OpenBSD vmm enabled - <AUTHOR> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&mode=expanded&sid=20161012092516 <comment><USER2> And of course, being OpenBSD, it's privsep and sandboxed from the very beginning.. cool.

[https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=144702840931345&w=2](https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=144702840931345&w=2), [https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=147578652321303&w=2](https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=147578652321303&w=2)

Man pages:

[http://man.openbsd.org/vmm.4](http://man.openbsd.org/vmm.4)

[http://man.openbsd.org/vmd.8](http://man.openbsd.org/vmd.8), [http://man.openbsd.org/vm.conf.5](http://man.openbsd.org/vm.conf.5)

[http://man.openbsd.org/vmctl.8](http://man.openbsd.org/vmctl.8)

<comment><USER3> However, it is still a boring type-2 hypervisor, just like bhyve, vmware or kvm; no real progress whatsoever.

I'm keeping an eye at seL4's VMM support, it looks promising, with the microkernel actually guaranteeing isolation, whereas the VMM runs with minimum privileges as a user process.

<comment><USER4> VMware ESXi is a Type 1 hypervisor.

<comment><USER5> Is it really though? It is running on top of a stripped down version of Redhat.

<comment><USER6> No it's not. Once upon a time, ESXi (when it was still called ESX) shipped with a stripped-down Linux in a role similar to a Dom0 on Xen; nowadays, ESXi doesn't even use Linux in _that_ capacity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Just to get out in front of this, as someone who is a quasi-fan of OpenBSD: yes, Theo had a scathing rant years ago about virtualization being terrible [1]. But it should be noted that that was well before virtualization on x86 was mature, and in response to an assertion that the use of VMs would increase security.

[1] [https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- misc&m=119318909016582](https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=119318909016582)

<comment><USER8> I know people like to point out Theo's "rants" for some reason (that was _nine years ago_ , for goodness' sake), but is it a rant, or is it just unvarnished truth delivered in a style that is more concerned with truth than people's precious feelings?

I've read a lot of Theo's emails in the lists, and frankly I find it refreshing that he says what he thinks.

And what I really find refreshing is that he gives a shit about whether code is correct, secure, and readable. There's a lot of lip service to those goals, but OpenBSD actually works really hard to deliver it with not a lot of money and precious little thanks.

Now, what was inaccurate about his assessment of VM from nine years ago that wasn't true? Or is it just that he seems so darn mean?

<comment><USER9> > I find it refreshing that he says what he thinks.

you can rephrase that email in a nicer way, while still expressing what you think. For example, you can drop the first paragraph, and no information is lost. You can also remove "if not stupid" and the informational content stays the same.

I am an OpenBSD fan in many ways, but you can generally express what you think while still being kind.

<comment><USER10> I don't always agree. Rhetoric has a lot of forms that are useful tools in argument, and while we will not admonish someone for asking "have you stopped beating your wife yet" (or in this case, "Virtualization seems to have a lot of security benefits.") we are too quick to ignore the very valid point in response because it wasn't friendly enough. Derailing the conversation that way prevents us from dealing with what I think is the bigger issue:

When someone says something stupid like "have you stopped beating your wife" (or "Virtualization seems to have a lot of security benefits"), we may need to tell them it is stupid, because stupidity has this way of spreading when it sounds nice and helpful (yes, beating your wife is bad; yes security benefits are good), but it's still a stupid statement.

Virtualization is extremely popular, but it isn't secure, and it's actually (and when you're thinking clearly, obviously) _less secure_ than other, existing systems. Security has to be a complete holistic effort, and not an abstraction layer, which is something most people in our industry ignore. Calling out someone as stupid for saying stupid things seems to me to be the best defence, after all, you're not going to convince _them_ that they're stupid, but you might convince someone else.

<comment> david-given This is the standard apologia for rudeness. The problem is that people don't work like that. If you say something in an aggressive manner, they will tend to assume a confrontational posture and won't work with you. It's just how people are wired.

Consider two possible responses I could have to your comment:

(a) You're full of shit.

(b) In my experience, that's not actually true.

Chances are you're going to respond better to (b) than to (a). So, if I actually want to engage you in conversation, _or work with you in the future_ , I should say (b). Routine courtesy is part of the standard toolkit of effective communication skills. It may be cathartic to be rude to someone, but it doesn't lead to long-term progress.

> Calling out someone as stupid for saying stupid things seems to me to be the > best defence...

...or you could simply explain why you think they're _mistaken_ , without using personal insults, and so win them over to your side of the debate? As it is, you're not just driving them away, but you're also sending a message to everybody else reading the conversation that you're intolerant and difficult to work with, which is not going to help the project.

I actually remember that particular conversation, as that was the point when I gave up on OpenBSD, unsubscribed from -misc, and switched to Debian Linux (and never went back). It simply wasn't worth my time to wade through the insults and abuse to get things done any more.

Of course, in those days, Theo de Raadt had the reputation for being an angry jerk, and Linux Torvalds had a reputation for being moderate and easy to work with. How times have changed.

<comment><USER11> > You're full of shit.

If you said that, I would have respected you, even though we disagreed.

> In my experience, that's not actually true.

Now I know you're just PC police, and that I have nothing to gain by further engaging with you. I have no respect for you.

So no, you are wrong. People don't work like that. Or at least people worth talking to are not like that. People see through all the PC bullshit, and respond accordingly.

> It simply wasn't worth my time to wade through the insults and abuse to get > things done any more.

Yeah, this kind of PC attitude it's not worth my time. People who can't, just discuss PC politics, while people who can, just do, and don't care about any of this stuff.

<comment><USER12> "Now I know you're just PC police, and that I have nothing to gain by further engaging with you."

That's not PC police. This is How To Win Friends And Influence People stuff, not PC stuff.

You are free to be rude, but you'll pay the consequences, quite needlessly.

I'm in a position where I with some frequency have to contradict people (being a code reviewer for a significant internal shared library has that result), but I try to make it clear in my words and tone that it's in the spirit of working with them and obtaining the best solution. I'm pretty sure it's not 100% successful, because some people to some extent can't process being contradicted in any way as anything less than hostility (and I put both "somes" in that sentence on purpose), no matter how polite you are about it, and on my side, I'm absolutely sure I'm not perfect about it, but I am sure I'm better off than I would be if I was always being as blunt as possible without even trying.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Surprised that it's not a port of bhyve.

I also found some slides from the authors of vmm/vmd:

[http://bhyvecon.org/bhyvecon2016-Mike.pdf](http://bhyvecon.org/bhyvecon2016-Mike.pdf)

[http://bhyvecon.org/bhyvecon2016-Reyk.pdf](http://bhyvecon.org/bhyvecon2016-Reyk.pdf)

(found on [https://wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve](https://wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve))

<comment><USER14> OpenBSD and FreeBSD diverged long enough ago that a port might not be straightforward, or in alignment with the objectives of the project.

<comment><USER15> Bigger things have been ported across wider gaps. Illumos has a "port" of Linux's KVM!

<comment><USER11> Yeah, and the KVM in illumos comes from a now obsolete Linux, and the pf in FreeBSD and Solaris comes from a now obsolete OpenBSD.

If anything, this should teach us _not to port_ unportable things from different operating systems, because the maintenance cost is untenable.

<comment><USER5> iianm, Solaris has a port of IPF, not pf. Oracle is working on trying to port pf now.

<comment><USER11> The pf has been ported and it shipped already in Solaris 11.3. It is based on OpenBSD 5.5 code.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> From the thread: _Currently this is limited to Intel hosts. We would like to get AMD also supported, but that requires some more work._

Still very cool -- happy to have an option other than qemu.

</comment><comment><USER16> Will this run nested inside VMWare Fusion? I don't have a spare computer to try this out.

<comment><USER17> typically not, once you use a virtualisation instruction on the CPU it cannot be passed to the guests.

Nested virtualisation typically uses emulation without hardware acceleration.

<comment><USER18> Hyper-V runs under Fusion, Qubes OS and Xen also work. Have not tested others, but this is one area where Fusion excels. Yes it will be slower, but for testing the concept that is usually fine.

<comment><USER16> I needed Xen for some experimentation. I had trouble running alpine-xen-3.4.4 in Fusion. XenServer 7 seems to work in Fusion, but I don't like it. I finally managed to get alpine-xen running inside KVM (Ubuntu 16.04) inside Fusion.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Death is not the end: video games wrecked my idea of mortality - <AUTHOR> http://www.hopesandfears.com/hopes/culture/video-games/213589-dying-in-video-games <comment><USER2> I'll be perfectly honest...I found this article to be not only pointless, but full of false ideas as well. I'd rather read Elements of Style all over again than read that poor excuse of an essay.

One thing really irked me...the author states that initially "...death was a failure state because it required little explanation and was easy to quantify from a programming and visual standpoint."

Bullshit. Death is a failure state because it's a natural mode of failure for a hero on an adventure trying to fight off a horde of koopas/moblins/thugs/zombies/aliens/etc. Developers used death not as an easy way to signify failure, but as a sensible way to signify failure.

Sure, he can bring up games like Super Dodge Ball to illustrate his point that the mechanism of death was sometimes forced into the game to convey failure scenarios, but then what about games like Duck Hunt, Sim City, and Super Tecmo Bowl? In not one of those games did your avatar 'die' in any failure scenario. Failure was denoted in a multitude of other ways in those games.

</comment><comment><USER3> This discussion really reminds me of _Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead_ , which has the best view of death I've ever encountered. A specific line stands out:

> _No, no, no… Death is… not. Death isn 't. You take my meaning. Death is the > ultimate negative. Not-being._

Well, perhaps it works better in context, but it's just such a succinct summary. "Death isn't."

An even more pertinent part involves some actors talking about death on the stage. Acted death is nothing like actual death—it's far more believable. Death on the stage feels pretty similar to death in a game.

> _GUIL (fear, derision): Actors! The mechanics of cheap melodrama! That isn > 't death!

(More quietly.) You scream and choke and sink to your knees, but it doesn't bring death home to anyone-it doesn't catch them unawares and start the whisper in their skulls that says-"One day you are going to die."

(He straightens up.) You die so many times; how can you expect them to believe in your death?

PLAYER: On the contrary, it's the only kind they do believe. They're conditioned to it._

The whole play is worth reading about death, but that passage, and the part that follows, stand out specifically.

</comment><comment><USER4> Over the past five years, I've been actively researching game-development. The truth is that everything you see in-game is faked in one way or another. Faking things is _really really hard_.

Realistic death doesn't tie into the general character animation model because they're skeletal-based animations and not physical ones (again, fake). When rag-doll physics is employed the skeletal-based animated body is simply swapped-out in-place. It's _really hard_ to physically simulate 'a bullet going through a human stomach', and honestly there are more important things in games to focus on financially.

> the most apparent conclusion is that games are using this fatalism as a > crutch, because they don't know what else to do with it.

It's sentences like these that make me think the author has completely neglected the technical and financial difficulty of game development.

Morally, the author does a great job portraying the non-gamer (read: "normal person") ideology of what death should be: special, eventful, meaningful, a thought-provoking once in a lifetime experience and conclusion to your story.

As someone whose dealt with death more in his life than most probably will in their entire life -- it's not any of those things _to the person dying_.

Death for you _is_ a binary switch, and once you're gone, you are gone. Games do a good job portraying that.

I'll end this with just one of my favorite quotes.

"Nothing" isn't better or worse than anything. Nothing is just... Nothing..." \- Aria Stark, GoT

<comment><USER5> > It's sentences like these that make me think the author has completely > neglected the technical and financial difficulty of game development.

I tend to disagree. If the creators (and/or the players) thought it was important to portray death more accurately, effort would go into it. Look at the effort that goes into boob physics. The fact that that's even a term shows that video game writers are more than willing to work on simulating things that are _really hard_ if they think it will sell games.

The fact that it wouldn't is the point.

<comment><USER6> I disagree with the part you quoted too. First of all, games are art form, they're not purely money driven, and some are not even tech driven, but they _drive tech_.

Secondly, games were experimenting _a lot_ with death. It used to be that your character just fell and disappeared. Then you could wound or chop off its limbs. It would die differently when shot than when falling, etc.

Heck, Dwarf Fortress actually _does_ simulate arrows penetrating internal organs and its consequences in great detail.

The ultimate reason why games portray death in simplified, binary way is the same as reason why movies portray death in simplified, binary way - because if you went into gory details of last moments of a person with a lung punctured by a bullet, desperately trying to catch a breath while slowly bleeding out, calling out to his god or his family, _your player would freak out_ and probably puke. That is assuming that you'd be allowed to sell the game in the first place.

Games and movies are meant to be enjoyable, not disturbing, so death is always simplified, unless there's a strong reason to go into details.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> At a fundamental level, video games are about control---what you can control and how, when, in what contexts. It is the interactivity of the game media that separates it from other media.

Death acts as a convenient lose-state because it's at first approximation a loss of control---transitioning from life to death (for a player-controlled avatar) is transitioning from a state where you can control an aspect of the world directly via your will to a point where your will no longer has bearing on the simulation playing out. It's convenient to use that no-control state as an indication that the player has done something "incorrect," i.e. "You messed up, we're going to punish you by time-out in the corner" (even if the time-out is just the few moments it takes to respawn).

All of that having been said, I wouldn't agree with the author that death in games is a "crutch," per se, but I think there are other facets of death that are explorable that most games do not. Some games do; Wing Commander and the much-maligned Steel Battalion: Heavy Armor have the interesting aspect in that your decisions in play would cost you members of your team---and those costs were permanent (for a given session of the game's linear narrative). But in terms of what the player directly experiences, death is often just cutting of the strings between the controller and the on-screen avatar. Maybe there's room to grow there?

<comment><USER8> Your comment reminds me of that novel www.lightspeedmagazine.com/fiction/exhalation/

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> > Video Games have gradually turned death, the most (only?) influential and > thought-provoking aspect of human existence, into a nearly-unexamined > cliché.

Death? That thing that happens to everybody and everything (except for that one weird jellyfish). That thing that's is random (oh look, a brick just fell off the truck in front on me and it went through a car window immediately snuffing out the passenger's life), capricious (childhood cancer?), and just plain everyday (most people eat other animals on a daily basis).

Additionally, if you look at history you'll see that attitudes towards death vary greatly. From celebrations of the dead, to fear of the dead, to just a shrug.

Meanwhile you have video games that play with the idea of death and destruction, just like much of Indo-European epics have for millennia.

God of War has you killing the gods and everything in your path, including innocents. All because you killed your family.

Super Meat Boy has a brilliant scene when you first get to the afterlife and you see thousands of copies of you raining down into a hellscape. I didn't count, but as the game keeps track of how many times you've died, I wouldn't be surprised if it's raining the dead versions of all your failures.

Then there's the really disturbing (in the good way) take of Binding of Isaac or Braid or Limbo. Even mainstream games like Final Fantasy will play with it.

Video games are great for exploring the ideas of death and life. Sometimes they treat it sadly, sometimes is relatively inconsequential, and sometimes it can even be humorous. Honestly, I find they treat death better than most other mediums.

<comment><USER10> If the "thousands of copies raining down into a hellscape" bit is in a level, then this TAS suggests that it does keep track, as I don't see that happening. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JHPrmQS29k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JHPrmQS29k)

If it's in one of the cutscenes I have no idea, as those always get skipped in a TAS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> My goodness, so much rambling (excuse my bluntness). I really tried to find a single thought of value in the piece; I failed. It is literally void of content, except for the names of some games in which you can die.

<comment><USER12> Indeed, he fails to come to any point at all..

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "FPS Doug" instantly comes to mind.

"Sometimes I think maybe I want to join the army. I mean, it's basically like FPS, except better graphics. But, what happens if I get lag out there? I'm dead! I mean, I even heard there aren't any respawn points in RL." [0]

[0][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9qXbgrx9rg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9qXbgrx9rg)

<comment><USER14> uuuuuughhhh I completely forgot about those videos.

<comment><USER15> BOOM HEADSHOT!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I was really hoping Dark Souls was one of his examples. The game incorporates its own take on death/mortality in a way that no other game touches upon. It's also brutally hard and death is actually expected part of the experience; often you can't get past an area without dying first and in a few sequence, you have to die to advance the story.

<comment><USER17> In Dark Souls, you _are_ dead. Undead. That's the story. When your character is _defeated_ , your essence goes back to the checkpoint because of a magic doodad (that no-one remembers (or manually uses the item, for that matter)).

While in terms of playing a video game that's all nonsense - you have a character, it runs around doing things until it 'dies', so we talk of being defeated as "I died" \- in Dark Souls you don't "die", and that's a fundamental part of the story. It's why you are where you are, why the things you fight are where they are. Why some things you fight disappear in a puff of magic smoke, and other things leave corpses. You can temporarily 'become human' in Dark Souls, but that's really just an improved link to the human essence - you don't actually 'return to life'. It really is a beautifully subtle and complex game with it's underlying backstory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think the author missed the most obvious point. Let me copy what I originally wrote in a subthread:

The ultimate reason why games portray death in simplified, binary way is the same as reason why movies portray death in simplified, binary way - because if you went into gory details of last moments of a person with a lung punctured by a bullet, desperately trying to catch a breath while slowly bleeding out, calling out to his god or his family, your player would freak out and probably puke. That is assuming that you'd be allowed to sell the game in the first place.

Games and movies are meant to be enjoyable, not disturbing, so death is always simplified, unless there's a strong reason to go into details.

</comment><comment><USER18> Movies, TV, games...they all desensitize us (everyday Americans, at least) to death, or a certain view of it, in so many ways. Yet, we're all (soldiers excluded) incredibly disconnected to death, to the point where we're actually trying to solve the problem of death. As if it's something we can logically reason out of our lives with science and medicine.

Seems like 100 years ago, people were dying a lot, all the time. Brothers, sisters, parents, friends...people died a lot more often. Now that medical science has advanced so much, we don't have to deal with it nearly as often. I wouldn't say we are desensitized to death. On the contrary, I think we are actually hypersensitized to it.

I think our media representations of death are a product of our own crippling fear of death trying to convince ourselves that it's not that big of a deal.

<comment> vezzy-fnord I'm struggling to observe any consistency on your part.

You say we are hypersensitized to death, yet also think it's not a big deal.

We are trying to solve the problem of death, yet in doing so we are disconnected to it. The implication being that the drive to achieve immortality and/or extend lifespans is some recent phenomenon that emerged in the last century, which is patently false, and that trying to reason about ending a phenomenon means we are oblivious of its true nature, which is again false, and odd.

In addition, I'm skeptical of your implication that the rate of emotional sensitivity to death increases with more exposure to it. It should be the opposite.

<comment><USER19>
        You say we are hypersensitized to death, yet also think it's not a big deal.

The GP didn't say that we think death is no big deal, he said that we _are attempting to convince ourselves_ that it is no big deal.

        We are trying to solve the problem of death, yet in doing so we are disconnected to it.

You have the causality backwards.

        In addition, I'm skeptical of your implication that the rate of emotional sensitivity to death increases with more exposure to it. It should be the opposite.

The GP said the opposite.

The GP's argument is that because we as a society are less connected to death that we are therefore more afraid of it than ever, that the commonality of death in the 1800s made it something less fearful, more banal, to them than to us.

<comment> vezzy-fnord My first statement was admittedly ambiguous: I meant that the GP implies that the figurative "we" think it's not a big deal from his position, not that the GP themselves think that.

We are disconnected from death, and in doing so we are trying to solve its disputed problem? Doesn't seem to be the case, as human desire for immortality is quite ancient, precisely because of how visible death was.

As for the last statement, the GP contradicted themselves w.r.t. whether we are desensitized or hypersensitized in the beginning and end of their post, respectively.

<comment><USER18> > they all desensitize us .. to death, or a certain view of it

This could probably have been written better. I was saying that we are desensitized to the _idea_ of death but not to death itself. The two are logically relatable but not the same.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> When are we going to accept the scientific evidence that video games (and movies before them (and books before them)) don't fundamentally change a person's philosophy? Books in particular are really good at helping you explore ideas and challenge your preconceived notions, but the subconscious effect is akin to hypnosis, completely incapable of making you do or believe something that you ordinarily wouldn't have.

Concern trolling makes for a good read I guess. People are wired to always be on the lookout for the next good thing to be concerned about.

<comment><USER21> Can you provide some links to the scientific papers asserting that media doesn't fundamentally change people's philosophies?

Also, if media can't change people's philosophies, what does according to science?

<comment><USER20> The consistent trend going all the way back to the Payne Fund Studies is that someone somewhere thinks they can show some alarmist correlation between media and behavior.

However, the trend always disappears once you've accounted for shoddy research and disregarded short-term effects (i.e. hormone responses). I could cherry- pick you some recent results; the most popular lately seem to be video games and violence or video games and sexism. It wouldn't be very convincing since you can ostensibly find a variety of papers that say exactly the opposite. I urge you to browse through the google scholar results and draw your own conclusions.

Please do note: I'm arguing a subtle distinction here between subconscious subversion and conscious consideration. After seeing a horrifying documentary about war, I might consciously change my philosophy on death because the source is reliable and the information is believable/consistent. However, seeing silly deaths in a video game can't influence me in the opposite way because the source is dismissible and the conclusion is fantastical.

So, to answer your second question in an unsatisfying way: I think it's clear that people change their own philosophies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wish real life had the concept of "savegames".

<comment><USER23> Read the Takeshi Kovacs novels by Richard Morgan for some interesting ideas about this. In them, you can back up your mind and switch it to different bodies. If you get killed, you can restore your last backup but you lose any memories from then on.

Where do these bodies come from? Well one form of punishment is where they back up your mind and sell off your body (why waste it?)... When you get out of prison, you end up with a different body. Bodies are expensive, so getting out is only viable if you are rich.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Some of the single player parts of the Call of Duty series have featured you dying bad deaths.

The one that sticks in my mind is in Modern Warfare (I think) when the nuke goes off while you're fleeing the city. You assume you're going to survive. Then the nuke goes off, your helicopter crashes, everyone around you is dead, you stagger out, look around a little bit (still assuming you'll be saved), fall over, and die.

<comment><USER6> Yes, that was Modern Warfare 1. I remember that part; it felt both sad and disturbing. You weren't just fleeing the city, you just finished an emergency rescue of a _single_ person from the battlefield. Then boom, 40 000 souls are gone. I think Modern Warfare 1 and 2 were the first games when during the plot your protagonist died suddenly and unexpectedly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I am an avid gamer and I think about death all the time. If you were to actually take anything from games, you would realize how fragile life really is.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm not sure what this title is about. "Wrecked" has such a negative connotation attached to the word. Are you sure your view of death is worse than it was before video games? What are the implications of your view being changed and doo you behave in a worse way now than you imagine you would with a different view of death?

</comment><comment><USER27> I dunno, I feel the games are cherry-picked. For example, just off the top of my head, "The Last of Us" had a great death scene right in the intro. And for that matter, people still talk about Aeris dying in FF7. These are super mainstream, blockbuster games so I'm not sure that the thesis is valid.

</comment><comment><USER28> The author mentions that many games now treat death as comedic or at least have backed away from in-your-face player death. I would love to see their take on death in the Dead Space series, where you are frequently treated to the sight of your character's body being dismembered by your enemies.

</comment><comment><USER17> Better not let this author watch an old Road Runner cartoon...

</comment><comment><USER29> I expected at least a mention to Planescape: Torment.

</comment><comment><USER30> Edge of Tomorrow, anyone? Heh.

<comment><USER6> _This is not the end..._

I must admit, I loved the movie. Went to see it twice, actually. (Watch. Contemplate. Repeat.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> but what if the human playing the game is not kill?

</comment><comment><USER32> Death in videogames is, oddly, opposite to death in real life.

In real life, we prefer to avoid things that can kill us, for obvious reasons. In video games, the effect of death is to keep people playing, not just in an abstract "making things interesting" sense, but in a measurable Skinnerian sort of way.

Also, one of the reasons why 1980s arcade and NES games were so brutally, unforgivingly difficult (with "no continues" the norm rather than exception) was to keep people playing. The oldest games weren't actually very big: the original Dragon Quest 1 was under 64 kB. Constantly killing the player (with no continues) allowed a game that might take 30 minutes for a skilled player to take 20-40 hours for a beginner. By the time someone could actually win one of these games, they had a deep expertise and that shared knowledge was enough to create cultures around these games, which made them both "viral" in their time and lasting into ours.

It's odd to think that something we aggressively avoid in real life was, in no uncertain terms, a killer (pun not intended) feature for video games.

</comment><comment><USER33> I think it's a personal thing that can't be applied generally. I find a lot of the death in video games very disturbing and not casual at all. I think all you have to do is look at the right things to see it.

With games being more complex and having higher budgets for things like special effects and voice acting, killing people isn't just making some pixels disappear. Take for example using a corrosive gun against a human in Borderlands, or shooting a bad guy with a fire arrow in Tomb Raider (the most recent one): Killing enemies this way usually involve them dying slowly as they are corroded away or burned alive. There are voice actors who act out horrible agonizing death rattles for that (in both instances, there is an initial painful scream, a second of panicked realization, then horrible screaming for seconds afterwards). Animators had to make people writhe around in agony as they slowly die. Game designers made a conscious choice about how they would proceed with the deaths of people - these things have costs and I would imagine they aren't small.

More obviously with Tomb Raider: there are some horribly gruesome death sequences for Lara if you mess up. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen her get impaled, or crushed, or shot and all of the deaths are horrible and disturbing. Every time, I've felt it, and thought about how horrible it must be to die that way. I don't think I can really ask for more from a video game when it comes to expressing death, while still making a game enjoyable to play.</comment>


Javelin (JS) - <AUTHOR> http://www.javelinjs.com/ <comment><USER2> What is that hacked by chinese tag in the corner?</comment>


IP over Avian Carriers - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers <comment><USER2> This makes me smile every time I read it, but it's interesting to see the recent activity, from IP6, to implementations and races between IPoAC and other media.

And just to say, people are often surprised at how readable the RFCs are. But they are _intended_ to be understood, each one is explicitly intended to be the document you use to actually implement something.

There is value in learning how to read an RFC, and RFC1149 is as good a place to start as any. Others that are worth reading include:

* RFC 768 : User Datagram Protocol (UDP)

* RFC 793 : Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)</comment>


HTML 5 Won't Be Ready Until 2022. Yes, 2022 - <AUTHOR> http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/HTML_5_Won_t_Be_Ready_Until_2022DOT_Yes__2022DOT

<comment><USER2> haha i love the phony outrage by "jeff croft" in response:

 _"I care about right fucking now. My clients care about right fucking now. Our users care about right fucking now. "_

wow, he really has his irish up! hey folks, don't piss off jeff croft! he has clients!

you have to hand it to jeff, it takes a big man to swing at a slow pitch over the plate. does he piss his pants over poverty or injustice? NO! but show him an obviously pointless-to-the-brink-of-trolling "due date" for html5 and LOOK OUT. you just got played jeff.

only thing funnier is scoble's new "get in your face" conference response method, when he hops off the table and goes directly to some dude and screams in his face. scoble, my wife could kick your fat ass

stuff the faux indignation and keep your panties on ladies, the next guy you try to rip your shirt off in front of might have been in the marines

</comment><comment><USER3> I think as long as browsers start implementing HTML5 _now_ , we could actually see widespread adoption by 2012-2013. Which is reasonable. But we'll always have IE slowing that adoption down ;).

Anyways, as long as there's a large enough backlash to this roadmap, I'm hoping the process can be sped up by at least a few years.

<comment><USER4> Somebody should just make a HTML5 ActiveX control so we can all just get on with life.

After reading this:

[http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080819-mozilla- drags-...](http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080819-mozilla-drags-ie- into-the-future-with-canvas-element-plugin.html)

I think the right solution for living with IE is just to use it as a vehicle for modern web experience plug-ins. Give people the chance to download the plug-ins when they visit your site and before too long enough sites are doing it that it's like java or flash, in that enough people have it that you can expect it to be there.

On the other hand downloading 234234234 plugins for IE is going to reduce the public's reservations about plugins and they'll end up with a lot more spyware and other network gremlins, but that's the fate they've chosen, I guess.

<comment><USER5> It would be cool if we could get a plugin that implements the Gecko/Webkit engine :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This title seems to be a complete beat up.

It says "it won't be ready until 2022", but then goes on to say the widespread adoption of final drafts is expected by 2012... It even mentions that the 2012 draft is by far the more important?

It doesn't even go into the reasons for 10 years between the final draft 2012 and the final proposal 2022... In the actual blog the substance seems to be that the 10 years is to provide additional robustness via test suites.

Whatever your view "won't be ready" seems extreme.

</comment><comment><USER7> You've just gotta account for Internet Explorer, all the respectable browsers will have HTML5 support by 2012, while IE will trail behind and have support around 2022, along with all the changes they think is necessary. "Microsoft HTML™"

Maybe IE will be dead by then......hopefully....

</comment><comment><USER8> CSS 2 was specified in 1998, and updated to be more realistic in 2005, and even today no browsers follow the standard to the letter - although both Gecko and Webkit admittedly both have a good go at it. Let's not forget that Hixie has seen this first hand maintaining the Acid tests. Having realism on how long standards take to be implemented completely doesn't mean that many of the added features aren't useful in the meantime.

<comment><USER9> Good point. Regardless of when HTML5's specs are nailed down, it will still be quite a long time before they're implemented in browsers. Instead of sensational posts, I'd like to see more developers working on useful tools we can use now, like BlueprintCSS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'll tell you a story kid, listen carefully...

Ten internet years is a very loooong time, just look back at 1998 and see how things have changed.

I tell you, one man will come with a new browser and a new markup language and kids like you everywhere will use it, 100 million downloads in a week will mark its arrival, you'll know it, wait patiently.

That's how you replace the web, and all old behemoths who tried to kill it will finally see it die a sudden death for good, and good thing is, they will die too for all the bad things they've done, we never forget.

And they won't have participation in the new web, we won't let them play. I swear by all gods we won't.

For we are legion...

<comment><USER11> Voted down for the legion reference.</comment></comment>


Nuclear could be the clean energy source the world needs - <AUTHOR> http://cnn.com/2019/09/16/perspectives/nuclear-energy-green-goals/index.html <comment><USER2> Only if its nuclear fusion

<comment><USER3> Or whenever thorium becomes viable

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> ah no... it's not clean... the places where radioactive materials are mined are inhabitable forever. If something goes wrong the place where the plant was build it inhabitable as well. And we have no idea how to make storage places of radioactive materials safe for future generations. These costs are put on states and countries while companies are reaping the rewards. Nuclear power might be clean in the CO² sense, but it's pretty damn toxic in the long run...</comment>


Solving Jepsen with OpenCensus Distributed Tracing - <AUTHOR> https://dgraph.io/blog/post/solving-jepsen-with-opencensus/ <comment><USER2> "Solving Jepsen" is kind of a misleading way to say "debugging issues found by Jepsen". The former made me expect some kind of general solution to distributed consistency.

> And ultimately, adding quality tests is the best you can do to improve your > software.

Tests are great, but that's not "the best you can do". You can redesign things to be simpler, and there's even an example of that earlier in the article:

> By re-architecting the design, the code could be hugely simplified. So, I > had rewritten the whole thing from scratch over the past few months.

> The rewritten, simplified codebase did fix a variety of Jepsen issues. The > last major stronghold was the bank test.

A better design can make it easier to informally "prove" the absence of certain issues.

</comment><comment><USER3> The Jepsen report referred to can be found at [http://jepsen.io/analyses/dgraph-1.1.1](http://jepsen.io/analyses/dgraph-1.1.1).

<comment><USER4> Does anyone have a rough idea what Jepsen charges to do testing?

<comment><USER5> Extrapolating from the numbers here, probably low 6 figures as of a couple years ago: [https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/74nt43/jepsen_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/74nt43/jepsen_hazelcast_383/do1cmff/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is a great debugging story. I don't know if dgraph hosts the traces themselves or some other service</comment>


Death by GPS: why do we follow digital maps into dodgy places? - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/death-by-gps/ <comment><USER2> I think this is more a problem of us being taught in school not to question authorities "who ought to know better" and thereby unlearning to rely on instincts. Teachers in school, GPS on the road, weather forecasts or any apps we use when we can use some extra expertise. I've:

* told a friend in a coastal desert village "It's going to rain, better get the laundry from the roof." \- He grew up there and never left village town but still, instead of relying on instincts, took out his smartphone and checked the forecast "No way, mate, no rain today." He had not finished his sentence when the first drop hit the screen of his smartphone.

* pointed fellow passengers on a boat to the rising moon. They took out their smartphone, argued it cannot be the moon because their app says it's going to rise in another direction. Then the app corrected itself, now pointing at the clearly visible rising moon.

* spent a beautiful morning with a flatmate in the garden of our Venice Beach apartment talking about how beautiful and warm the day is. We go back inside, she looks at the weather app and exclaims "holy shit, it's hot outside!"

</comment><comment><USER3> A long time ago I was working on a mobile application that used OpenStreetMap data for navigation. I was always really scared that something like what was mentioned in the article would happen. Its a difficult problem to solve because you need so much robust information, and that information can rapidly change as well due to construction or weather (roads can be seasonal etc).

I can only imagine this problem getting worse with self-driving smart cars where the driver probably won't paying _any_ attention to the road. Imagine taking a nap and waking up stranded somewhere with no mobile signal.

<comment><USER4> As I commented on another link to this article, the majority (though not all) of the real horror stories tend to be in the American West. The real issue there is that, contra the full life experience of many visitors, a lot of roads are seasonal, very rough, or just plain undriveable without high clearance 4WD and the ability to operate it.

This is really a maps issue rather than a GPS issue. And there have been tragedies based on people following very secondary roads on paper maps as well. The issue is that there's not really an easy classification scheme. After all, there are well graded dirt roads that can be easily travelled by passenger cars that steadily degrade to "I can't believe someone could drive this in a car" levels. And all ranges of roads in between.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I read an article about the U.S. military's research into AI. Their conclusion is that AI isn't reliable or creative enough to be put in charge; a human needs to be in charge who takes the AI's input, but overrules it as needed.</comment>


Libyan Disconnect - <AUTHOR> http://www.renesys.com/blog/2011/02/libyan-disconnect-1.shtml

<comment><USER2> _"Update 06:39 UTC

Two-thirds of Libyan routes came back to life at 6:01 UTC (8:01 local time), and the remainder were restored nine minutes later. At the moment, spot checks of Libyan domains and traceroutes into affected networks indicate that connectivity has been restored, and Libya is back on the Internet."_</comment>


Save IE6 - <AUTHOR> http://www.saveie6.com/

<comment><USER2> This is like saying 'lets save the VCR'...it's a dying technology that no one wants to save.

</comment><comment><USER3> haha.. ok, that's awesome!

(The SaveIE6 campaign was launched on April 1, 2009 and will last until April 1, 2010.)</comment>


Make it work. Make it pretty. Make it fast. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.opportunitycloud.com/2009/10/04/make-it-work-make-it-pretty-make-it-fast/ <comment><USER2> > "My education is software engineering (I have a masters degree) and when I > was fresh out of school (which I was 10 years ago) I used to spend a lot of > time drawing class diagrams and object interaction flows and lots of other > paper stuff that didn't take me anywhere closer to a working program."

i have a master's, too, and i can relate to the progression from wanting "well designed code" to wanting "products that work and look pretty."

i don't see the goals as mutually exclusive. writing diagrams, and indeed doing all sorts of on-paper design work, is often necessary for either better programming or better teamwork.

i've worked with people who can keep crazy data structures and algorithms in their head. that's cool. maybe i'm all modest and unhackerly, but i can clearly see limitations in my mental space. i love loading problems and solutions into my head, but the real problems and solutions are often bigger than my head (elegance and the desire for simplicity aside...they'are awesome, too).

the point is that it's impossible to work _with_ non-writers, unless the "collaboration" is entirely modular. sometimes you need to hire a person to write a library for you. seldom do you need to spend a day reading and poking crazy code in order to understand the datastructures for a small tweak. look, i love open source and i've gotten pretty damn good and groking code. it doesn't matter. pictures can still display relationships better than code. it's faster. diagrams as documentation rocks. just don't go overboard. do exactly as much as is useful. just like simplifying, right?

for me, i'm a better programmer when i write things down. after a few months, i'm happy when i can go back to an old section of code and see immediately what's going on. it means my friction for getting started is close to 0. i write down object models for all my databases because seeing a bunch of boxes and arrows in a single glance is a lot faster than scrolling through code.

i wrote my own python script for converting django models into omnigraffle diagrams, and vice versa. sometimes i need the diagrams before i even write code, as i'm figuring things out. sometimes i need the diagrams later, when i'm adding features.

i also used <http://www.websequencediagrams.com> for the first time a few weeks ago to quickly draft up the complex interactions between a firefox extension, server and Amazon's FPS. looking at that diagram i know i have the logic right.

the code is almost boring to write once i have a diagram.

writing the _correct_ code _faster_ is a big win for me. i think some folks are afraid to admit that because it seems "unhackerly" or "unbrilliant." forget about that. being smart means doing exactly what you need to do to get the job done right, whatever the constraints on _right_ are.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, good thoughts. Most of the coding I've done in the last 2-3 years have been in my own projects, and it certainly helps when you're your own customer.

I've also done lots of typical web stuff and once you've coded 5-10 html/logic/SQL-projects you start seeing the similarities and it's easier to go straight to code.

If there's anything I put any significant time into before coding that would be the data model. It's hard to change built in restrictions.</comment></comment>


My shitty AirBnB experience - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@caio_gondim/my-airbnb-experience-11837d94491 <comment><USER3> I had a very similar frustrating experience with AirBnB. Essentially, my rental turned out to be an illegal sublet that hosted a large party the weekend before. There was still trash strewn about. The real owner contacted the neighbors and they (kindly) informed me of the situation.

I immediately contacted AirBnB, here's a quick summary of what happened:

\- On hold for 30 min \- Offered a $50 coupon for another booking (I was traveling with 5 other people) \- We had a full day of activities so I booked a rental with instant confirmation. \- The customer service rep scolded me because I was supposed wait for the coupon code (which was sent 30 minutes after I booked). \- The coupon could not be retroactively applied to my new booking. \- Only after tweeting their customer service did someone else reach out. \- Every new customer rep had a different answer for me. \- In the end took 2 months and a credit card chargeback to sort everything out.

My whole experience left me with a whole bunch of questions.

\- If your $20B valuation comes from connecting rentors and rentees, shouldn't your customer service be stellar?

\- If something goes wrong (at the fault of the rentor), why is the onus on me to solve it (imagine if this happened at a hotel)?

\- There's a lot more time and emotion invested in making an AirBnB rental over a car share (Uber, Lyft). So when things go wrong, why does it feel like AirBnB treats it as the same (e.g. "just book another AirBnB")?

\- To cut down on illegal rentals, AirBnB could choose to ask for a copy of the lease agreement. It's an obvious answer, but why not?

When everything goes right, I'm sure AirBnb is fine. But if you have an experience when something goes wrong, you'll understand why I no longer use AirBnb.

<comment><USER4> So let me say this to others who may be reading:

If you book something like this, and your expectations are not met and you call the company and they do not provide adequate compensation, do not bullshit with calling them back or tweeting their customer service or whatever. Tell them you are going to call your credit card company and dispute the charge. Period. Normally this is a magic keyword to immediately remedy the situation, and if the situation is still not fixed, then your credit card company will deal with it for you. This is particularly true if you have a high-end credit card like the Amex platinum or CSR. No need for you to screw around with bullshit customer service.

Example: GF and I booked a tour. Tour bus didn't show up. Called, emailed, no response. Called credit card company. Transaction reversed within 24 hours after the credit card company called and took care of the situation (CSR in this case).

<comment><USER5> I think your advice is reasonable, but I believe it's not sufficient.

Yes, vendors are somewhat pained by chargebacks, but many CC will ask you to resolve with them first.

Ultimately when AirBnB has this failure in quality, they should provide you a free room of equal or greater value AND not charge you.

AirBnB seems unwilling to invest in quality, which makes me believe they are not delivering a quality product.

<comment><USER4> As of yet I have not run into an issue with my credit card company has asked me to resolve an issue so long as I had previously attempted to resolve it. I don't disagree with what AirBnB should probably provide as compensation, I'm just trying to save you from wasting time or dealing with stuff that you just don't need to be dealing with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My experience out of four AirBnB stays was that two were as advertised and two were complete dirty slums, nothing like the photos or reviews suggested. We had to leave and get a hotel. The reviews were all 5 star raving about how beautiful, amazing, etc they were with 40-50 reviews each.

Has anyone else had this experience? It made us unable to trust the review system because in this case it was so clearly rigged somehow. And without being able to trust the review system AirBnB is next to useless.

<comment><USER7> I don't think the reviews are rigged per se. Here's what I think causes this. I was a superhost for about a year renting out a spare room.

Superhost status seems to increase your position in search results, and acts as an indication of high-performance/great accommodations leading to more renters being interested and you charging higher prices charged. Most hosts want to achieve this rating. Part of superhost status is maintaining an insanely good rating, I think > 4.5 avg for rolling 3 month periods. Renters seem to know this, and in fear of being somebody that gives low reviews, will inflate their reviews. I could be wrong, but I think my wife and I would review accounts and lease to renters who had given more positive reviews.

This may seem selfish but it only takes 1 3-star review from middle-aged people comparing you to a luxury hotel to learn.

<comment><USER8> Are you saying that I, as someone who needs a place to stay, am more likely to give a 5-star rating to a slum so that if I ever apply to stay with a superhost, they'll look at my rating history and be more likely to approve me?

<comment><USER9> "my wife and I would review accounts and lease to renters who had given more positive reviews"

That is exactly what he/she is saying. I'm not actually surprised by this.

5-star ratings are a poor means of actually ranking things as they are generally currently implemented - especially when there is no guidance as to what each star means.

Big issues include:

As per this post, if PartyA needs high ratings and can see all the ratings PartyB provides to other PartyA types, they will certainly favor those PartyB types who rate higher.

The "average" on most of these 1 to 5 star scales is not a 3. E.g. the average Uber driver rating is 4.7 (or something) stars. So what does that mean to the user? I need to remember 4.7 is ok but 4.8 is good? Shouldn't the app provide guidance to users? Say to the user, "if you had a good overall drive - <USER2> this 3 stars".

Why doesn't the AirBnB app "curve" ratings as well? Meaning apply my ratings to a bell curve with the average being a 3 - i.e. if my average rating is 4.8 with a high of 5 and a low of 4.6 - why doesn't the app just translate my 4.6 a "1", my 5 a "5" and curve the rest of my ratings so my average fits on the scale? Then users would know that a "3" is average - which for AirBNB might mean "good"? And a 4.8 is truly exceptional?

And of course none of this addresses the problem where my "exceptional" does not match yours. Maybe I like I like eco-tourism and camping, and you like Ritz Carltons and gold martinis. Or maybe I like slow and safe drivers and you like fast drives who run yellow lights?

Regardless, I'm tired of all these meaningless inflations.

<comment><USER10> What's the rationale for allowing Airbnb hosts to see the reviews that a renter has given other rentals?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The first bait-and-switch apartment listed "Entire home/apt" with 4.5 stars rating is here: [https://www.airbnb.com/rooms/14489610](https://www.airbnb.com/rooms/14489610)

 _1 or 2 of my very nice people will be in the office upstairs to help with any questions during daytime. (the bathroom is shared on Mo, Wed, Fri during daytime)_

How is this even legal?

<comment><USER12> In NYC its actually illegal to do a short term sublet of an entire apartment. So this is a common workaround so they can give you a short term sublet. They can claim that they just rented you some space from their office so they don't get fined for short term subletting. They can also tell you that the space is private (because by NYC standards it basically is private, you get desensitized to stuff like this when you live in close quarters with lots of people).

<comment><USER13> I'm thinking AirBNB should be enforcing the accepted definition of private, not NYC's.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> When using Airbnb, the consumer should approach it as if they are taking on risk that some number of reservations will fail, and you'll have to pay a premium to find lodging. If your perceived expected value is greater when taking that risk, Airbnb is for you. If you're not willing to entertain that possibility, you should avoid it altogether.

I don't think Airbnb service handled this appropriately, but I find companies' service centers to be less than helpful most of the time.

<comment><USER14> > the consumer should approach it as if they are taking on risk that some > number of reservations will fail, and you'll have to pay a premium to find > lodging.

While that may be true now, that's a pretty shitty deal to actually have to take as the norm. Having to always have a backup plan makes travel budgeting unpredictable for a lot of people.

I'd be curious to see what the rates are on reservations falling through, also compared to the same rates for the hotel industry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> > Since I don't have a credit card, I asked my beloved mother to use hers.

You should never ever let other people use your credit card or ask to use other people's credit card. Credit card is called personal card for a reason. There is so much fraud, credit card theft going on that it is surprising that your transaction succeeded at all.

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm amazed at the amount of victim blaming in the comments.

You book a private place you expect a private place. Anywhere else in the world except for the US thesr fine print tactics are considered void.

You can book over $1000 accommodations using Brazilian credit cards on other websites, it's clearly an Airbnb problem.

Finally, I'm disgusted to learn that hosts select guests based on how positive they are.

</comment><comment><USER17> What I am always curious about are all these rentals on AirBnB owned by the people renting it out? As I am renting myself and my rental agreement clearly states I can't underlet it: "Not assign, underlet or part with or share possession of the whole or any part of the Property."

Ain't this a normal item in an agreement? How does this work? Are they just breaking their agreement?

<comment><USER18> A fair amount of them are breaking their lease agreement, or doing it in violation of local laws. Walking down the Mission in SF, you'll find a fair number of orange sheets taped to apartments from the San Francisco Office of Short Term Rentals, informing the tenant that they are in violation of the SF Administrative Code Chapter 41A.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Airbnb is for when you want to have an adventure. It's not going to be easy, it may not be clean, but if you are the type of person who likes meeting new people and having interesting new experiences then go for it. If you expect a traditional hotel that's probably just not going to happen.

<comment><USER19> Incorrect, Airbnb is for when you want to have an apartment to stay in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> This sounds like a case of someone not reading the fine print, not doing their due diligence, and then complaining about their outcome. Which is fine, that's how most people go through life. But it's not particularly illustrative of a fundamental issue with AirBNB.

<comment><USER21> Not really. In the first instance the fine print literally contradicted something that was said earlier, if it says in big letters at the top "Entire home/apartment" then having fine print that contradicts that isn't reasonable, it's just a lie. In the second instance the host just never responded which once again isn't a fine print issue.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Other benefits of hotels: * All the cleaning makes bedbugs less of a worry * the doors actually lock properly * less barking dogs

</comment><comment><USER23> It's funny when I click on the JavaScript error image the page fails and has to reload.

Safari Mobile iPhone 7 plus 10.3.1

</comment><comment><USER24> Sorry but if you want to function in the US, get a credit card. The rest of the stuff sucks but the lack of a CC is on you.

<comment><USER25> that would have changed nothing--ie, the $1,000 limit is AirBnB's rule for Brazilian credit cards used to book US properties, i inferred, plus he had access to credit cards provided by family, co-workers, et al.

unless you mean by "get a credit card", get a _US_ credit card (which i suppose means a credit card issued by a US bank), then indeed, that would have solved the initial problem (of the $1,000 limit) and allowed him to book his first choice.

but is this reasonable? If a US citizen travels to Brazil should they have to get a credit card issued by a Brazilian bank?</comment></comment>


Word of the day: Passion - <AUTHOR> http://nesheimgroup.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/03/word_of_the_day_2.html <comment><AUTHOR> The one sentence that stood out the most to me from this article was "Pick your hill to die on."

Life's too short to work on something meaningless, a reminder to myself that nothing is more important than working towards your passion. I can see myself old, and on my death bed, regretting not taking the chance to change the world. And that, scares me.

</comment><comment><USER2> Fortunately it was 11:47 pm when I read this.

</comment><comment><USER3> I realize that it appears the same way on the article and you probably just copy-pasted, but please don't post article titles in all-caps.</comment>


Graphcool Framework Preview - <AUTHOR> https://blog.graph.cool/graphcool-framework-preview-ff42081b1333 <comment><USER2> This framework looks great - I've been using the GUI console and the ability to use git workflow and edit permissions using an IDE is promising. Having said that the console did make it a lot easier for me to try out the Graphcool.

I've been using graphcool to build my MVP on React + Apollo Client and I have to say thumbs up! It takes a lot of work out of building a CRUD backend. The community has been very helpful when I run into problems and there's no lock- in. I could build my own express GraphQL server and transfer over my data whilst keeping my frontend intact. Not possible to do this with firebase

</comment><comment><USER3> So now you can automate creating new APIs with this cli framework?</comment>


Ask HN: Who don't Hacker News discussion threads appear in web search results? - <AUTHOR>

I use Google and DuckDuckGo. The site's robots.txt file doesn't look like it does anything to preclude inclusion by the engines. <comment><USER2> They do

[https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22so+you+add+%22syn_maxfa...](https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22so+you+add+%22syn_maxfan%22+constraints+to+prevent+the+%22optimization%22&oq=%22so+you+add+%22syn_maxfan%22+constraints+to+prevent+the+%22optimization%22&aqs=chrome..69i57.1208j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8#q=%22syn_maxfan+constraints%22&filter=0)

Possibly you were searching for a thread that was too recent to have been indexed?

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm. Thanks.

> ...too recent to have been indexed? The opposite, actually. For example, I'd > think that searching Google for "disrespect CasperJS or PhantomJS" would, at > a minimum, return this discussion from a year back:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5344729](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5344729)</comment></comment>


How to make a voice-controlled robot arm for $55 - <AUTHOR> http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/98623-how-to-make-a-voice-controlled-robotic-arm-for-55?f=2

<comment><USER2> Important Warning For Small Inquisitive Children: Do _not_ begin with an Armatron[1]. You're ready to fiddle with all the wires and figure out a way to remotely operate the way-too-many-degrees-of-freedom controls, only to find that it's all mechanical, there's only a single motor running the whole thing![2], and your parents are probably going to be home before you can pick all the bits of gearbox out of the cat's dinner bowl and try to reassemble them. Claims that those grinding, crunching noises "were always there" are unlikely to pass muster.

[1] <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Armatron>

[2] <http://www.starborneworks.com/?p=22>

<comment><USER3> As I discovered with a similar system, a cheap arm's motions are also not easily repeatable. I wanted to pick up CDs and move them around via robotic arm, with something similar to the Armatron. We discovered that there's enough slop in the system as to make anything remotely precise impossible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the most annoying mobile scrolling I've ever seen. What could possess anyone to make this? Sorry to be off point, but the scrolling makes it half impossible to read.

</comment><comment><USER5> Steps include buying pre-made remote-controlled robot-arm from Maplin/OWI (<http://www.owirobot.com/products/Robotic-Arm-Edge.html>) for $55.99 and connecting it to a computer running Linux (which in this article seems to be free!) REEAAAALL awe-inspiring indeed. (read: linkbait) [EDIT: Just saw that you can also buy a 'USB interface' for it. Ha!]</comment>


The ultimate popularity proof of JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/benontherun/status/537580012892086272 <comment><USER2> What else as lame is popular out there? Join in!

[http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=justin%20bieber](http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=justin%20bieber)</comment>


Ask HN: Most effective path to become a solid systems practitioner? - <AUTHOR> Context: I'm a mid-tier dev at a BigCo, and I was never classically trained as a computer scientist. Lately, I've been interested in problem spaces where having a deeper systems knowledge (think databases, streaming systems, operating systems, distributed systems etc.) is incredibly beneficial. I haven't found a straight forward path to learn all this short of maybe doing a Masters degree.<p>Is there a set/sequence of resources/MOOCs that HN could recommendation on getting ramped up on these topics. I understand that it will likely be a multi-month journey at the very least, but I'm tired of hitting a ceiling on what I'm able to contribute to due to my lack of knowledge. <comment><USER2> Starting to feel like a parrot since I've recommended this book a few times already on HN but Designing Data Intensive Applications [0] is a great starting resource. I'm not affiliated in any way just a happy reader.

[0] [https://dataintensive.net/](https://dataintensive.net/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Click on 'old video' to see the lectures, this covers x86 arch from a programmer's perspective, such as writing cache friendly code [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./213/schedule.html](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./213/schedule.html) Database lectures here including a really good advanced playlist on building your own dbms [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHnBsf2rH-K7pn09rb3qvkA/pla...](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHnBsf2rH-K7pn09rb3qvkA/playlists) From there the book _Programming Rust_ is a great book about systems programming. There's also an OS class [https://www.rust- class.org/pages/classes.html](https://www.rust-class.org/pages/classes.html) or you can try taking some CS theory classes [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWnu2XymDtORV-- qG2uG5eQ/pla...](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWnu2XymDtORV-- qG2uG5eQ/playlists)

Andrew S Tanenbaum has a Distributed Systems and OS book too that most universities still use.

<comment><USER4> That Rust OS class is from 2014, and so was pre 1.0 and therefore near useless today. Phil Opp's work is preferred, for sure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I would learn AWS. Their GUI and the abstraction available in their PaaS services will allow you to build really cool "distributed" application without needing to know all the ins and outs of say Linux and Sambda and Kerberos that you would typically need. It would be a good introduction.

EDIT: and to learn AWS of course there is [https://acloud.guru](https://acloud.guru). Strange name of a site but def considered the best for learning AWS. I would focus on the AWS Solutions Architect courses if you need something to start with.

</comment><comment><USER6> Have you tried this ? [https://github.com/donnemartin/system-design- primer](https://github.com/donnemartin/system-design-primer)

<comment><USER7> imo the best way is to look at what other's have built. Here's some of my favorite talks that go from 0 users to millions.

Dropbox - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE4gwstWhmc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE4gwstWhmc)

Instagram - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNA2C1vC8FQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNA2C1vC8FQ)

Slack (bonus. not as applicable but good reminder of why initial architecture does matter) - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE9c9AZe- DY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE9c9AZe-DY)</comment></comment>


Convince me to ride roller coasters - <AUTHOR> http://shoptalkapp.com/blog/2009/9/29/convince-me-to-ride-roller-coasters

<comment><USER2> Good advice :)

>> "Fuel peer pressure: everyone's doing it"

I'd personally add a caveat here though. You don't want to over do this. If _too_ many people are trying to convince you to do something (Apple evangelists, git lovers, tweetaholics), quite a few people just close off and assume these people are madmen with an agenda.

Can end up polarizing people.

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice to see someone else had the same experience with roller coasters as me! Same with swimming too - I wonder if kids with a "scientific head" over- rationalize fears of things that look dangerous but that are, statistically, quite safe.

<comment><USER4> I never had a problem with roller coasters, even the ones that invert, even the ones that invert and the harness feels loose and you fall of your seat and know there's only a thin buckle holding you in place.

However swimming I had a problem with; I love to swim, but if anyone tries to dunk me I panic and I have the same reaction at 21 as I did when I was 7, but now I'm a 300lb man used to lifting 60 kilos while working so my reaction isn't usually pretty.

I do have a strong sense of self-preservation that I've always attributed to actually _knowing_ the risks of the things I'm doing. You'll never catch me parachuting, because I know what the physics of a parachute failure mean.

<comment><USER5> Exactly. I am not the least bit scared of heights. Top of the arch in St. Louis, hanging over the railing with my head pressed against the glass, looking straight down at nothing underneath me - no problem. Why? I am in zero danger whatsoever. If I'm not in actual danger of falling, heights are no problem. And so I love roller coasters. Pure exhilaration (Last one I did was New York-New York in Vegas. Outstanding at night.)

But put me on a 12/12 roof, and I can't stop shaking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have done roller coasters... I don't like them.</comment>


Ask HN: What are your favorite prototyping tools? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Our product POP - Prototyping on Paper ( <http://popapp.in> ) might be a good choice for app prototyping :)</comment>


Why don't developers dress better? - <AUTHOR> http://putthison.com/post/10782417306/why-dont-developers-dress-better

<comment><USER2> 1) Because programming in a suit is uncomfortable.

2) Because companies that have dress codes tend to produce bad software. This correlation turned into "I am not dressed well, therefore I write good software."

Sayth PG: "Dressing up is not so much bad in itself. The problem is the receptor it binds to: dressing up is inevitably a substitute for good ideas. It is no coincidence that technically inept business types are known as "suits.""

From <http://www.paulgraham.com/bubble.html>

<comment><USER3> _Because programming in a suit is uncomfortable._

Not really. Are you assuming that or speaking from experience?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There seems to be a meme in hacker culture: "Business people are tools; I want to be judged on my ability and not my looks. I don't wish to manage people or do sales so I will dress down. Crocs with socks for me!"

In the majority of companies, here's what actually happens: (1) you are still judged on your looks, (2) you are not given client-facing roles, (3) you are kept in the basement.

Why sacrifice social power for mere comfort and 'base' comradeship with your hacker friends?

When you are speaking to another developer, then sure enough, communicate in a strictly rational way. Be logical; talk ideas; sidestep social niceties; dress functionally. They understand. But in the rest of the world or in the context of a larger company, why not communicate on a level normal people understand: visually through your dress sense and body language. A crisp white shirt is a far greater signal of power than a well crafted sentence.

edit: Don't wear a suit if you're a developer if nobody else does though. It will give off a very bad impression. Aim for smart casual. Make sure your shirts are always ironed. Attention to detail matters. If in doubt emulate classic hollywood actors or the tamer high-fashion adverts. They set the standards that you will be judged on.

</comment><comment><USER5> Zuck is a horrible example of a guy that doesn't need to impress anyone. He doesn't wear suits for us, he wears suits for the investment bankers.

I don't dress better for a lot of reasons but mostly because it doesn't matter. Charitably, I consider fashion to be little more than an expensive hobby.

Not so charitably, the places I have worked, fashion was always inversely correlated with having a clue. "To some, it's a secret handshake. It's a 'my talent supersedes my necessity to follow the guidelines of society.'" This is partly true. Most fashion rules are not guidelines of society, but guidelines of a select few who are so useless and boring they sit around all day worrying about what to wear. The rest of us go for the bare minimum required to keep their mouths shut so we can actually get some work/play done. In that way, ignoring the guidelines is a signal that we're not vapid nincompoops.

</comment><comment><USER6> For who's definition of "better"? If I remember correctly, put this on was the blog who did a video about "proper" jeans (i.e. unwashed, indigo, able to stand on its own). There are still a lot of people who would consider jeans of any form to be out of the question for anyone not needing them for work…

Never mind that you're most likely sitting in an office alone or with co- workers all day. Why would you dress up like a lawyer when you have no contact with clients? Getting a dozen suits is quite expensive, never mind the laundry costs. It just strikes most engineers as quite ineffective.

"It's not for others, it's for your own self-esteem!" Really? That sounds a lot like the argument a car salesman would make. So me riding around on a bike is a bit childish, too? Yes, suits, cars, toupees, escorts – all might help a few people, but aren't we fighting symptoms instead of root causes here?

I'm in my thirties now, and I understand the pressure/urge of "dressing like a grown up". I do have some saddle-stitched shoes, English shirts and a few suits (most of it a bit too big, as I've lost a few pounds recently). I'm aware that "woot" shirts don't flatter anyone's physique…

But trying to fit in by dressing a certain way isn't exactly the epitome of growing up (one might argue about that). So dress up nice if you think that particular style makes you look better (and there is a certain evolution of mens wear…).

I just disagree that you a) have to, and b) about what to wear. In my opinion chinos + dress shirts are hardly better than t-shirts and jeans, so that seems hardly worth it. And well-tailored suits are quite high maintenance in comparison and difficult to choose.

TL;DR - That's why I'm wearing my Star Fleet uniform all the time.

</comment><comment><USER7> It's repost of a tumblr blog. Lots of discussion on the source article: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3048550>

</comment><comment><USER8> It's not that we don't know how to dress or don't care how to dress ourselves, it's just that we don't care what you think about what we're wearing. Why would I wear something I feel uncomfortable in? The only time I'll wear a suit or a tie is if I'm going to a wedding or a funeral. What someone wears shouldn't define how "professional" they are.

> You are building the future, so dress like it.

Exactly. I'm trying to build a future where wardrobe isn't a predictor for success.

</comment><comment><USER9> Interesting. Seems like dressing up is the "right" way and those who dress as they please(without making anyone uncomfortable) are not in the wrong per say, but maybe under achieving. I suppose those in power choose(implicitly) what the right dress is. If developers held all the power would this author be writing wondering why people didn't dress in t-shirts and hoodies to fit in?

</comment><comment><USER10> I think people should wear what makes them feel comfortable. Ties work for Jesse, but there are some jobs where a tie is required, and that doesn't work for the wearer. This could explain why people have an aversion to "dressing up." I'm a jeans and t-shirt person when I'm at work because that's what I feel most at ease in.

</comment><comment><USER11> There seems to be a belief that dressing nice means wearing a suit but that's not so. You can look very nice and still be very comfortable. Simply wear clothes that fit well and ditch the hoodie and you're most of the way there.

</comment><comment><USER12> Mostly because geeks in general have no dress sense.

I've made numerous attempts at dressing better, but the result is always "dressed to the appropriate level, but everything clashes or is just plain wrong". Maybe one day when I can afford to go to a mens store and say "Dress me and make me look good. I don't care how much it costs", I'll take another stab at it.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think you guys interpreting this advice a little too narrowly. Here's one of the guys from Put This On (Jesse Thorn) advising the Kickstarter guys how to "Dress Like Grownups" [http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/jesse-thorn-from-put- this-on...](http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/jesse-thorn-from-put-this-on- helps-the-men-of-kick)

</comment><comment><USER14> _You are building the future, so dress like it._

So, jeans, then? A person in a suit isn't dressing like they're building anything. They're dressing like they want to tell other people to build something.

</comment><comment><USER15> I was nodding along until I started reading Put This On. Roughly 80% of the clothing pictured suggests "uncomfortable", "impractical" or "I'm a tool". I'll keep my sneakers. :-/</comment>


Show HN: Block Brain – a rather tricky puzzle game - <AUTHOR> http://blockbraingame.com <comment><AUTHOR> This has been a minor obsession of mine for the past few months. My first project in Unity .

I had a huge amount of fun building it. ANY advice on how to find a market of people who like to play puzzle games would be greatly appreciated. I have no experience in selling a product.

</comment><comment><USER2> Odd - searching for "Block Brain" on the iOS App Store doesn't show me your game within the first 5 clusters. I wonder if there's any ASO you can do for that, or if it's just not indexed yet?

<comment><AUTHOR> You would think that an exact title search would work, but no. Same on Play Store. I am guessing that installs and rating is very heavily weighted.</comment></comment>


Cathode vintage terminal - <AUTHOR> http://www.secretgeometry.com/apps/cathode/

<comment><USER2> Saw this a couple years ago and downloaded the demo. Even though I think $9 is dreaming for something like this, it was pretty cool.

Also, the way the demo "expires" was creative. The static and flicker effects just get worse and worse until it's unusable.

</comment><comment><USER3> Unfortunately the 9 dollar price and the lack of assurance that this is not just a toy doesn't make me very compelled to buy it. Would have thought more about it if it were something like $1, though.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I paid The $9 pricetag thinking it would be something other than a toy. And while it looks nice, and is fun to play with for a while; I haven't really found much utility for it where day-to-day work is concerned.

It is really slick looking though!

<comment><USER5> But it is a proper terminal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> There is a linux Open Source QT based project that is quite similar [1].

Or, if you have xscreensaver installed you can just run the following:

      /usr/lib/xscreensaver/apple2 -text -fast -bs -program bash

[1] [https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old- term](https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term)

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice emulator, but I'd love to have the real thing, a genuine old-school monochrome monitor, the kind that you used with a Hercules graphics card. Those monitors were so easy on the eyes. You could stare at Pascal all day. Figuring out the details of making it work is one of my 'someday' projects.

</comment><comment><USER8> I was the first upvote--did not notice the cost and would not have upvoted had I known. I do love its looks.

</comment><comment><USER9> Does this tie display speed to a selectable baud rate?

<comment><USER10> yes: [http://www.secretgeometry.com/media/screenshot14.jpg](http://www.secretgeometry.com/media/screenshot14.jpg)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> it looks cool, but I don't like the idea of paying for a terminal that hurts your eyes</comment>


Razer Prototype Laptops stolen from CES after show - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/9/14214568/razer-prototype-laptops-stolen-at-ces <comment><AUTHOR> Funny story, when I worked at Intel I got to attend/help at COMDEX one year when Intel was showing off their graphics chips. We were packing up some demonstration systems and their very expensive (at the time monitors) into road cases for the event and I noticed there were two brand new "boom box" type portable stereo systems with the gear. I asked if we were doing music in the booth and the product manager replied "No those are for the guys unloading and loading the equipment to steal at the venue." Apparently the only way they could avoid getting stuff stolen while it was being moved by the required convention center staff was to have something "set aside" that they would preferentially steal. It shocked my tender sensibilities.

I really hope the Verge follows up on this story to figure out what happened and shares it with the rest of the world.</comment>


Rhinoplasty – attacking poaching problems from the supply side - <AUTHOR> http://www.laura-krantz.com/looking/2015/10/23/rhinoplasty <comment><USER2> I'm not sure if this would work, unless it was done in secrecy. From what I've come to understand, rhino horn usage has a superstitious component to it. If it's known a sample doesn't come from a rhino people wouldn't be interested.

In addition, poachers know how to make people stop doing things: keep killing rhinos.

<comment><USER3> The point is to flood the market with fake horns and make them indistinguishable from real ones, while at the same time broadcasting the fact that you're doing so. This will spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the genuineness of any product that claims to be rhino horn.

This is classic flood-the-market-with-cheap-alternatives-to-destroy-the- competition business strategy, except the goal is to destroy the entire rhino horn market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is it actually feasible to 3d print a realistic rhino horn from synthesized keratin? Googling keratin 3d printing mostly turns up Pembient itself. One would suspect that keratin printing would have plenty of more humble applications (synthetic hair, nails, biomimetic prosthetics).

</comment><comment><USER5> Synhtetic rhino-horn is a clever idea, but one could suspect that once it goes "mainstream", the demand will also rise. Or am I completely wrong?

<comment><USER6> That is touched on in the final paragraph</comment></comment>


$6800 Elio Motors Vehicle Closer to Reality - <AUTHOR> http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/6800-elio-motors-vehicle-takes-step-closer-to-reality.html

<comment> jack-r-abbit That article is from Jan 2013. I wonder how things have progressed. They claimed they expect to begin "commercial vehicle production in mid-2014." That is just around the corner.</comment>


Ask HN: Fellow hackers – Glasses or contact lenses? - <AUTHOR> It is the time to change my glasses, and I am thinking about if it's worth using contact lenses instead of glasses. Most hackers have dry eye from staring at the display for long hours and I don't know if there is any technology/solution I might use instead of  the traditional glasses.<p>What's your experience? <comment><USER2> I switched from glasses to contacts because I kept leaving my glasses everywhere. My eyes don't get dry unless I leave the lenses in for more than 18 hours, but I do look away from screens frequently.</comment>