companies". So they'll stick to tables with links to more tables that link to even more tables! If you think about it, a portfolio of derivatives who underlying maps to a cross-correlated matrix is essentially a force-directed graph whose vertices are growing & shrinking as they trade throughout the day. If you think the vertex is about to pop, sell it! Instead, "Big Companies" will hire tons of analysts who will simply stare at tabular Excel screens of rows & columns & red/green alert button like you're back in the 1970s. There are startups doing really cool stuff with trading & visualization, but they don't take off - simply because of inertia & retraining of existing traders to stare at graphs instead of tabular rows & columns :) Maybe 10 years from now...

</comment><comment><USER9> If you start at a large company with a reputation for only hiring top candidates, you will start your career with a higher salary, a great company on your resume, and experience in how world-class companies do things (both good and bad). These are your journeyman years, and will give you the experience, context, and contacts to be much more effective if and when you do decide to join a startup. It will also make you much more interesting and valuable to a startup (which will equal more equity).

<comment><USER3> Fine, but it might also hurt your creativity to drink the companies cool aid. Also, think about all the time you gonna waste in meetings. Not to speak of learning and using tools, that you dislike because they suck for you.

I'm graduating in two weeks and I will try to do my own startup. If you're interested in robotics shoot me a message.

<comment><USER10> Not all large companies feed you kool aid, force you to attend pointless meetings or use shitty tools. And re: tools, this really has little to do with the company size, and sometimes you have to take shortcuts and use inelegant solutions to satisfy the customer - which actually happens a lot in startups. It is true that working for a large company can hurt your creativity, but on the other hand there are classes of problems that can really only be solved at a big co. If you enjoy working on these problems you might not have much of a choice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Is it time for you to earn or learn?

Mark Suster put it better than I ever could! [http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/11/04/is-it-time- for...](http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/11/04/is-it-time-for-you-to- earn-or-to-learn/)

</comment><comment><USER12> When thinking about my career overall, I broke things down into small company/big company and buy side/sell side (or customers and vendors). I think you are likely to get different experience from working at each. This may be less true if you're a pure developer/engineer, but if you want to gain experience of the business side of things as well, it's really useful to know what it feels like to be the person on the other side of the table.

So far I've worked for a small software house (so, sell side) and tried to do a startup. I'm now contracting for a big corporate (buy side). So I guess that's two down, two to go.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think a great solution is to work for a late-stage startup, or a startup with plenty of funding, or a company that's recently entered its growth phase. You'll have the security and resources of a larger company (and more time out of work to pursue your own projects!), but you'll still be one of the first 5-20 people in the office. The atmosphere will still be very scrappy and creative. And you know your bosses/mentors have a proven track record of success, because the company has already made it pretty far - there will be plenty to learn and absorb.

<comment><USER14> +1 for this. I work at Heroku and it has really been the best of both worlds getting to have a large impact on meaningful projects and enjoy the perks of a startup combined with the resources of a large company (Salesforce).

The market is so strong for engineers right now that you don't need to choose between decent compensation and startup environment; you can have both.

<comment><USER13> "The market is so strong for engineers right now that you don't need to choose between decent compensation and startup environment; you can have both."

Far more articulate than me :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The best advice I can give is start not at the monoliths that are Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and the others everyone and their mother knows. Start at company that is medium sized, you'll find plenty of real stuff to work on while having the experience of being able to get help from people who have been doing things a lot longer than you.

School doesn't teach you proper engineering practices and learning from the mistakes of companies that have already gone through starting troubles is also beneficial to you in a long term if you want to form your own startup.

<comment><USER10> Joining an ambitious and brand new project at a large company can offer the best of both worlds. E.g. first generation Xbox, Kindle, Instant Video, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> What are you like? Do you enjoy digging really really deep into a problem? Perhaps a big company that provides the stability to work on a problem for years is the right place? Do you like doing lots of different things, none of them deeply, but all of them well, with never enough information to make a solid decision with? Go find a startup. How are you at interacting with people? Extremely outgoing, always meeting new people? Startup all the way. Introverted and terrified of sales? (well, work on that, but a safe place to get better at it is a big company.) No kids, no spouse, no debt? Totally going to help at a startup. There's no right answer to the question, it depends on what's best for you. I've done big company and startup and independent contracting and I don't regret any of them, but I'm also having a fantastic time at my current company. It turns out that for me, at this time, the best answer is a small profitable company with wonderful people where I can make things better with computers. And don't underestimate how important people are. Your coworkers make a huge difference.

</comment><comment><USER17> What about if you have a lot of student debt? Does that change things?

I have a bunch of student debt and I start paying interest in 6 months. I elected to work at a big company to get out of debt. The benefits and perks are amazing...and the learning opportunity is definitely there. It's turning into a great decision :)

Anyone out there go to a startup while they're in debt?

</comment><comment><USER18> Short answer here: If you don't mind not having weekends off, work for a startup with some semblance of traction.

If you are interested in going to Tahoe for skiing over the weekend and visit friends in Florida the next weekend? Pick a large company.

Who knows where each path will lead, go with what you enjoy the most.

</comment><comment><USER19> I recommend wherever the pay is high

<comment><USER10> Blindly chasing dollar signs can lead to very bad career decisions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Big companies are great in a few areas and highly recommend them to anyone graduating.

1\. You learn strict business processes that are reproducible and repeatable. They don't teach these in school.

2\. You'll be surrounded by senior people who have years of experience. Albeit (in my experience) these people are not very good at what they do, they do offer a good mentor model.

3\. You can make an endless amount of mistakes and you won't effect the bottom line of the business.

4\. You'll quickly build a network of professionals. This is key. Networking is (almost) everything in business.

Finding small companies that do all of these well do exist but they are hard to find.

</comment><comment><USER21> I started at a medium size company, went on to a large and am now at a startup. I think it's good to try different environments. Some people prefer the stability of a large company, but it wasn't for me.

</comment><comment><USER22> I would recommend clearing out student debt before doing a startup full time. One can always work full-time at a big company, and do a startup at the same time on the side

</comment><comment><USER23> I ask myself this question every day. argh.

</comment><comment><USER24> my 2 cents: it's not - or at least it shouldn't be - a lifestyle choice.

</comment><comment><USER25> Both!

</comment><comment><USER26> Plain and simple... you can always get a normal job at any time or age, they will be around for awhile. A startup gets harder to do as you get older and family or bills come into play.

Start with the startup, no question about it.

</comment><comment><USER27> I'd tend to say big company. Go to google or microsoft for two to three years. You'll go to a company with strong mentoring to help you dramatically improve your development skills, and you can almost view it as getting a masters in software engineering if you work hard and take advantage of everything the company has to offer. You'll get a great introduction to things like testing in practice, using and configuring linux in practice, developing good taste in software development practices, debugging large systems, what large systems should look like in order to be maintainable, source code control systems, etc. You should also be able to live relatively inexpensively and save a great deal of money.

After your two to three years, go to a startup. You'll get the increased responsibility and have the skills and experience to take advantage of it.

In my view, the problem with going to a startup is they tend to need you to be productive in a real hurry. There won't be much if any mentorship and often you'll be left to work autonomously. Frequently you won't even get reviews or feedback, which isn't as bad as it sounds, because often your boss won't be able to give good feedback anyway -- remember that at a startup your bosses are probably learning as they go just as much as you are. If you haven't developed good taste in software and a sense for how to build big systems -- something virtually no undergrad has, with the exception of people who've done a bunch of open source -- you can get yourself into a pretty bad place. Bright people can often overcome bad software development practices, but only for so long, and when the tech debt hits you it hits hard.

Edit: plus, if you go big company first, you can have little debt and $15k+ in the bank. There's nothing in the world as reassuring as knowing that if shit happens with your paycheck, you have 3-6 months to find a new job and won't have any trouble paying bills meanwhile.</comment>


Do not use dot-notation (Objective-C 2.0) - <AUTHOR> http://weblog.bignerdranch.com/?p=83

<comment><USER2> Dot syntax isn't so evil. Even the example of setting a property on a view's frame seems slightly contrived in that the compiler _will_ give an error. It doesn't silently fail or do undefined things. The primary confusion there is, when you're new, wondering what in the world the strange error message means - but that's something you eventually get over as you learn more about the language and how it works.

Also, dot syntax is how you reference properties when you're doing KVC and KVO, so it wasn't without precedent.

</comment><comment><USER3> "Likewise, we know exactly what this line of code does: a = b + 5;"

It could easily be unification or checking for equality depending on the language. Or it could be an assertion.

"Except for dot notation doesn't do the same thing in Objective-C as it does in other languages."

And ='s doesn't do the same thing in objective-C as in other languages. (Although it does mean the same thing as in other C languages).

If you treat structure access as nested method calls, and then understand that certain methods do not have setters, this is a non-problem conceptually.

It is just a matter of knowing what methods can have get and set used on them, and which cannot. If you don't know that (and can't figure it out easily), I feel like you are SOL.

</comment><comment><USER4> This argument seems silly when the world is already full of code like "self.view.frame" and almost any class uses @properties, which are very natural to access with dot notation.

Of course it's important to realize what dot notation actually does behind the scenes and use it properly. But I don't think that's so hard. The author just seems to be clinging to old ways out of stubbornness.</comment>


Speeding Up PS1 Emulation with OMAP's DSP - <AUTHOR> http://pandoralive.info/?p=4488....

<comment><USER2> I suspect the `....` isn't part of the canonical URL, despite the site serving the same content either way. URL should be [http://pandoralive.info/?p=4488](http://pandoralive.info/?p=4488)

<comment><USER3> It's been posted by the same person 3 times in the last day. [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=http:%2F%2Fpandoralive.info%2F...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=http:%2F%2Fpandoralive.info%2F%3Fp%3D4488&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

<comment><USER4> A small number of reposts are ok if a story hasn't had significant attention yet on HN: [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html).

We actually asked the submitter to repost it this last time, because it looked like a good story that the community would enjoy.

Asking users to repost good stories is part of an experiment we've been doing to try to improve story quality on HN. That part of the experiment has been working so well that we're going to write software to streamline it.</comment></comment></comment>


Pebble announces round watch: Pebble Time Round - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/23/9372899/pebble-time-round-smartwatch-announcement-availability <comment><AUTHOR> Can someone update the link? Pebble's official blog post has gone live now: [https://blog.getpebble.com/tag/pebble-time- round/](https://blog.getpebble.com/tag/pebble-time-round/)</comment>


Google Officially Launches Zero Search Results - <AUTHOR> https://www.seroundtable.com/google-zero-search-results-26725.html <comment><USER2> this is not good according to me! favoring the one while other may be good than that. I did't like it! But its google way to do it.</comment>


Bill Gates' nuclear company explores molten salt reactors, thorium - <AUTHOR> http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/2013/07/23/bill-gates-nuclear-company-explores-molten-salt-reactors-thorium/ <comment><USER2> They say Bill Gates because he's famous.

This is a spinoff of Nathan Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures - which is a patent trolling company. They may talk about plans to produce actual nuclear power, but I'll believe it when I see it. However it is guaranteed to create a lot of patents.

Personally, even if it does succeed, I would have a bad taste in my mouth for anything and everything involved because I do not like Nathan Myhrvold.

<comment><USER3> Do you know him?

Honesty I don't have a huge amount of information about his other dealings, but I think there is a genuine case for what he is trying to do with IV, even if you disagree with with methods.

With me and my company, he has been a man of tremendous character and generosity. I daresay you and most others are prejudging the situation. In error.

Keep in mind, I am no fan of the patent system either.

[http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the- busine...](http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-business- landscape-and-a-patent-puzzle/)

<comment><USER4> They make deals where they sell patents to East Texas shell companies but keep 90% of the proceeds from their shakedown lawsuits. That's what _This American Life_ uncovered recently—they looked at just one (laughably illegitimate) patent, and found that hundreds of millions of dollars had been extracted using that one alone. I don't know how you could listen to that and not find the case devastating. If the broadcast was unfair, I'd very much like to hear the rebuttal. All TAL did was follow up on the example that IV themselves had given as exemplary of what they do, and it turned out to be shockingly unjust. So I do think most people here would disagree with their methods.

<comment><USER3> This is a good point, but far from complete. It is not like they are rolling in the proceeds.

Word on the street is that the IV funds are not profitable yet. Also, inventors, who they purchase patents from, are in fact getting checks in the mail. So at least one of the following are true:

\- They are paying inventors (patent holders) too much \- Nobody should pay inventors at all \- They should be more aggressive in acquiring settlements / awards in court. \- They should shut down completely. \- They should cut overhead.

Of the above, cutting overhead seems most reasonable. But there are significant activities in their invention lab. They have the world's most advanced malaria modeling system. They are developing a cold chain for vaccines with an incredibly clever thermo-mechanically activated cold finger for control. They are pushing metamaterials. They have an incredibly cool mosquito calming project. They run invention dinners where amazingly brilliant, cool people attack novel problems in novel ways. And TerraPower could, if they are successful, crack the energy problem.

Cutting overhead would hurt most of the incredibly commendable activities that they are doing. It takes big bucks to run an invention lab. This isn't the only way, of course.

But I'm calling it when I see it: IV is making honest efforts to invent and commercialize a series of amazing inventions, including those in the physical world. _Almost nobody else_ is doing this today. They are funding inventors -- their own and outside inventors, through what many believe are questionable methods exploiting legal loopholes, but are in fact often direclty in keeping with the intent of an admittedly archaic and outdated system. And they're being scapegoated not because they might be a patent troll, but because they are a publicly identifiable organization with public inventions and activities, and public advocacy.

And it's a damned shame that we are so clannish that the are ready to, without thinking, without the requisite knowledge, damn one of the only truly ambitious efforts in physical invention, and great hacker, simply because we do not understand, do not approve of, or are uncomfortable with, the systems that are being used to support invention.

<comment><USER4> I admire a good contrarian defence. With respect, though, I think it goes off the rails here:

 _And they 're being scapegoated not because they might be a patent troll, but because they are a publicly identifiable organization with public inventions and activities, and public advocacy_

From everything I've seen, they're being scapegoated precisely because they are a patent troll. And rightly so, because the end doesn't justify the means.

<comment><USER3> Sorry! Good point.

What I meant to say was that if they are a patent troll, they are not the trolliest of the trolls. They are merely the most public.

<comment><USER5> The allegation that Planet Money is making is that while IV may not be the trolliest of the trolls, part of its business model involves arming exactly those trolls while concealing the relationship.

I want to find a way to rationalize what IV does (for different, dumber reasons; I just happen to like their book _Modernist Cuisine_), but the evidence we have from reporters looks very bad.

<comment><USER3> Agree that, especially, the recent uncovered Origin lawsuit stuff looks pretty bad. It is probably worth considering the activities of customers, allies, partners, and taking responsibility.

(e.g. for that matter, we are allied with Saudi Arabia, and rely on them for our oil. The world is full of nasty compromises...)

But the stuff that they are actually developing, the inventors they're supporting, the work they're doing in nuclear shouldn't be painted with the same brush. This is supposed to be hacker news, and the top comment about a new nuclear startup isn't about technology at all; it's about how someone doesn't like one of the principals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nathan Myhrvold

He did this cool TED talk about shooting mosquitos out of the air with lasers salvaged from commodity electronics. Since that was years ago, it appears that it is doesn't work in the real world. Par for the course with TED.

A prominent malaria expert tore into him for exploiting a real crisis that kills millions to make his company actually does something good for the world. Going all hi-tech hero when what is really needed in low-tech nets.

So I'll go with evil for $500. Nice cuddly evil but evil nonetheless.

<comment><USER7> We don't need solutions. We need big corporations to accrue patents and public approval so that they can steamroll the rest of the industry many years down the line. It's called charity™

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> To everyone bashing Intellectual Ventures, the key here is that TerraPower is a spinoff. They are becoming independent of IV precisely because they don't want to be a patent troll.

Also one LOL of having Bill Gates fund your nuclear company is you end up with the biggest Windows cluster for simulations.

Source: I'm a PhD student in nuclear engineering with friends working at TerraPower.

<comment><USER9> And we get some idea of the power requirements for Windows 10???

:-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why is it so obvious to the internet and no one else that thorium is the future of power? What do they (the experts) know that we don't?

<comment><USER11> Because Thorium isn't the answer. What I don't get, that people who care about technology and about freedom prefer a centralised technology like fission power over a decentralised technology like solar or wind, in combination with electricity storage.

So far nobody has developed a reactor design which is really better or cleaner than what it is currently available. No "new" design could deliver what it has promised. Not even nuclear power was able to deliver what it has promised to begin with.

Well, I guess, we both don't get the other side.

<comment><USER12> Wind and solar aren't the answer either, or you wouldn't be having this discussion because it would already have been deployed. The economics of all intermittent power sources make it unfeasible; Installing the necessary transmission lines to all those decentralized sites, the energy lost during transmission to and from storage, the costs of storing that much power, and the other inefficiencies of generating the power, make what you propose very unrealistic.

Nuclear power is millions of times more energy dense than solar, wind, and fossil fuels. Though the current generation of nuclear reactors have some significant drawbacks, not the least of which is the inefficient use of fuels leading to nuclear wastes, they still generate much cleaner power than the alternatives.

Liquid Salt reactor designs based on Thorium take aim specifically at the nuclear fuel and waste problems. Rather than using 1% of the solid fuel like today's reactors, it's possible for liquid salt reactors to use up nearly 99% of the fuel, reducing the waste problem by many orders of magnitude, and would not contain the transuranics that take 10s of thousands of years to decay.

It's a good thing that serious people are looking into radically different forms of nuclear power. The current conventional reactors were based off of designs for producing materials for weapons, and it's high time we set that garbage aside and consider other options.

<comment><USER11> Actually, decentralised power sources would make high voltage lines obsolet because you can build them where you need the electricity. Centralised systems need high voltage lines around the country.

Energy density is not a good measurement I think. In theory the sun sends more energy per day than we might ever need but we can only make use of parts of that. This is improving but still, just a tiny part of it. The same with Thorium or Uranium or even fossil fuels. Usually the efficiency of those power plants is well below 50%, nuclear power below 40%, coal even less, especially those "clean coal" CSS plants.

The problem with molten salt reactor will be the same with fast breeders, where the liquid sodium was/is causing corrosion and problem when mixing with water. IIRC most accidents in FBRs were sodium related. And even if MSRs are cheaper in one way than current designs, it doesn't say they are not more expensive in other ways.

But currently none of those reactor designs is ready for commercial use. None! With the time you need to get such a design up and running, you can also deploy renewable energy. Much more reliable and stable.

In 2012 about 7.5 GW of renewable energy were deployed in Germany. Even if you calculate that not all of that is available around the clock, you would have build more than 2 EPRs with 1.6 GW electrical power to get the same amount of energy, which you just can't do within one year.

Maybe MSR solve a lot of problems with nuclear energy but it won't come free, it won't come w/o other problems. All forms of energy have drawbacks. Photovoltaik uses rare earth, wind has huge towers which are not really popular with locals, water has a huge impact on rivers and the environment. Biomass has the problem with using food for energy, and usage of land. I could continue the entire night.

The important question is a different one, do you want to solve the energy problem or just ask the next generation to solve it for you?

<comment><USER13> thats it. if all the nuclear promises come true, its still just offering to delay the inevitable

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The title has now been changed to remove the reference to Intellectual Ventures. A well-known philanthropist has taken its place.

Maybe it's not true that "all publicity is good publicity". At least not for Intellectual Ventures.

</comment><comment><USER15> My god it is about time that someone started looking into this technology. I understand the tech hurdles and the even cleaner tech etc. but think about how much safer LFTRs are. Even just to replace all the running reactors if not build more. [http://www.ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternativ...](http://www.ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternative_nuclear_fuel.html)

</comment><comment><USER16> Too bad that kirk sorensen is never mentioned, as he and his company flibe energy are a big advocate of all this

<comment><USER17> He'll probably get sued by IV in the near future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I want a thorium-powered car.

[http://www.geekosystem.com/thorium-powered- car/](http://www.geekosystem.com/thorium-powered-car/)

<comment><USER19> No you don't. Thorium reactors are actually breeder reactors which run off of U-233, one of the byproducts of breeding U-233 is U-232, which emits gamma rays like nobody's business. The only way to stop gamma rays is with lots of shielding made out of high-Z materials, like lead, which is inevitably super heavy. So you'll either get a multi-ton car that crawls or a light-weight car that gives you cancer or a lethal dose of radiation if you drive it more than a few hours.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: I need to learn about PR and Marketing, recommendations? - <AUTHOR> Hello HackerNews entrepreneurs,
I'm after some lessons in PR and Marketing. I would really appreciate any recommendations for good resources (online) and books on the topic.
I read the Burnt Out Bloggers guide to PR (recommended by Justin, Founder of Twitch in the Startup School Lectures), I need more knowledge!!!
Thanks and Merry Christmas everyone.
P.s. I think I will be getting a Kindle for Christmas :) <comment><USER2> Here are two old threads with some of my book recommendations, FWIW.

1\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4417443](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4417443)

2\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7653263](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7653263)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks mindcrime, appreciate the share!</comment></comment>


Powering Down Google Reader - <AUTHOR> http://googlereader.blogspot.com/2013/03/powering-down-google-reader.html

<comment><USER2> > There are two simple reasons for this: usage of Google Reader has declined, > and as a company we're pouring all of our energy into fewer products. We > think that kind of focus will make for a better user experience.

Google Reader seems like one of the most direct bits of attention-grabbing competition to Google Plus.

I suspect they already have a long-term plan in place to sunset Blogger in favor of Plus as well.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ongoing discussion -> <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5371725>

</comment><comment><USER4> any _real_ alternatives suggestion? I don't care for fancy magazine like interface or anything, I just want to be able to quickly scan for news, click on one that I am interested in, and mark everything else as read. also, fast.

<comment><USER5> [http://www.gizmag.com/best-google-reader- alternatives-2013/2...](http://www.gizmag.com/best-google-reader- alternatives-2013/26643/)</comment></comment>


Mail.Ru launches vulnerability reward program - <AUTHOR> http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?&lo=SS&from=ru&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fcorp.mail.ru%2Fru%2Fpress%2Freleases%2F9064%2F

<comment><USER3> Too late. Their security reputation has been terrible for over 5 years I guess. Quite a few services therefore do not allow a mail.ru email address for registration. One more point in their announcement is laughable because of how it contradicts itself. 1\. По условиям конкурса, участники смогут рассказать об обнаруженных уязвимостях спустя три месяца после отправки сообщения. - <USER2> one says hackers will be able to publish their vulnerabilities within 3 months after reporting said vulnerabilities. 2\. Таким образом Mail.Ru Group обязуется быстро исправить любые найденные ошибки - And here they say they will be obliged to promptly fix any found errors. Are they saying they will promptly within 3 months fix vulnerabilities? Ok, if they fix them the following day after they get the report, what's the point in keeping a hacker silent? I just don't understand those guys.</comment>


Show HN: Weekly newsletter of requests for pitches from top-tier angels and VCS - <AUTHOR> Hey guys!
Weekly.vc (https://weekly.vc) is a weekly email with requests for pitches from top VCs and angel investors.
When investors want to meet, research, invest in, or learn more about a specific kind of startup––either by industry, location, or mission––they submit "requests for pitches" to Weekly.vc.
Every week we compile a list and send them out to everyone who's subscribed to the newsletter (while keeping the identity of the investors anonymous so there's no abuse or spam). Founders respond to investors' requests, we forward to the investors, and if the investors like their pitch, we introduce the founder and investor directly.
Throughout years of building products & services helping hundreds of founders from all over the world optimize their fundraising process, we've found warm introductions to be the best strategy to maximize conversion rate and start building positive relationships.
Weekly.vc is the simplest way to keep a pulse on what investors are interested in and to get consistent warm introductions to investors ready to learn more about your project at that moment.
For investors, it's one of the best ways to get in touch with resourceful startups from all over the world building high growth products on the internet––with many of them looking to raise their seed round.
We're running an early beta pricing for founders so you can subscribe for just $29/mo to get the email every week and respond to unlimited requests. And if you sign up today, you'll also get last week's email!
Weekly.vc is 100% free for investors––both angels & VCs. If you'd like to submit a request, you can do so here: https://weekly.vc/investors
Thanks for the time––and as always we'd love your feedback on how we can improve the product!
–– Matt & Aaron from Weekly.vc
P.S. We also just launched on Product Hunt: https://www.producthunt.com/posts/weekly-vc <comment><USER2> This is an interesting idea, is there any free version that's going to happen? Maybe one where we can't ask for the warm intros but can see the requests for pitches? There have been many times when I've been looking for inspiration on what to build, and if there were more things like YC's Request For Startups that'd be great, especially updated regularly and from different sources so you can see trends

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for commenting by the way!

<comment><USER2> Awesome and of course! Good luck with everything</comment></comment></comment>


Pepper.com is quietly building a global social commerce empire out of Berlin - <AUTHOR> http://tech.eu/brief/pepper-com-social-commerce/ <comment><USER2> One of those rare startup-success-stories, where there isn't even a mention of "valuation" or "investment rounds". I very much enjoy that.</comment>


Creativity is not a talent - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VShmtsLhkQg

<comment><USER2> I watched that for the first time a couple of weeks ago. It's quite a difficult discipline to practice, especially when it seems that every waking hour is spent completely plugged in. I aspire to do it, but so far it's been a struggle.

</comment><comment><USER3> Brilliant. Most of things he said I already knew and I have to say he's completely right.

</comment><comment><USER4> Wow. Definitely worth watching.</comment>


Two tools for quick and easy web application load testing during development - <AUTHOR> http://www.hanselman.com/blog/TwoToolsForQuickAndEasyWebApplicationLoadTestingDuringDevelopment.aspx <comment><USER2> I usually use Apache bench:

[https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/programs/ab.html](https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/programs/ab.html)

<comment><USER3> That's what I use. Simple and effective.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> wrk is pretty awesome for non-distributed testing. It supports lua scripting so it actually can be used to do tests that bust caches or run other custom logic.

If you need a more sophisticated product, I've used jmeter before. It is distributed, supports all kinds of protocols, scenarios, etc. If you want to stress test a checkout flow it can be good. It's kind of an ugly mess though.

<comment><USER5> wrk is capable of generating a lot more load than other tools I've tested (e.g. ApacheBench). If your web server can handle a ton of requests/sec, wrk is the only thing I've found which can push your server hard. Highly recommended.

Link: [https://github.com/wg/wrk](https://github.com/wg/wrk)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> We use Tsung.

[http://tsung.erlang-projects.org/](http://tsung.erlang-projects.org/)

</comment><comment><USER7> I like Artillery: [https://artillery.io/](https://artillery.io/)

</comment><comment><USER8> I've had a lot of success using Bees With Machine Guns

[https://github.com/newsapps/beeswithmachineguns/](https://github.com/newsapps/beeswithmachineguns/)

(Also, the name is awesome)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The only thing about these 2 tools is that they can only ran on Windows. Which can be a barrier for most developers. We run mac ubuntu and redhat everyday. Sometimes it's even hard to get a windows machine inside company.

<comment><USER9> Hanselman is a Microsoft employee and a luminary in the .NET community. The audience for his blog is definitely Windows-focused.

</comment></comment><comment> slice-beans Locust is really good, allows custom scripts for user behaviour, and works well spun up on multiple cloud instances [http://locust.io/](http://locust.io/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I had a need to test random requests, so I built this: [http://loadme.socialtalents.com/](http://loadme.socialtalents.com/)

Enter something like: [http://domain.com/article/$RND(1000,9999)](http://domain.com/article/$RND\(1000,9999\))} to get random urls every time.

Please note, that website needs to be public accessible.

</comment><comment><USER11> I also like Siege. A very simple tool: [https://www.joedog.org/siege- home/](https://www.joedog.org/siege-home/)

</comment><comment><USER12> We use loader.io, but am looking for ways to load test websockets which loader.io doesn't support</comment>