How to Disable NetBiOS on MacOS OS X - <AUTHOR> https://www.tecklyfe.com/disable-netbios-macos-os-x/ <comment><USER2> That seems like a rather strange way to construct that command.

Why not just:

        sudo printf "[default]\nport445=no_netbios\n" >> /etc/nsmb.conf

<comment><USER3> That command would run the redirection in the local shell. You can try it out and notice that it doesn't work, because the local shell does not have write access to that file.

Shell redirection works by opening the destination file and then dup2()'ing it to stdout before exec??()'ing the target program (sudo, in this case) -- since that open fails, the target program is never even run -- and the open()'ing certainly isn't done after sudo runs, since your shell isn't even part of the execution environment at that point (its image having been replaced by sudo's).

Another way to do it, is to invoke a shell that does the redirection after sudo runs, like so:

sudo bash -c '( echo blah; echo blah; echo blah ) >> /etc/nsmb.conf'</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is anybody getting a new Google search results page? - <AUTHOR>

I just noticed that I'm getting a completely new search results page. Are other people seeing this too?<p>There is a voice search option (that is much more prominent - never noticed it before) and the page looks a little bit cleaner to me. <comment><USER2> Still have the old one here. Screenshot for comparison: <http://imgur.com/r9SSm>

New version has less colorful icons, dividing lines traded for whitespace, some colored backgrounds, and a smaller Google logo.

A really strange change you might not have noticed: you searched for hacker news and got "About 94,200,000 results". I did the same thing and got "About 20,300,000 results". What's up with that?

It gets weirder. I'm not signed into my Google account. If I sign in, then I get "About 20,200,000 results". Sign back out, and it's 20,300,000 again.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's a screenshot: <http://imgur.com/Dgh7A></comment>


Ask HN: Understanding HN? - <AUTHOR>

I am a freshman computer science major that frequents this site and has trouble understanding a lot of the posts, especially the ones that link / discuss github, opensource projects, HTML5, and the like. The posts I enjoy the most are blog posts and reviews. I know the reason for this is my lack of experience and knowledge. Besides my courses, I am learning python and have a plan to start learning PHP/MySQL and JavaScript. I already have the fundamentals of programming down from my courses. Is there anything else I can/ should be doing? <comment><USER2> Is there anything else you should be doing, in order to achieve what goal? Understanding all of the posts on HN? I finished my computer science degree ten years ago, and I don't understand all of the posts on HN! There's just way too much breadth to seriously keep up with it all.

Specific technologies may or may not be interesting for you. Is Git (or Github) terribly important? Maybe not. But you should aim to understand version control in general, and learn to use at least one version control system.

Open source projects? Thousands upon thousands, many of them defunct or floundering. Read about the history of GNU, and Linux, and maybe some of Eric Raymond's articles from the 1990's. That should give a decent foundation as to what's going on in general.

Computer science topics build upon each other. It's woefully out of date now, but look up The Hacker's Dictionary (aka Jargon File) and peruse whatever entries look interesting. The specifics are mostly obsolete, but the concepts, and more importantly, the character, spirit, attitude of hacking described there persists.

Get familiar with some classic stuff in the field. Write a few small C programs, if only to get the feel of what C is like. Try your hand at some Lisp (or maybe Scheme) programming, to see what that is like. Read biographical sketches of important people in the field (maybe start with Dennis Ritchie, John Backus, David Huffman, Guy Steele, John McCarthy, Donald Knuth, Richard Stallman) and learn what they have contributed. When was the first computer built? When was the first IBM computer built? What was Digital Equipment Corporation? How does a DEC PDP-11 compare in computing power to your mobile phone?

Go to the library and look up Knuth's Art of Computer Programming. Read the table of contents. Read some of the text. What's MIX? Implement the algorithm to calculate the date of Easter in the programming language of your choice. Try to solve a few of the exercises. Now that you've been exposed to Knuth, you'll know it's there if you ever need it.

But that's all background. Ours is an engineering discipline, in the sense that we strive to build products that help people do something. Poking around with technology for the sake of technology can be enjoyable for us, but perhaps not very fruitful for the rest of the world. Who are some people you could help? Does your barber have an online scheduling system? Do they want one?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for this! What a great comment. Also, Scheme was actually the first language I learned in college. Very good for programming concepts.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Have the char limits for responses in the YC application been removed? - <AUTHOR> I've applied before and I remember there being character limits, but they're not showing up when I load the application.  I'm working on my application now and my responses might change depending on the limits. <comment><USER2> Try to contact dang by email at firstname.lastname@example.com . They usually reply faster by mail because some thread get lost unnoticed.

(I think firstname.lastname@example.com is the wrong account, because it's for moderation an HN and not for generic YC stuff, but I'm sure he can forward the question to the right people.)

<comment><USER3> YC questions should go to email@example.com.</comment></comment>


The original sources of MS-DOS 1.25 and 2.0 are Open Source now - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/microsoft/ms-dos <comment><USER2> Discussed yesterday at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18097661](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18097661)</comment>


Amazon In-Vehicle Gaming – Now Play Games While Driving - <AUTHOR> http://greybmusings.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/in-vehicle-gaming-sytem-by-audible-inc/

<comment><USER2> Why would Amazon in Automobile domain? Is this something to do with their OS?</comment>


Elon Musk hires 2 Newfoundland interns who solved problems at Tesla factory - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/elon-musk-tesla-newfoundland-interns-hired-1.4663270 <comment><USER2> Interns are awesome and smart. Never give them garbage work. Give them a challenge and see if they can handle it. Worst case scenario, you throw away their work after they leave, and they have learned some stuff.

<comment><USER3> I thought this was the whole point of summer interns, the other point of summer interns being that it's a trial run before you decide to hire them full time after graduation.

That's what my old company used to do (who originally hired me as an intern). The interns were tasked with a brand new project, something that wasn't business critical but would be a great new addition to the product.

Then when we came on board full time were were slotted into the regular development flow.

Using interns as grunts seems like a poor allocation of resources.

<comment><USER4> Unfortunately a lot of non tier 1 status companies especially in Europe and the developing world treat "interns" as a way to get cheap workers and abuse the system.

Non high end tech interns where always treated like grunts especially in high status industries and often had to work for free.

<comment><USER5> >>often had to work for free.

At least in the USA it is illegal for an intern to work for free if that intern is adding value to the company.

The relevant guideline is this:

"The employer doesn't benefit from work the intern is doing, "and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded." [1]

[1] [https://www.propublica.org/article/when-interns-should-be- pa...](https://www.propublica.org/article/when-interns-should-be-paid- explained)

<comment><USER6> If you don't have tier one interns and you're not the kind of employer who knows Nobel laureates like elsewhere in this thread... Then you can probably just throw away your interns work after the summer. They are just "normal" college students after all. Personally, I know none of my student work should have been used in production.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was really hoping this was about dogs.

</comment><comment><USER8> I think this is a nice motivational story for local kids to get excited about finding their place in the workforce.

When I started working I had no idea that the key to success was as simple as giving a crap and being consistent in your good work. I figured that it would take me decades to work on some secret skills to move up, but now I know that's not true.

<comment><USER9> Amen. Turn up when you say you will, deliver what you promised, on time, and generally give a minimal damn, and you're already ahead of 95% of your co- workers. I don't think it will ever stop amazing me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why is this news? This happens in pretty much every company.

<comment><USER11> Getting personally hired by the CEO of a $50B company happens in pretty much every company?

<comment><USER12> GM is worth $50 billion. Do you _really_ want to claim that Tesla is as big as GM? Tesla has 1/5 the employees of GM, 10% of the revenue, and has sold about 200,000 cars total compared to the 9.6 million GM shipped last year alone. The story is the same for any other big manufacturer.

Tesla is a pipsqueak. It's just ludicrously overpriced.

<comment><USER13> Tesla has 10% of GM's employees? That's nuts. Does GM have a lot more contractors?

<comment><USER14> This is based on the wikipedia stats, but GM built ~9,600,000 vehicles with ~180,000 employees in 2017. Telsa built ~100,000 vehicles with ~35,000 employees in 2017

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'm curious in what characteristics Elon saw in these individuals. Solving a problem once is great, but Elon clearly saw something deeper in them. I wonder if he sees what Nikola Tesla called the "finer fibers"...

"But instinct is something which transcends knowledge. We have, undoubtedly, certain finer fibers that enable us to perceive truths when logical deduction, or any other willful effort of the brain, is futile." Nikola Tesla

<comment><USER16> Well, according to the article they solved two different problems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> "Startup hires 2 interns." is A1 news.

Can we say this is peak Tesla hype yet?

<comment> swagasaurus-rex The hype could pull a 787

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wish we learned about what problem they solved.

<comment><USER19> Elon did say they were having a hackathon to fix problems on the two major bottleneck robots the other day...

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> It has an undertone of humor, because in Canada people from Newfoundland are often the butt of jokes, sort of like in America we have jokes about rednecks or Fark-style "oh, Florida again!" observations.

So to have 2 "Newfies" fix problems at a high tech enterprise like Tesla is both a bit of pride and a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor.

<comment><USER21> Woah, there! Don't use the N word. It's Newfoundlander.

[https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article- newfoundlande...](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article- newfoundlanders-call-out-anthony-bourdains-tv-show-for-using/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Honest question here, it's my understanding that a bunch of states have laws that state something along the lines of:

Interns can only be interns if they do work that A. Primarily benefit their learning and growth and B. Their labor would not normally be done by a full time employee.

Is this understanding correct? If it is, wouldn't these two interns constitute a breach of said policy?

<comment><USER23> The rule you mentioned is for unpaid interns only. Paid interns can do any work that full time employees do, and that's exactly what all big tech internships are about.

<comment><USER22> Ah, thank you for the clarification!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I guess they never got a chance to negotiate offers...

</comment><comment><USER25> Great for these guys.

But it really makes me think that Tesla has big problems. There just shouldn't exist problems that relatively untrained eyes can spot and fix in short order. Maybe this is related to production difficulties overall?

And don't get me wrong, the fact that the solution was accepted, implemented and rewarded so quickly is a testament to Musk (and his managers). My point is just that either this was lightning striking or the production line has inexcusable issues -- that is low-hanging opportunities for improvement.

<comment><USER26> > _There just shouldn 't exist problems that relatively untrained eyes can > spot and fix in short order_

Many companies have big glaring inefficiencies that employees become blind to over time. Often times, new hires will be acutely aware of them, but won't speak up because they're new. Within a few weeks or months, they just become acclimated to the situation and work around it.

<comment><USER27> I second this. I work in a rather large company, and believe me, there are "opportunities" everywhere. The trouble is there is usually such a level of bureaucracy, that it takes real effort to push a change.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> What a pile load of propaganda.

<comment><USER29> For Tesla or Newfies?

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> TLDR; Two engineers with marketable skills get jobs. Slow news day in Newfoundland?

<comment> r-s I was traveling in Newfoundland last summer (Deer Lake) and someone phoned into the radio station reporting that they saw an overly large moose. This may be the biggest story of the year.

<comment><USER31> Having to listen to CNN during lunch breaks this is refreshing. The world needs less exciting news.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> What actual problems did they solve?

</comment><comment><USER33> As somebody who has been in a similar situation, I must warn that accepting Elon's offer could be perilous to them in long term. It looks like at least one of them will be dropping out of school before graduating to start working for Tesla. Later in his career, he might regret that. It is cool to impress big company and get a job, but if he is as smart as it sounds, he will have no problem finding a job after graduation.

<comment><USER34> Speaking from the software side, it pretty much always seems better to take the job and leave school if you have to. Once a person has a couple years work experience I don't really even care if they went to school at all.

<comment><USER4> Not all employers are as broadminded I suspect I didn't get past a screen for one of the FANGS. I suspect the Spanish recruiter saw I had not got a degree. But ignored the fact my fist Job was on the campus of Cranfield at a world leading RnD organisation - Cranfield being a Masters and Phd only University at the time :-)</comment></comment></comment>


Madeon's Adventure Machine - <AUTHOR> http://www.madeon.fr/adventuremachine/? <comment><USER2> Not totally sure what this is, but I enjoyed playing with it.</comment>


Why is Chrome's font aliasing so much worse than Firefox? - <AUTHOR> This is one of the main reasons I keep going back to Firefox, firefox has crisper and less "fuzzy" text aliasing. Is there any reason why Chrome hasn't fixed this annoyance? <comment><USER2> No idea, but they have signed distance fields font rendering (phew) which you can enable to get proper font rendering: chrome://flags/#distance-field-text

For some info: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGZRHJvJYIg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGZRHJvJYIg)</comment>


EtherPad Back Online Until Open Sourced - <AUTHOR> http://etherpad.com/ep/blog/posts/etherpad-back-online-until-open-sourced <comment><USER2> This is one of those stories I'll tell the next time someone asks me what's so special about the "hacker" community.

<comment><USER3> And what it says about Google. +5 years into their life as a big public company and they still "get it".

I'm thinking of how many desks such a decision would cross at my company (publicly traded, ~1500 people) and it's amazing that Google turned it around in two days.

<comment><USER4> if they "got it" they wouldn't have done it in the first place. It's just damage control for them,

Sure the fact that they actually try to damage control gives them lots of points, but let's not kid ourselves, without the outrage, nothing would have happened.

<comment><USER5> Other companies would "damage control" by re-enabling new pad creation until their preferred new version came out.

Google promises to open-source the code.

I call this a win for nonevil. Any sufficiently advanced damage control is indistinguishable from ethics.

<comment><USER6> Google's "don't be evil" motto is a weak one for several reasons. Negative mottos are inherently weak because they provide a lot of leeway in definition, it's always possible to fuzz the line on what's evil and define evil to be a smaller and smaller zone of behavior. In the strictest terms Google has already committed a fair number of evil acts (e.g. cooperating with Chinese persecution). Also, a double negative (essentially don't be not good) is fundamentally weaker than a positive statement (e.g. "do only good"). More so, over time a statement such as "don't be evil" quickly morphs into "be much less evil than the competition" which then slowly morphs over time into "be just a little bit less evil than the competition". Reading the comments here defending google's actions re: etherpad it's hard to argue that google is at any stage other than the last "be a little less evil than the competition" stage.

And at that point your precious "don't be evil" guidance is worthless because at best you are so inconsequentially less evil than the run of the mill heartless corporation that you really haven't decreased the amount of evil being done in the world.

<comment><USER7> You've got an odd definition of evil.

Exactly which part is evil? 1) Buying AppJet 2) Publicly announcing their intentions for the service 3) Listing to feedback 4) Changing their intentions for the service (on a weekend)

This is a serious question, btw. Obviously shutting down a service isn't evil on it's own - it's a net good for the world if no one care about it (saving electricity, giving people more fulfilling work etc).

Perhaps your argument is that they should have responded quicker. If that's the case then would it be possible for you to lay out your proposal for quicker responses?

<comment><USER8> 2.5) That their intentions are "now or soon you must stop using this service which you like, and instead you can use our unfinished, very different service or you can fuck off".

We call it 'evil' (to some degree) when a big supermarket starts up on the edge of town, shuts down the small independent shops and offers you the choice of supermarket-butcher and supermarket-baker or nothing, don't we?

We call it 'evil' (to some degree) when governments or industry forcibly buy up houses and turf people out to build a railway or reservoir, and offer people the choice of whatever-the-government-wants-to-pay or nothing, yes?

Yes Google have turned it around very quickly, but in the context of the parent post "we like EtherPad let's use our massive amounts of cash to hire their developers and incidentally ruin their product but who cares" is not on the same level of goodness as "we like EtherPad let's use our massive amounts of cash to train our developers and make our product so good that people move over by choice".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Kudos to Etherpad && Google. Lets just take a moment and acknowledge that fact that if etherpad was taken over by any other company they would never release the source, or feel compelled to continue the service after the acquisition.

As much as some of us love to hate Google, you have to agree they deserve some kudos too.

<comment><USER10> _you have to agree they deserve some kudos too_

Assuming Google acquired all of the IP in etherpad, they deserve quite a few kudos :-P

<comment><USER11> I hope it's a trend other companies will be prepared to follow. Value the work methodology - not just the end product.

In this case, the initial end product may not be needed by google, as it will most likely require a significant restructure to fit in with Wave, but this shows that they appreciate the original idea to the point where they are prepared to let it stand on it's own merit.

The greatest gain to google (as with most of their acquisitions) is the talent. Its a new form of hiring - you get to see the quality and end results of the team, taking much of the guesswork out of the hiring process.

So I wish the guys from AppJet all the best, thanks for your work so far, may you go on to do great things from your new positions! And thanks for etherpad too!

<comment><USER12> Kind of an odd form of hiring, since 2 of the 3 Etherpad founders used to work at Google and left to form AppJet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> All the hullabaloo the past couple days has inspired me to try EtherPad for the first time. Death has long been a great career move for artists, but I never thought it would be that way for web applications.

<comment><USER8> Has the hullabaloo left you feeling better or worse about Google?

I would hate it to start a precedent where every takeover goes:

Takeover with intent to open source site, but announce site closure. Lots of fuss and free marketing profile raising. Pretend reversal of intentions and announce site can stay, appear benevolent and wonderful.

<comment><USER13> It's left me feeling a bit better about Google. My reaction isn't that strong because the route they have chosen obviously makes the most sense for them, especially given that Wave itself is open-source so it's not like they would gain a lot by keeping whatever technology in EtherPad they may adopt secret.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If they are going to open source most/all of the code, isn't that even a stronger indicator that this was a talent acquisition?

<comment><USER9> I don't think there was much doubt this was a talent acquisition. Google wave is fully open source too.

<comment><USER15> the client isn't open source is it?

<comment><USER16> If you mean Wave, there is some code open sourced (syncronizer), and we're working on getting the rest out. Also, we have federation testing. You should join the dev list if you want to try it out. There are some neat non-google implemented wave servers based on the protocol docs we released earlier this year.

<comment><USER15> not the servers, the code that produces the web app I see at wave.google.com

<comment><USER16> Actually, we intend to opensource the UI as well. So server + federation + syncronization + client ui.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The news of open sourcing of the platform and etherpad has seriously made my day.

</comment><comment><USER18> I instantly became incredibly happy when I read the title of this link. I'm so glad that Google and AppJet were actually listening to us and addressed our complaints in just a day.

</comment><comment><USER19> Quite a contrast between how Google handles developer outrage and how Apple does (or, rather, doesn't).

<comment><USER16> The hardest part is not knee-jerk reacting to the vitriol and trying to get to the root of the complaint. So instead of saying "Some jerk wants us to open source project x" we try (and sometimes it is harder than you think!) to say "Okay, should we open source project X." and go from there.

From what I've seen in companies large and small: Outrage works against the outraged, most of the time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Possibly a lame theory, but after they shut it down, clone talk was spreading pretty heavily. By open-sourcing, did they just take away the biggest player AND stop the competition in one swoop?

</comment><comment><USER21> Good damage control from Google. It's nice to see a big company that can reverse these sorts of mistakes quickly.

<comment><USER22> You've gotta be kidding me. Damage control? They had absolutely no need to take this step; the fact that they did is just a nice thing.

<comment><USER23> It's all relative isn't it :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Awesome -- glad few hours were wasted building Etherpad clones, too :)

</comment><comment><USER25> This afternoon, I installed node.js, started reading papers on operational transformation and sketched ideas based on the Jef Raskin's humane interface.

This is great news.

And yet, I learned something.

</comment><comment><USER26> Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER27> You know, I feel a little bad for the Etherpads. They were gonna go off and work on a totally new project as big shots and now they have to spend time supporting a software product that they've already EOL'd.

<comment><USER28> I'd imagine they'll still get some good wave time in. They'll have to spend some time on support and such, but it's not like they'll be working on new features, looking for acquisition, or doing any of that.

Also, if support becomes too much of a burden, I could see google having them train 1 or 2 google employees to do a lot of it.

These guys are some of the best real-time web programmers in the world. Google just spend "low eight figures" and tried to kill their product immediately. They clearly want them to spend as much time on wave as possible, so they'll find a way to make that happen.

<comment><USER29> >> "These guys are some of the best real-time web programmers in the world."

WHAT? Come on. Do you not think other programmers do real-time web things, and have been for years? _sigh_

<comment><USER28> Would Google have paid low eight figures in a talent acquisition if they weren't?

In particular, they probably are _the_ best people to join the Wave team because not only have they been doing real-time, they've been doing a real- time app that is very similar to wave, since they're both essentially documents (though wave is a little more like a series of sometimes-nested documents, but it's all the basically the same).

<comment><USER29> I have no idea. My point though is:

      1. "Real-time" is nothing new
      2. There are people who have been working in 'real time' web apps for years

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> This is great. Big "stupid" (at least from some specific point of view indeed) companies are well known, when they do a mistake, to take huge time before to realize it.

Google is Big, but apparently does not suffer from this problem, so I can only conclude is NOT "stupid".

</comment><comment><USER31> Best acquisition ever.

</comment><comment><USER32> Thank you. Tonight I was beginning my transition - downloading my pads (zip, thanks!) and moving up to Bespin. Glad I don't have to worry about that now.

</comment><comment><USER33> Bravo.

</comment><comment><USER34> w00t!</comment>


How to get your personal data from apps you use - <AUTHOR> https://try.mydatarequest.com/ <comment><USER2> This is pretty nifty. Though sadly many of these constitute "you can send a letter asking them for it", which is somewhat painful. That being said, it would be intriguing to see what response I got back in a few cases, especially since I'm in the US, and they aren't really obligated to respond.

<comment><USER3> OTOH (e)mail has the advantage that it lands as a written record in _your_ inbox and you are in control of it, not kept behind a service which might disappear overnight.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't think these are all correct. But i'm not sure if this page will change after the GDPR comes into effect. I'm just taking the Facebook one as an example; it links me to the official download page on Facebook itself. I downloaded this, but it didn't contain a whole lot of data. In fact, it contained nothing about the data it collects using its 'tracking cookie' / like buttons. I absolutely 100% expect them to have a database somewhere of the pages i've visited that have either a like button, or a tracking cookie.

Then again, maybe i'd just need to send them a data request after the GDPR comes into effect to be sure.

</comment><comment><USER5> This gets flagged as a malware site by my employer's proxy. Anyone knows why?

<comment> xkcd-sucks do you work at facebook?</comment></comment>


Apigee Source: Rapid Prototypes with the Twitter API Using HTML5/Javascript - <AUTHOR> http://blog.apigee.com/detail/apigee_source_twitter_api/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ApigeeBlog+%28Apigee+Blog%29 <comment><USER2> I find that idea really interesting. I find it even sad that it's limited to twitter :-/ Shouldn't it be possible to use any kind of rest API with that same interface? Maybe some "Templates" for popular services such as twitter or facebook could be provided.. otherwise, it'd just be possible to write our own data and examine the results, etc.

<comment><USER3> It is limited to Twitter only so we could launch it faster and iterate quickly. There is lots more to come!

<comment><USER2> Maybe a sneak peek on the "lots more to come" ?!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> add youtube next pls</comment>


The risks of cheap water - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/business/economy/the-price-of-water-is-too-low.html <comment><USER3> I live in Dubai, where apparently the city has the highest worldwide per capita usage of 500 gallons/day [0] (18 months ago, so probably higher now) but we also have fairly cheap water, it works out to be about US$10/1000 gallons. Even though we are in the desert, we don't have any restrictions on water usage (there is a nice green park next to my apartment). Apart from cheap fuel, one of the main reasons why is that water production is by-product of electricity production.

Most of the electricity here is produced by natural gas (yep, not oil) which is used to heat water into steam to drive turbines. This needs a lot of water, which there isn't really much in the desert, so it uses sea water. This distills the water, after which limestone is added to make it potable (drinking water has quite a lot of minerals in it, so drinking distilled water isn't that great for you) and then it is sent to the water grid. The overall process has an efficiency of 82%.

Further reading:

[http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/uae-s-largest- power-...](http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/uae-s-largest-power-and- desalination-plant-opens-at-jebel-ali)

[https://www.dubal.ae/who-we-are/our-production- process/power...](https://www.dubal.ae/who-we-are/our-production- process/power-desalination.aspx)

[0] [http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/uae-water- consumpti...](http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/uae-water-consumption- highest-in-the-world-2013-03-13-1.498498)

<comment><USER4> "drinking water has quite a lot of minerals in it, so drinking distilled water isn't that great for you"

That's an urban legend. Please stop spreading false tales. Rainwater is distilled water, and lacks exactly the same minerals. Yet people live for years without a problem on harvested rainwater.

As [http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/devices- dispo...](http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/devices-dispositifs- eng.php) points out "There are no known beneficial, nor harmful health effects associated with the ingestion of demineralized or distilled water."

You can see how contentious this is at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Distilled_water](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Distilled_water) .

Limestone is added because the water is low in calcium. Concrete contains calcium, and water will dissolve the calcium from concrete pipes. Pure water also has "little buffering capacity relative to that of freshwater. Low buffering capacity increases risks of corrosion to metal distribution pipes."

(Quote from [http://www.arava.co.il/haklaut/mop/d081007/d081007_2.pdf](http://www.arava.co.il/haklaut/mop/d081007/d081007_2.pdf) . See the same points at [http://books.google.com/books?id=XTrvVSJTnUEC&pg=PA311&lpg=P...](http://books.google.com/books?id=XTrvVSJTnUEC&pg=PA311&lpg=PA311&dq=rainwater+mineral+content&source=bl&ots=QWg8AkLjbB&sig=6t1Uq2IgQVgYTqAb-C2HYfNOu0U&hl=sv&sa=X&ei=uVc- VJipLcvLygPQoIDgCw&ved=0CGkQ6AEwCzgK#v=onepage&q=rainwater%20mineral%20content&f=false) and [http://books.google.com/books?id=M3W7QsfdyMIC&pg=PA37&lpg=PA...](http://books.google.com/books?id=M3W7QsfdyMIC&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=limestone+desalination&source=bl&ots=sW6X8YiM2C&sig=VNfV4D_Pc7kLkJl4w49iziMSbF0&hl=sv&sa=X&ei=rlw- VIm8LYr8ygPMhYHQDg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=limestone%20desalination&f=false) .)

They also point out that consumers prefer the taste after some remineralization. The first link also comments the using RO water for agriculture ended up with MG2+ deficiency diseases in the irrigated plants.

However, you'll noted that remineralization only adds a couple of ions. It doesn't add "quite a lot of minerals" to the water supply, which would be needed if distilled water actually were a problem for the body.

<comment><USER5> Rainwater isn't distilled water. It has acids in it to make acidic rain. You can distill wine and I'd imagine you'd end up with water, alcohol and a lot less colour.

<comment><USER4> For the purposes of this discussion it's distilled, because it doesn't have minerals in it.

As you say acid rain contains sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. It can also pick up other gases. Rain also contains carbon dioxide, and rain near the sea also contains some salt. (Then again, distillation isn't perfect either.)

It doesn't contain dissolved limestone, granite, or other minerals that might be found in ground water, at least not that makes a credible biological difference.

I don't understand your comment about wine - if you distill crude oil you can end up with gasoline, asphalt, and more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Here's all the cost figures in metric, in case you forgot how to handle gallons => acre-feet in your head.

        cost / cubic meter

                 [ Residential ]
        $0.63    Fresno
        $1.69    Boston
        $2.64    HN'er in Dubai

                 [ Agriculture ]
        $0.02    CA Imperial Irrigation District ($0.016, rounded)
        $0.16+   San Diego

                 [ Desalination plants ]
        $1.62    San Diego

Alfalfa's market value is $0.75 per m^3 of water used growing it. (The article compared this to the $1.62 desal figure: i.e., at market (?) rates, growing it would be a net loss).

Here's a related factsheet of California water statistics. Tap water amounts to 9 km^3/year; irrigation is 32 km^3.

[http://ca.water.usgs.gov/water_use/2010-california-water- use...](http://ca.water.usgs.gov/water_use/2010-california-water-use.html)

<comment><USER7> > in case you forgot how to handle gallons => acre-feet in your head

Or in case those have no intuitive meaning to you :) Thanks.

<comment><USER8> A gallon is ~4 litres (two large bottles of soda) and an acre is a the small end of a soccer^H^H^H^H^H^H^H football-field (or half of a big one). For an acre-foot, that's all underwater, up to your shins. Or maybe you just stacked all the soda bottles next to each other, they're about a foot tall...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Between the lines, this reads as:

"Water prices are going up. Consumers will need to use less, because they won't be able to afford as much. If that affects them... boo hoo. We'd rather have water riots than go up against the agribusiness lobby, who can't and won't pay for water - they wouldn't be profitable if they weren't - and being unprofitable is anti-american!"

<comment><USER10> There is evidence[1] that Jimmy Carter was going after the water rates Central Valley farmers owe the U.S. government. This cause Ronald Reagan's campaign to be better financed. Don't know if it can be credited with costing Carter the election, but it was a factor.

[1] I recall the story as being from the book "Cadillac Desert".

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Yeah, so markets aren't necessarily the answer to _everything_. Simply making water more expensive isn't necessarily going to decrease its consumption, as hawkice has said in this thread.

And I'm really not a fan of how this article vilifies the farmers. This quote sums it up:

> [This awesome thing would give] farmers an opportunity to sell their [water] > rights to developers rather than using them for low-value crops.

"Low-value crops", eh? Sure, make farmers use water more efficiently, but it seems pretty silly to value the construction of new buildings over the production _of food_.

<comment><USER12> > "Low-value crops", eh? Sure, make farmers use water more efficiently, but it > seems pretty silly to value the construction of new buildings over the > production of food.

Is it really that easy? Food >> Buildings? A lot of crops are grown that never end up on your plate - biofuel, exported food, stuff that in the end rots in the silos. It might really be valuable to rethink the priorities here.

<comment><USER11> If we want to have that discussion, I think that'd be a great one to have. But that was not the author's intention.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> At the same time the right to water has been protected by UN as a basic human right.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_water](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_water)

For this reason what happens when the price for water is raised and the consumers can't pay becomes a very interesting issue. Detroit has raised their prices and then started to cut off consumers that don't pay. Something UN has criticized Detroit for:

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/26/united-nations- detr...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/26/united-nations-detroit- water-shutoffs_n_5533901.html)

[http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/u-n-to-intervene-in-detroit- water...](http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/u-n-to-intervene-in-detroit-water- shutoffs/)

<comment><USER14> It's the kind of "right" that only exists if other people provide it - <USER2> who quite reasonably, don't see your "right" as a reason they should work for free.

<comment><USER15> This is also true of a right to own land, unless you are actually out there physically patrolling your property with an intent to stop someone from trespassing.

And after you stop that person, who's to say you had the right to, and that the person's friends shouldn't come back and teach you the error of your ways?

My point is, if you can't have water because someone else claims they own it, their ownership claim is backed up by the positive effort of others just as much as your claim to the water is, if not more so.

"Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." — Thomas Jefferson ( [http://press- pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12....](http://press- pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12.html) )

<comment><USER16> >unless you are actually out there physically patrolling your property with an intent to stop someone from trespassing.

It's worth noting that in some countries (Scotland, Norway) there is no such thing as trespass. So not only do you not have government assistance with preventing people walking on your land, you are not legally allowed to enforce that yourself either.

On the topic of land ownership:

A Scottish miner is walking home one evening with a brace of pheasants. He unexpectedly meets the landowner who informs him that this is his land and he better hand over the pheasants:

      'Your land eh' asks the miner.
      'Yes', replies the laird, 'and my pheasants.'
      'And who did you get this land from?'
      'Well, I inherited it from my father.'
      'And who did he get it from?' the miner insists.
      'His father of course. The land has been in my family for over 400 years' the laird splutters.
      'OK, so how did your family come to own this land 400 years ago?' the miner asks.
      'Well… well… they fought for it!'
      'Fine,' replies the miner. 'Take your jacket off and I'll fight you for it now.'

<comment><USER17> I don't think it's quite true to say there are _no_ trespass laws in Scotland - there is still laws against aggravated and collective trespass and there is a rather long list of laws governing access to other peoples land.

However, the general rule is that we do have a "right to roam" with the condition that people accessing land are sensible about it:

[http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/](http://www.outdooraccess- scotland.com/)

Land ownership in Scotland is _incredibly_ complex - I can recommend the book "The Poor Had No Lawyers: Who Owns Scotland and How They Got it":

[http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Poor-Had-No- Lawyers/dp/178027114...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Poor-Had-No- Lawyers/dp/178027114X)

<comment><USER16> That little story I quoted is actually from that book. I've yet to read most of it though.

<comment><USER17> I did recognise it - been a while since I read the book though! :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> By far the best reference on this subject is the Aguanomics blog and his book Living With Water Scarcity. This article barely scratches the surface of the insanity of water allocation and the difficulties of regulation surrounding the industry.

Suffice it to say, making water more expensive might not even be a solution until is it extremely expensive, because we already have water pricing so complex (in many places in the US) that many people have no idea what their water needs are or how to efficiently use water. Roughly a sixth of residential water usage in some areas effected by the drought in California is leaked from the building's pipes unused.

The solutions are complex, involve analyzing risk and allowing high water prices in years without scarcity to fund investment in infrastructure (desalination, for instance) to avoid scarcity turning into a shortage (which no one wants).

</comment><comment><USER19> After reading this, I was reminded of an older 2006 article also from the NYT "There's Money in Thirst". Its a good companion to this article. I hope thirst isn't a business opportunity that leaves many without.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/10/business/worldbusiness/10w...](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/10/business/worldbusiness/10water.html)

<comment><USER20> Awesome article clumsysmurf. Thanks for sharing

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I think that selling water only brings more scarcity.

Money is cheap. Maybe we need a monetary system backed by clean drinking water. Money as water.

WaterCoin could be created by producing clean drinking water. The algorithm would encourage water to be abundant.

</comment><comment><USER22> Complaining about farmers using too much water is the same as complaining about people eating too much food. The word "food" doesn't even occur in this article that appears to have started with a conclusion ("markets are magic!!!") and omitted facts until the conclusion was justified.

The disruption to our nation's economy and lower classes caused by an increase in food prices or scarcity as a result of hasty water management changes would potentially destabilize society.

Edit: the article also failed to mention that the water delivered to farmers has most likely not been purified, chlorinated, or protected from animals, so of course it will be cheaper than culinary water.

<comment> guard-of-terra Optimising the 20% of water spent on humans seems suboptimal. Not much gains to have there, just stress. All the billboards who make you think it's you who spent all the water.

It's the same thing where people are advised to conserve electricity yet we see large offices glowing with every light all night and day.

<comment><USER23> I think you're confused. Most offices shut off the lights at night.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> So if you can pay (more) it's OK to use more? We never learn.

</comment><comment><USER25> For years, off and on, I've seen scare stories about running out of water. Broadly, the situation is really simple: In some parts of the world, water suitable for humans and/or agriculture is scarce, but in other parts of the world such water is plentiful. In simplest terms, if are concerned about water, then don't live in a desert.

For me, no worries, mate: I live in the US 70 miles north of Wall Street, and my water comes from a well in my front yard. There's an electric pump at the bottom of the well, and everything's fine. I have no swimming pool, but my neighbors on both sides do, and they have similar wells. We have no water shortage at all. Indeed, each spring there's enough melted snow and rain to totally soak the ground with the excess water running off into, no doubt, the Hudson River and the Atlantic Ocean.

Is it _good_ water? It seems fine. I have a filter in the line; the filter is some tube about a foot long and 2 inches in diameter, sometimes of some foam and other times a bunch of thread wrapped tightly. The water flows through the tube, and any little pits of dirt, gravel, etc. get filtered out. I have a supply of about a half-dozen new filters, and I replace a filter about once each two years whether needed or not.

Yes, the water is totally saturated with CaCO3, that is, calcium carbonate. No worries, mate. Everything in my kitchen is nice and clean with no sign of CaCO3 deposits. Hot water coils? Yup, since hot water dissolves CaCO3 less well than cold water, I get CaCO3 deposits in the hot water coils. So, maybe twice a year I use some HCl, a drill pump, and two garden hoses to clean out the CaCO3 from the hot water coils. Of course the reaction generates CaCL2 and CO2. No biggie.

For the water I _use_ , it's not really _lost_ but goes to my septic tank. Right, no sewer and just a backyard septic tank instead. What comes out of the septic tank goes into a _drain field_ in my backyard and, then, no doubt helps keep the backyard moist. Some of that water likely leaks into a stream that runs past the back of the property, and the stream no doubt soon ends up in the Hudson River. No worries, mate.

So, I pay nothing for the drinking water and nothing for sewer.

Trash? Paper and plastic I burn in the fireplace. Bottles and cans I accumulate and occasionally, once each few years, make a midnight deposit in a dumpster someplace.

Those bottles and cans causing a gigantic pile up of trash that is covering the globe, as has been claimed by other alarmists? Nope: Instead what I dump is a very high grade aluminum mine.

The article is more from the _Alarmist Industry_. The theme is: Humans are evil. They are all sinners. They are greedy, filthy, and wasteful. They are committing sinful, destructive, dangerous, short-sighted _transgressions_ against the 100% pure, pristine, precious, delicate, sensitive, beautiful natural environment of Mother Nature. This transgression will led to just horrible _retribution_ as just payback from injured, angry Mother Nature. The only course is _redemption_ via sacrifice, discipline, denial, conservation, and more in costs, taxes, regulations, etc.

Uh, where have we heard this trilogy, this line, before? How about 1000 years ago in the English morality plays? It's called a _guilt trip_ , exploiting the vulnerability of people to become afraid of dangers from the unknown. Laying on such a guilt trip has been a favorite scam of charlatans for at least 1000 years.

No doubt one of the reasons for _The Age of Reason_ was to have means to separate truth from superstitions and fears based on ignorance.

Yes, Virginia, there really are some dangers. And we need to understand such dangers and do something effective about them. Dangers? Ebola, if we are not careful. Polio unless we take vaccines seriously or just eliminate the virus from the environment. Similarly for several other diseases for which we have good vaccines. In some locations, earthquakes. In some locations, hurricanes. In some locations, blizzards. In some locations, water shortages.

And, now, with the media, in all locations, alarmist charlatans using misleading nonsense to try to grab us by the gut, make us afraid, create a flim-flam, fraud scam, and get on our backs and into our pockets, all as their _career_. Apparently there is a big industry for such. And, of course, the media like such stories -- screaming "danger!" \-- to get eyeballs for ad revenue.

Virginia, it's a scam, exploiting ignorance. Broadly the solution is knowledge, education, and rationality.

Here, let's call a scam what it is and try to push back against such destructive nonsense.

So, this article is from the NYT. Okay, for years I've concluded that the NYT can't pass up an opportunity to try to get their (sucker!) readers up on their hind legs by running scare stories about _the sky is falling_. So, I long ago gave up on the NYT being rational or responsible. Emotional? Yes. Even paranoid? Yes. Rational? No. If they were rational and responsible, then many of their stories with a lot of eyeballs would go away. But, also, due to their nonsense, I went away. So, back in the days of paper, I refused to have their trash in the house, even for free. Now the NYT is running stories of wide variety, and maybe some of the stories have some okay, rational, informational content. Maybe.

But the NYT, from their long standard goal of grabbing people by the heart, the gut, and below the belt, always below the shoulders, rarely between the ears, has left me so pissed off I just can't take them seriously.

Clearly the NYT understands _formula fiction_ , that is, sympathetic White Hat protagonists facing danger, dangerous Black Hats threatening the White Hats, with strong issues of morality, etc. So, the NYT takes whatever they can find and presents it using the techniques of formula fiction. Long ago, my brother had an English prof who just asserted that the _news_ is mostly from just the techniques of formula fiction. Informing the readers is not the goal. Instead the goal is ad revenue from eyeballs from grabbing people emotionally by the heart, gut, and below the belt.

Long ago one of the news anchors on one of the three major TV networks explained that the _evening news_ was not healthy for viewers because it got the viewers highly concerned about things they could do nothing about. Not a full description of what is wrong with the media but a description of part of it.

We gotta push back against this nonsense.

NYT, here's some feedback for you: Your content is alarmist, wildly overly emotional, irrational, irresponsible, and frustrating; you just piss me off; and mostly I just will refuse to pay attention to your stuff. You can keep writing that nonsense, but I will rarely read it. And, as a matter of principle, I will just never pay for that nonsense. And, as here, in public I will push back against your nonsense. Did I mention your nonsense? I don't want to leave out that I regard nearly everything you write as nonsense or worse. You are getting this?

<comment><USER26> You might say that the septic is free, but in practice the installation is fairly costly, and it does need maintenance. It also requires less dense housing, so there is an implied cost there (i.e. you need probably 1/2 an acre of land). After the initial cost, it is still probably cheaper than a sewer; but excavating the field will run thousands of dollars.

I have septic and am perfectly fine with it, total cost has probably been about $1800 over 8 years (4 x $300 pumpings + 1 x $600 jetting to clear out roots that grew into a line).

The well also requires maintenance, an initial setup, and probably doesn't have as much capacity as a municipal water supply. I'm happier having town water, which requires no electricity or maintenance (on my part).

<comment><USER25> Yes, the septic tank is not entirely free, but I was trying to keep the explanation simple. But, I pay no monthly _sewer fee_ to the town, city, or whatever.

For the original cost of installing a septic system, sure, that's not free, but neither is running a town-approved sewer line out to the street. And town taxes or fees, I'd have to pay for, will have to maintain that sewer line. Heck, a town sewer line has to carry my waste for miles, but my drain field only runs for, maybe, 40 feet. My guess is, net, in both capex an opex, my septic system is cheaper than a town sewer system.

Besides, with a town system, there is a central collection and processing plant, and occasionally it has to get rid of the final, insoluble waste. So, it might haul out that waste. Then, right, presto, bingo, the professional alarmists, as in the OP, are out screaming about the _environment_ , even if the town hauls the waste 100 miles into the Atlantic Ocean before dumping it. Screaming professional alarmists. With my septic system, there's no screaming. Good.

But, for the opex, I've been in the house for 23 years and so far have done only one thing to the septic system: From some skin irritation from using a weed whacker, I used some Wal-Mart triple anti-biotic cream on my legs; the cream got on my socks; when I washed the socks the cream got into the septic system. Then some sewage bubbled up from a spot far into the back yard. So, the Wal-Mart cream was powerful stuff -- steralized my septic system!

Solution: There is a box of dry beads can buy at the grocery store. Just flush the stuff, and the septic system is working again. Worked fine, right away. The spot in the backyard? I did nothing about it, and soon it dried out and is invisible now.

No worries, mate!

The lot? Yes, it's nice in some ways, and so is the neighborhood. There are deer in the backyard; sometimes I see them, and when I mow the grass I can see where they have matted down the grass from sleeping. There's a lot of wildlife, mice (they tend to avoid the house; I have two kitty cats; mice aren't totally stupid, you know!), rabbits, possums, skunks, raccoons, ground hogs, geese, wild turkeys, hawks, crows, lots of other birds, and sometimes foxes.

My kitty cats go out and are fine. My older kitty cat has been going out in this neighborhood for 10 years now with no big problems. Secret: Have a neutered male; else the little guy will go for miles each day, looking for females, marking territory, getting into fights, maybe getting into trouble with traffic, anti-freeze, etc.

I omitted what I do with fruits and vegetables that are too old: Sure, I dump them on a pile in the bushes. It's a _compost_ pile. I also dump shrubbery clippings on that pile. The pile shrinks down to next to nothing very quickly. After 23 years of such dumping, I still have to look carefully in the bushes even to find the pile.

I don't want town water, sewer, etc., heavily because I just don't want bureaucratic mud wrestling with people who could issue edicts I'd have to obey, no matter what the heck the cost, justification, etc.

There is no end of people who want to find excuses to have power over others, e.g., the people in the article screaming for more in fees, taxes, regulations, etc. Getting taxes from me and slapping regulations on me is all they have to do; that's their job; maybe they believe that they are doing _good_ ; but I am happy just avoiding them. Let them stay in CA! That's CA where they also want to put regulations on, gads, lawn mowers. Generally NY where I am also has a lot of regulations and taxes, but so far where I am I manage to avoid most of that nonsense.

If my start-up works and I move to a nicer house, then I'll make sure I have well water, a septic tank, room for a compost pile, lots of trees and bushes, good room for kitty cats, lots of wild life, a nice emergency electric power generator, and nearly no bureaucrats! Maybe for the well water I'll get a reverse osmosis system -- that could be a little better!</comment></comment></comment>


An Open Source 4-Port High Power USB Hub - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dilshan/usb2-power-hub <comment><USER2> A well documented project, and its admirable getting actual open source hardware certification, but I think the design isn't really suitable.

All those separate switching regulators look a nightmare for electromagnetic interference to me, the inductors are unshielded and there is no solid ground plane on the PCB. I would be surprised if USB HS (480mbps) works reliably with this layout. Also, there is no consideration given for ESD protection.

A better design would be to have a single more modern high current regulator/module (the LM2596 [1] used dates from 1999) and use protected high side load switches to supply the ports. These kind of high current supplies are a bit tricky (external MOSFETs etc), so a module might be a good shout, example [2], which might even end up cheaper than having 4 discrete regulators and passives.

Protected load switches detect overcurrent and turn off the output, sometimes with auto-retry. Its getting harder to find them in packages with legs, but the AP22815[3] looks suitable in a TSOT package that shouldn't be any harder to solder than the USB hub IC.

Protected load switches could also allow removal of the microcontroller, as they have a simple high/low enable pin and fault LED, that could connect to a simple slide switch and red/green LED per channel. They also offer nice features like discharging the output capacitors, and reverse current flow protection.

As for the suitability/usefulness of a 3A USB hub, if you try and pull 3A through a USB connector, it will get quite warm, especially if you have a micro USB connector on the other end.

[1] [http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm2596.pdf](http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm2596.pdf) [2] [https://www.digikey.co.uk/product-detail/en/bel-power- soluti...](https://www.digikey.co.uk/product-detail/en/bel-power- solutions/SLDN-12D1ALG/179-3029-ND/8028727) [3] [https://www.digikey.co.uk/product-detail/en/diodes- incorpora...](https://www.digikey.co.uk/product-detail/en/diodes- incorporated/AP22815AWT-7/AP22815AWT-7DICT-ND/9562756)

<comment><USER3> I think it would be really great if you slice these criticism into items and fill in issues!

[https://github.com/dilshan/usb2-power- hub/issues](https://github.com/dilshan/usb2-power-hub/issues)

That's exactly why such a project benefits from being open source: someone with enough motivation and knowledge to hack something together do it, then other people with more specialized knowledge make suggestions for improvement.

<comment><USER4> Issues aren't really a great way to address core architectural questions that effectively say "I think it would be better to start over and build this in an entirely different way".

There are some (small) benefits to independent regulators. A massive rail with high-side switches is a completely different design approach with its own benefits.

<comment><USER3> The issue would be tagged "wish" or "for v2" and discussed. It can later be referenced when a design for a new release is being discussed.

There are always better ways to handle discussions, but on a github issue on the project's repo is probably better than on a HN thread that won't be linked to it easily.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Because I see it again and again: Please don't put 20 years old dc/dc converters into new things. Neither price nor package are valid resons.

There's cheaper and better ones available in similar or the same packages. E.g. LCSC is a perfectly valid source for many chinese brands and cheaper ICs, so availability is also not a reason.

Now for the last: familiarity. If you have to take a ti simpleswitcher because you're scared of DC/DC's, that's also perfectly valid, but again, there are newer ones which are better all around.

<comment><USER6> Is documentation a valid reason?

Old Linear Technology, Analog Devices, and Texas Instruments data sheets were and are fantastic. Someone with an understanding of little more than the fundamentals of resistors, inductors, and capacitors could learn about and implement a DC/DC converter from those docs - and the simplest ones are the oldest ones.

A seasoned electronics designer with previous examples to draw on can select an IC and basically reverse-engineer it from the sample application and comparisons with previous designs they're familiar with. If they get stuck, they will call their vendor...they might not even read the docs. Hobbyists can't do that.

<comment><USER5> I have the most experience with TI silicon, so that's where i can talk most about the datasheets.

Some are excellent, many are really good and except for the odd outlier, most are sufficient. Especially certain lines of the newer dc/dc's have really good datasheets where you can just take the reference circuit in the datasheet as is, plug in your values in the formulas to get your inductance, resistors and cap values. Oh, and webench power designer also does a good job if your application is not too complex.

And complexity is also why i mentioned the simpleswitcher series. Other vendors also have similar simple integrated and modern solutions. With good documentation.

And as for Linear, they have amazing chips and documentation with a price that brings tears to your eyes. I have a love/hate relationship with those.

As for calling up vendors, TI at least has their e2e forum where you usually can get an answer no matter how much you pay them, you just need to create an account.

<comment><AUTHOR> Webench Power Designer looks nifty, thanks for pointing it out. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> So here's something I'm having a hard time finding. As a musician, I have a stomp box board. A lot of my effects are digital and reprogrammable. I'd love to to just "keep them all connected" to a usb hub, then connect a single usb cable back to my phone or computer.

When doing so, I instantly introduce ground loops. MIDI gets around this by having opto-isolation as part of the spec, but MIDI-over-USB of course negates this. I would love to have a USB hub that was opto-isolated for both power, data, and ground!

<comment><USER8> USB isolators (single port) can be bought cheaply on eBay but may be bandwidth limited. They use a small isolated DC-DC brick and a USB isolation chip, probably with internal isolation capacitors to get the signals across

<comment><USER9> I think the ADI ones are actually based on transformers.

Specifically they'll do "Full Speed" 12Mbit, but _not_ "High Speed" 480Mbit. USB3 @ 5Gbit can also be isolated, as it uses separate send/receive pairs. But that doesn't mean you can use a hub and drop down to 480MBit - they're separate data paths.

If you need 480Mbit, the best solution is probably a Raspberry Pi or other SBC, to convert to ethernet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's sad to see so much effort put into making this as open source as possible, only for the firmware to require Microchip's proprietary MPLAB.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point. Still, this seems like a reasonable start.

Being OSS, someone with the right skills / motivation could probably replace the Microchip pieces with something suitable.

<comment><USER11> Just because this is HN I will drop it, it would not be very difficult to change it with a ST32XX and do the firmware implementation in Rust

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> When I was first playing with Raspberry Pi clones, one of the ways you could talk to them is over USB, which would have been great for control plane traffic. I was miffed to find that none of Anker's products were simultaneously USB hubs _and_ chargers. I just figured that was a feature. There are many other options now but at the time I wasn't satisfied with them for some reason.

I ended up waiting for later models with more bandwidth before trying again. Power over USB is a much more compact and reusable pile of equipment.

</comment><comment><USER13> I hope Intel or who ever get their USB-C Hub chips out so we can finally get some USB-C hubs.

<comment><USER14> USB-C iirc is USB3 under the hood and can be converted passively from the "old" to the type-c connectors.

<comment><USER15> You can't do Power Delivery over Type-A. Probably there are other thunderbolt- related functions that don't work either. So yes, you can passively convert to type-a if what you're doing is within the spec of what type-a can do but it's not the same as an actual usb type-c hub could be.

<comment><USER14> USB-C PD can be done independently of the actual USB (or Thunderbolt, or DisplayPort alternate modes).</comment></comment></comment></comment>


HN: Most frustrating process at your company? - <AUTHOR> At my company, you need to fill 3 excel sheets, with exactly the same information, just to get on-board to HRMS.<p>- It takes 45 days for any reimbursement approval and 15 more to get the money in your account <comment><USER2> Yes, dealing with tax offices, insurances or similar always takes the longest for us. We can reimburse customers with a few clicks, it takes banks and credit card companies 5-10 days until the customer has the money on their account. Rarely we have to wait for a new server to get installed (physically put into a rack) 2-3 days.</comment>


Nokia: We Don't Know Why Criminals Want Our Old Phones - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,163515/printable.html <comment><USER2> Nokia says they're not aware of any software vulnerability, and I believe them. But if some essential information is transmitted in clear and can be read out or blocked via a small hack to the phone's PCB, then it would be a _hardware_ vulnerability, no? People like hard-modding old digital synthesizers, and a phone is just another kind of DSP device.

</comment><comment><USER3> Seems quite odd - I see them for sale all over the place for < $15 .. They might not be made in Bochum.

I would've thought this kind of spoofing involves sim cards rather than hardware.

<comment><USER4> Spoofing my own Danish SIM card was how I first got the iPhone to work with a Danish carrier in later summer 2007. That was one of the first method used around the world to get the iPhone to work outside of the US. Before the software hacks (anySIM).

I needed to brute force the original SIM card to get a certain number needed to forge the new SIM card. Luckily the SIM card I needed the key from was old. Modern SIM cards can not be hacked that easily. I heard that the phone companies know that number and in some cases would tell that number to the customer owning the SIM card.

<comment><USER5> But that was only because you had physical access to the original SIM, no? You couldn't mount this attack "over the air" against a stranger.

<comment><USER4> The only reason you would need the physical original SIM card is to get the numbers you need to make the SIM clone. (IIRC)

I think that the phone companies have all the keys you need. Of course they don't just give them out to anyone who asks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Seems like hacking the phone is the trivial part compared to the SIM authentication scheme. What am I missing?

<comment><USER6> Perhaps the phone is old enough that it doesn't _use_ SIM technology? I had a phone just last year that didn't (or at least, that's what they told me when I asked my next provider after that why I couldn't transition it to their network.)

<comment><USER5> I'm pretty sure all GSM phones use SIM cards. Perhaps your old phone was a Verizon or PCS phone.

Those don't use SIM cards, but they aren't GSM and generally aren't used outside North America.</comment></comment></comment>


Facebook accused of trying to decloak domain owners' personal Whois info - <AUTHOR> https://www.theregister.com/2020/06/23/facebook_gdpr_workaround/ <comment><USER2> From TFA, Facebook "... continues to claim that being a registered trademark holder is sufficient to be granted full access to the Whois database, and that all other routes are unduly burdensome."

So any fraudster just needs a registered trademark and they would, according to Facebook's request, be granted full access to the database.

And no oversight, as "all other routes are unduly burdensome." That means they DON'T want subpeonas or any kind of restriction in between like a judge who could evaluate the request based on some kind of merit. No limits. Just a giant straw they can use to get all that juicy data.

Facebook's request doesn't sound very good to me. Sounds great for criminals though.

<comment><USER3> This is a wonderful admission by Facebook. So any one of the millions of companies who have had their copyrights or trademarks infringed by fraudulent Chinese advertisers on Instagram and Facebook should now be given FULL access to all advertisers personal details on Facebook including the complete historic library of ads that have ever run on Facebook since, by their own argument, "You don't know who to sue until you've got the Whois information,"

<comment><USER4> No. They're arguing anyone with a registered trademark should have full access to everything, with no infringement required.

They're also arguing a restriction to advertisers would be an undue burden.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > Progress has been slow going, in large part because commercial entities > desperately want access to the full registration data of domains – which > includes people's home addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses – > and have been trying to find ways around the privacy protections.

Ouch. This is going to make it very hard for people to host content on the web anonymously, forcing them to link their entire identity to their website. This sucks.

<comment><USER6> Are you really forced to enter correct personal information for all domains, regardless of TLD and registrar?

<comment><USER7> I imagine your bank card payments may be somehow traced to your own identity but don't quote me on that.

I guess some crypto options might help that.

<comment><USER6> Surely Whois information does not include detailed information about past payments?

<comment><USER8> No, but as long as a payment to a CC is going through, then the registrar assumes you are "identified".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > That's not the answer that's going to work for us.

Well boo hoo hoo. You know what's not going to work for me?

You having unrestricted access to whois details!

The gall of these companies is amazing.

<comment><USER10> Like why do they even need it.

<comment><USER11> Assuming best intentions, Facebook could use this data to better identify spammers, fake news networks, etc.

<comment><USER12> That's not what they're saying. They claim it's to fight phishing.

<comment><USER13> And as a side benefit, if they can decloak critical sites like facebooksucks.whatever, they can harass enemies with expensive, frivolous lawsuits more easily.

<comment><USER4> I wish "abuse of trademark" was more commonly applied. The way the law is intended to work:

\- I register facebooksucks.com, and explain why.

\- Facebook sues me for trademark infringement, arguing there is a real risk my (non-existent) customers will think I am Facebook, and buy my services instead.

\- The judge rules that this is a frivolous lawsuit whose only purpose is to silence free speech (not to avoid brand confusion).

\- The judge invalidates the "Facebook" trademark.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I had deleted my Facebook a/c 5 years ago. I recently needed to look for apartment for rent and that is, unfortunately, done best on Facebook where I live unless you want to involve brokers who charge insane brokerage and show places you'd hate instantly, so you'd end up just wasting your time.

I choose my name as "first name + initial of my last name" (iirc that was my name in my previous/deleted a/c as well) and email and my date of birth and a real photo of mine (very clear -- basically a mug shot). Sent friend requests to 10-12 friends of mine and most of them accepted immediately.

Next day when I logged in I got a prompt that my account was disabled (flagged?) and I can request a review (or it said I can reactivate) only after adding a mobile number and I did that.

Few days later I try to login again:

"Your account has been disabled"

"You can't use Facebook because your account, or activity on it, didn't follow our Community Standards. We have already reviewed this decision and it can't be reversed. To learn more about the reasons why we disable accounts visit the Community Standards."

Maybe I will try to open with another email but they may again force me to use my mobile number and I can't keep getting new mobile numbers. While I do need to look at those "on rent" posts.

This company really has too much power!

<comment><USER15> Power without accountability or responsibility * _

<comment><USER16> Well, the other day there was a thread on hackernews full of people declaring how they dont trust democracy to deal with freedom of speech, and would rather trust a corporation with policing it.

<comment><USER15> Sometimes people of different opinions comment here. Some threads get bombed with opinions from one side or the other to the exclusion of another. I wouldn't read to much into it..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I own a domain that's <some other word>book.com

It's registered via one of those "privacy" services. There's no website on it, but I use the dns for some internet connected devices.

I keep getting requests, which I ignore, for information relayed by the privacy service. Lately, they've morphed into offers to "buy" the domain. I wonder if it's simply Facebook's attorneys who want to find some way to contact me to send a "notice of trademark infringement" to me?

</comment><comment><USER18> > All they say is, 'Go get a subpoena,' or, 'File a UDRP.' That's not the > answer that's going to work for us."

If you can't find an answer that is going to work for you, many would take that as a hint to stop it and not ask that question.

</comment><comment><USER19> That's pretty damn shady. The half-arsed attempt to dress it up as a security matter "harvest people's login details" makes it even worse.

<comment><USER20> Won't somebody think of the -c-h-i-l-d-r-e-n- Security(tm).

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Are they seeking to get the customer details that the registrar has on file, or just the whois data? If it's the latter, aren't you protected if you use a whois privacy service? In that case it's just going to be a shell company in panama or something.

<comment><USER22> They are not just going after phishing sites but sites criticizing and protesting Facebook and it's other social media apps. There's a good chance it's a normal person behind those sites.

See: [https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/15/21291666/ebay- employees-a...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/15/21291666/ebay-employees- arrested-journalist-harassment)

Why does anyone think this won't happen to normal site owners?

<comment><USER23> I mean, normal site owners often get this service through their registrar for free nowadays. I run one of my project sites, [https://dotbun.com](https://dotbun.com), through google domains, and they just obfuscate your details as part of the purchase unless you opt out.

Take a look at my domain's whois info: [https://www.whois.com/whois/dotbun.com](https://www.whois.com/whois/dotbun.com)

You will see that the name and org. aren't just redacted; they are in care of a company called "Contact Privacy Inc."

There's nothing for ICANN to unmask for FB in this case. They'd have to go to the company, and given that said company's entire business model is privacy, I would expect it to be a much more difficult argument.

Now, let me be clear that I don't like Facebook's actions here one bit. I just suspect it may be less of an issue that some people think.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> wow....Namecheap, a company that makes a ton of money by selling services to crooks and fraudsters, sure likes to spin a tall tale

no... facebook is not requesting that.... facebook sued namecheap last month in an attempt to unmask domains used by both fraudsters and nso group, yet namecheap is protecting those details cause it knows once it folds, all its (not-so-legal) customers will move shop, so it's now inveted this bs about facebook trying to break gdpr

<comment><USER25> Why should Namecheap give up the name of its customers?

<comment><USER24> if their customers are breaking the law, then WHY NOT!

you're aiding and abetting at that point

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Why are people surprised when facebook is caught doing sketchy stuff? Like I'm glad the media is covering it, but whatever.

<comment><USER27> I am getting very tired of "why are people surprised"

 _I_ am certainly surprised when FB does something evil because their CEO continually preaches the importance of privacy, so shame on me I guess for taking him at his word

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Off topic, I was given the option to "allow" "premium adverts", supposedly, non-tracking. But they come from a different site (ithinkthereforeiam.net) and therefore, it's a 3rd-party tracker. I'm fine with self hosted ads, but this is no different than the usual junk.

Is there something about ithinkthereforeiam.net that's keeping them off ad blocker lists, and is there some reason The Register felt the need to ask me before showing what they clearly could have shown without the prompt?

</comment><comment><USER29> This has never been difficult to achieve, why is this a big deal? Privacy never existed in the first place. People have been able to eavesdrop on homes by targeting pretty much anything containing metal coils (including appliances) with advanced HAM radio equipment since the early 1970s. We need to stop pretending there is such a thing as privacy and start actually looking at where scientific progress is at right now. If you actually get a basic grasp of physics, radio theory and electrical engineering you're going to find out exactly how little privacy we have.

<comment><USER30> We can skip the formalities then!

Please state your full legal name, date of birth, current address of residence, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, email addresses, passwords, your favorite type of pornography, and your mother's maiden name.

Thanks in advance!

<comment><USER29> Just because there is no privacy does not mean we should give away our privacy easily.

<comment><USER23> If you have no privacy, what is there to give away? You can't have both!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Well, well. It's harder and harder every day to argue with the legal opinion offered by former SCOTUS justice Kennedy, which seemed hilariously corrupt at the time, that corporations are effectively people.

A defining trait of an awful lot of people is that they accuse what they're guilty of.

In this case, Facebook accusing other websites of trademark violations is the very definition of hypocrisy. Facebook in particular, but Twitter as well, are absolutely littered with t-shirt vendors selling other people's logos and brand names, logarithmically generated with ad data.

If you fill out your movies, music, and books "likes" as they tell you to do, within 2 days tops you'll be able to buy a Pink Floyd t-shirt from virtually anyone on the planet... except Roger Waters or David Gilmour.

The fact that Facebook refuses all search indexes makes policing Facebook's infringement on the copyrights of others impossible. At least with Napster any musician could log in and see how many users were giving their content away for free. Not so on Facebook, you can't ever know how many pirated logos of yours that Facebook sold.

<comment><USER32> > Well, well. It's harder and harder every day to argue with the legal opinion > offered by former SCOTUS justice Kennedy, which seemed hilariously corrupt > at the time, that corporations are effectively people.

I hate this meme. That's not what the decision said.

First "corporate personhood" means that corporations are allowed to sue and be sued like they were individuals. Along with being taxed and regulated.

Citizens United, the decision you are referencing did not involve this concept.

Rather it said that the rights of individuals to free speech is not diminished if they act collectively as opposed to individually.

If I'm allowed to say, "RNCTX doesn't understand the issue" and so is my friend, then us saying it together doesn't make it illegal because we acted in coordination.

Likewise if I'm allowed to purchase a billboard that says it and so is my friend then there should be no issue with us pooling our money to purchase one together.

And that's what Citizens United said. Corporations are one such mechanism through which we could pool our money to purchase that advertisement but others such as unions, non-profits, and all other forms of collective groups are covered.

It's actually a very common sense extension of the first amendment.

<comment><USER33> Corporations are "people" because their owners are people and people get to work together and corporations are how they work together.

Corporations are allowed free speech because their owners are allowed free speech as a group; the corporation is the tool for organizing it. Corporations are not allowed to vote, because people are not allowed to vote as a group.

This is not new. This is not Kennedy's fault. This has been the case since the beginning of the United States, and it has been Supreme Court precedent since 1819, when the New Hampshire Legislature said they could take over a private university because it was a corporation, and therefore had no rights, and they could take its property and change its rules at will, ant the court said No. (Dartmouth College v. Woodward)

If corporations were not treated as people and not afforded civil rights, it would be legal for the government to censor newspapers at will because they have no First Amendment rights (News Corp, NY Times, etc are corporations). It would be legal for the President to order a warrantless search of the DNC headquarters, for the DNC is a corporation, and the Fourth Amendment would not apply. It would be legal to impose a trillion dollar fine on Planned Parenthood, a corporation, for any minor paperwork infraction, for the Eighth Amendment prohibition on excessive fines would not apply. It would be legal for the government to sue them for this infraction without a jury, for the Seventh Amendment would not apply.

<comment><USER34> > because people are not allowed to vote as a group

I see you've never been an observer for a New York City or Chicago election.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I actually agree with Facebook on this one, domain owners should have legal personalities.

That said, it shouldn't necessarily include their email, phone and address. Just the legal owner name (company or person) would be sufficient.

<comment><USER36> If the article is correct in that Facebook is requesting this data for domains that look alike to Facebook and/or do Phishing, then I very much believe they should receive the data necessary to go to court.

Just because Facebook is highly unsympathetic, doesn't mean that all their initiatives are evil.

And shady websides hiding behind third party privacy providers to avoid legal responsibility for their illegal content is sadly something that I've had to deal with myself in the past.

<comment><USER37> Then facebook can do that through the official means by submitting requests. They want to skip that process. I'd prefer their requests to be vetted before personal information is divulged. That way there is oversight.

We've already seen with the DMCA what happens when you give free-reign to companies in this area.

<comment><USER38> What process would that be? Genuine question, since the only process that the article mentioned apparently was only meant for law enforcement and registrars.

In particular, in the linked to lawsuit there's example sites that Facebook requested details for from Namecheap, and Namecheap chose not to give out the information. Many of them were 100% obvious phishing sites [0]. Clearly no option where the registrar gets to decide when to reveal information about the owner would work.

[0] E.g. facebo0k-login.com, facebokloginpage.site, faceboookmail.online

<comment><USER39> If you're genuinely confused, you really should get yourself informed on the concept of an independent court operating under the rule of law, and how it's implemented in our current systems. There are well-established legal procedures for requesting information on other parties that doesn't involve megacorps deciding to do whatever they please.

<comment><USER38> The phrasing that amaccuish used was "submitting requests". At least I've never heard filing a lawsuit be called "submitting a request", so the implication seemed to be that there was in fact some other process that was supposed to be followed.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>