Walking Through a Doorway Makes You Forget (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-walking-through-doorway-makes-you-forget/

<comment><USER2> A similar thing happens at an ATM when you dispense money before you give the user their card back. They tend to forget the card more often. Apparently this happens because the users goal in that whole process is to get the money, not to get the card back. So as soon as they have their money the forget about the card. Since the user has reached their goal there is no reason not to forget about the state of the task.

<comment><USER3> That's an interesting take on it. I'd always thought it was because: when ATMs were first introduced, people thought of the cash as more important than the card... Nowadays, I'd say the reverse is true for most people: I've occasionally started to walk away from the machine, stuffing my card into my wallet, only to be drawn back by the whirring sound of the cash counter... People are too set in their ways to reverse it now, but perhaps they could give us both cash and card at the same time?

<comment><USER4> Giving people their cash and card at the same time would open them up to a scenario where an attacker can just grab whichever they don't reach for first.

<comment><USER5> You could give them on top of each other so that both can be grabbed simultaneously.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A recent episode[1] of the design podcast 99% Invisible talks about how this (or a similar effect) was exploited by Victor Gruen in the design of shopping malls, in what they call Gruen transfer[2].

1\. [http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-gruen- effect/](http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-gruen-effect/)

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

</comment><comment><USER3> Surely it takes slightly more concentration to walk through a doorway than across a room. You need to avoid bumping into the walls, make sense of an (initially) reduced field of vision, and take-in new surroundings... The idea that people mentally discard information because they've moved into a different room seems far less likely.

<comment><USER7> Did the article or researchers say it was just because someone was in a different room? The title is "Walking through a doorway makes you forget" not "You forget because you're in a new room."

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> In some cultures it is said that dreams are forgotten the moment you look out through a window.

</comment><comment><USER9> I would be interested in the results of a variation: the participant walks through a door, only to enter the same room they just left (easier to test with the virtual version!) My hypothesis is that, when entering a new environment, the brain immediately has a huge number of stimuli to respond to, and that's what causes the short-term memory loss. Maybe being told in advance that they would re-enter the same room would have an effect.

<comment><USER10> The article describes exactly this experiment.

<comment><USER11> Almost, but not exactly: The article describes moving through two doorways, the last one taking the person back to the original room. That's different from passing through a doorway but never entering a new room.

If the "doorway effect" significantly decreased in that scenario, it would strongly suggest that it's the sudden introduction of new surroundings that triggers the memory dump that the article describes, rather than the doorway itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I had this idea for a minimal life countdown which is positioned at the exit of your house (eg inside the front door) and shows you how many days left you have in your life each time you leave the house.

Reading this makes me wonder if a better place for it would be somewhere on the outside of your doorway... :)

<comment><USER13> I use an app called Days Of Life for iOS that does precisely this, at a configurable time every day. I chose 17:00.

<comment><USER14> I have experimented with an app that always displays a couple of major events in the past and some in the future (including life expectancy) on a timeline. However, after a couple of days I couldn't care less about this information, because it changes so unnoticeably and slowly. It didn't help me at all to get a sense for these time scales.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Not entirely unlike running a garbage collection cycle (or freeing a pool) after each HTTP request...

</comment><comment><USER16> while not mentioned in the article, it is remarkable that this phenomena is very strongly apparent in dreams, in particular in lucid dreams; an effective way to dramatically change a dream is to walk through a door or a mirror; for example, you are in a distressing situation in your remote village home, you walk out the door to find out you are suddenly in a bustling big city street, you turn around open the door again, and find out it is the door of a restaurant, the previous scene having completely disappeared.</comment>


Show HN: Keep unwanted photos off any site with javascript one-liner - <AUTHOR> http://houdiniapi.com/2011/05/introducing-safecontent-keep-unwanted-photos-off-any-site/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey all, Chris from Houdini here. This is a new idea we're currently working on - any feedback is greatly appreciated!

</comment><comment><USER2> How does the tech work? Are you looking for some sort of standard deviation from what a "correct" image should look like or farming out the work to monkeys, or something else?

<comment><USER3> According to the reddit submission - <http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/hk4j5> \- seems to be using Amazon Mturk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The title, "Keep unwanted photos off any site," should be "Keep unwanted photos off sites you own".

</comment><comment><USER5> It's not clear what happens to the moderated photo. Is a placeholder returned? Is it blurred, etc etc.</comment>


A New Look for CodePlex - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/codeplex/archive/2012/04/30/new-codeplex-ui-released.aspx

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks like the redesign promised for CodePlex has finally landed: <http://www.codeplex.com/>

Shiny!</comment>


Ask HN: major company threatening to sue me my aggregator site - <AUTHOR>

Hey guys, first time posting a question.
Basically, I've got a daily deal aggregator site. One of the major players on the market is now threatening to sue me if I don't remove his site from my aggregator.
I have already removed their deal images (but not the actual deals), need I worry? <comment><USER2> If you don't get a cut in the sale they have no business suing you. It'd be the same as someone suing Google for showing up in their search results. You are just showing a graphic search result (vs text only). It's like suing someone for being quoted word for word (given you're not fudging with their deals). I have a feeling Donald Trump would do that, but thats another story.

I'd actually speak with a lawyer to double check, and once clear I'd write "Piss off" in broken handwriting with crayon. ;) (Followed by a letter from the lawyer that begins - the CEO is obviously upset regarding this baseless lawsuit...)

</comment><comment><USER3> Have you received a cease and desist? If not, continue business as usual.

<comment><AUTHOR> Are you sure? AFAIK, they don't have to to send a C&D before suing.

<comment><USER3> Nobody is going to sue ($5000) before a C&D ($200)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> i think not. Are you a company ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, but not a limited liability company. I personally have 100% liability for the company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Get a lawyer. What you're doing may be legal (I believe it is), but you still do need to worry about getting sued. It sounds like they're just trying to push you around, get a lawyer to check what you're doing is fine and respond to them with a letter containing lots of legal noise that basically means "piss off".

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice!

<comment><USER5> No prob. I know the Hacker News crowd has a lot of self reliance attitude, and I've been there too, but I've recently been coming to realize that for any legal matter its best to just go to a professional. Its often too far outside of our fields of expertise to be worth the time and effort to become competent in the field, especially because once any real legal action happens, you're going to need professional representation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> You're not in business until you get sued.

<comment><AUTHOR> Touché :)</comment></comment>


(More) Code Crackers Wanted - <AUTHOR> http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2008/05/15/code-crackers-wanted/ The Fermilab letter was originally assumed to be associated with neutrinos due to time proximity with the 20th Anniversary of SN1987A, and the letters mention of Frank Shoemaker, who worked with neutrino detectors. Confirmation has been found as time stamps in section 2.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34230168/Fermi06222010
https://sites.google.com/site/sfcanalysis/ <comment><AUTHOR> The Fermilab letter was originally assumed to be associated with neutrinos due to time proximity with the 20th Anniversary of SN1987A, and the letters mention of Frank Shoemaker, who worked with neutrino detectors. Confirmation has been found as time stamps in section 2.

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/34230168/Fermi06222010>

<https://sites.google.com/site/sfcanalysis/>

</comment><comment><USER2> (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3199712>)</comment>


Are hacking skills completely necessary to be successful these days? - <AUTHOR>

The title says it all for the most part, but as a young entrepreneur whose skills lie particularly in design and marketing, should I invest the time in learning a language or two or stick to what I know and focus on doing them better? It seems to me like the more successful startups are coming from those who bring the company from idea to product completely from their own work.<p>I've heard arguments on both sides of the fence, and am curious what YC members have to say on the topic. <comment><USER2> On one hand, I think everyone should learn at least a little programming. But honestly, casually "learning a language or two" isn't going to make you a great hacker.

That said, I certainly don't want to discourage you from doing it if you _want_ to. Perhaps try learning a little programming, and if you like what you find, learn more.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is pretty much what I had gathered previously; learning a bit for the sake of knowing every aspect of the business isn't enough to do the job with much excellence, but I think it could help a lot in understanding the problems my coders come across and in being more knowledgeable about the time restraints on certain tasks.

Thanks for the input.:) While I'm very busy with school and two outside projects, I feel like I'm missing a piece of the puzzle by not at least understanding the programming aspect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Building product awareness is a full time task and so is programming.</comment>


Type Systems (2004) [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://lucacardelli.name/Papers/TypeSystems.pdf <comment><USER2> > Languages where variables can be given (nontrivial) types are called typed > languages.

This is a vacuous definition because it doesn't specify what is meant by "variable" or what it means to be "given a type." This is not nit-picking. It actually matters in the case of Common Lisp. Consider:

(let ((x 1)) (declare (fixnum x)) ...)

X is clearly a variable, but has it been "given a type"? In CL, type specifications are _promises to the compiler_ , not specifications of program semantics. (declare (fixnum x)) means "I, the programmer, promise to write my code in such a way that the value of X will always be a fixnum, and you the compiler are free to assume that I will do this correctly in order to make my code run faster."

On the other hand:

(setf x (make-array 10 :element-type 'fixnum))

In this case the implementation is allowed (though not required) to make an array that can _only_ hold fixnums. So are the array elements variables? And have they been "given a type"?

<comment><USER3> I think we can forgive such stuff at least in the intro. This document is clearly an introduction to type systems for people who know more about programming than they do about the underlying maths and logic of type theory. Good.

Also good is that it starts from what the reader knows informally rather than trying to build everything rigorously from the ground up.

<comment><USER4> > Also good is that it starts from what the reader knows informally rather > than trying to build everything rigorously from the ground up.

It's certainly pragmatic, but is it good? Maybe I'm biased as a math student, but I've seen first-hand the horrors that happen when people think they know something just because they have a vague intuition about the topic's main ideas.

<comment><USER3> But whenever I have learned maths in strict lemma-proof form it was on the second time around. That is, I first had a general sense of the field and intuition about concepts and some of the results, and then rigorous stuff makes sense.

From everything I've read about how mathematicians work, I thought that was normal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is the notation used here standard in type systems research? I'm pretty much lost before halfway in at the _with_ concept.

</comment><comment><USER6> Is Mathematics, as a language, considered typed in general?

<comment><USER7> Most mathematics isn't constructive ([https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(mathematics)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_\(mathematics\))) so it doesn't really come up I think. E.g. you know how matrices need to have a certain shape to be multiplied? People don't really talk about what happens if they don't.

Physics on the other hand very much has types, the unit to type correspondence is dopetastic.

<comment><USER8> ELI5: Why would constructive math be more typed than non-constructive math?

<comment><USER7> Constructive mathematics is based on intuitionistic logic (i.e. classical logic without law of the excluded middle, meaning you don't have proof by contradiction, to demonstrate the existence of something you have to "construct" it). Intuitionistic logic is very close to type theory.

<comment><USER8> OK, ELI10: _Why or how_ is intuitionistic logic very close to type theory? Is it _based on_ type theory? Or is it just _similar_? In either case, how and why?

<comment><USER9> See [https://codewords.recurse.com/issues/one/type-systems-and- lo...](https://codewords.recurse.com/issues/one/type-systems-and-logic) for a pretty elaborate response to this question.

tl;dr: types are propositions and values are proofs of those propositions. Constructive logic is not concerned with (true xor false), but rather "I can prove A" or "I can prove not-A". There's also the middle ground of "I don't know how to prove anything about A".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why are these academic white papers always in the exact same format? Is there a formatting guide somewhere I don't know about?

</comment><comment><USER11> Admittedly, I skimmed through this, but I miss a balanced discussion of the cost/benefits of static typing. I could see no discussion of the benefits of dynamically typed languges. Insted arguments for static typing are enumerated without a single reference.

For a more balanced discussion, see: [https://www.infoq.com/presentations/dynamic-static- typing](https://www.infoq.com/presentations/dynamic-static-typing)

<comment><USER12> You should try skimming to the end, where there are two pages of references. Not to mention the fact that Cardelli is a prominent figure in the study of programming languages.

And I think you'll find that Gilad Bracha is a more informed critic of reliance on static type checking.

<comment><USER13> Yep, he was one of the designers in the Modula-2+ and Modula-3 languages.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Effects of hiring based on GitHub - <AUTHOR>

A growing part of the industry over the past several years is making github or other open source code examples mandatory for the application process.<p>Since I am interested in recruitment what changes have HN users noticed?<p>- Has the average quality of interview candidates increased?<p>- Do impressive open source contributions correlate with high performance when hired into your company?<p>- Do employees now push to open source internal tools to demonstrate their work? <comment><USER2> A related question to this. While I have started putting up my code on Github but they are rather small hacks which I do in my free time. I find it hard to be persistent in extending them or contributing to existing projects. Does that reflect negatively on me?

</comment><comment><USER3> I work in the gaming industry, and recently have been spending a lot of time between reviewing resumes and going through Github code. What I did notice is: \- The best profiles I've seen were not Github publishers \- Doing a dev-test prior to interview is a better sorting \- I believe open-source contribution is a state of mind and not of performance

<comment><AUTHOR> Has any Github code or practices put you off interviewing someone so far? What kind of dev test do you do? Question and answer or give them a spec to implement?

<comment><USER3> I give them a dev test (Node JS) with their choice of database to create a small service (front end and back end).

Deliverable is code + db scheme + additionnal questions (mostly how they would improve if they had time, choice on tech etc.)

We also have in interview "do this function for me" to see how they think

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> \- yes \- yes \- yes ... but that's not to say it's a must or even a terribly significant factor. It merely makes you easier to say 'yes' to from afar, and that's it. I think people generally realize that the "github profile is a must" mentality is extremely likely to pass by highly qualified candidates in a hiring market where nobody can afford to do that. Willingness to torch any candidate that doesn't behave like a 25 year old groomed in the silicon valley of the last few years is not a successful hiring strategy.

</comment><comment><USER5> Making it mandatory to have appropriate examples of your work on GitHub is foolish. There are a huge number of talented engineers who simply don't have the time or the ability to maintain a decent OS repo.

Sure, it certainly helps to be able to see real samples of code but it should never be a mandatory requirement.</comment>


Tonido: A Dropbox alternative for SMBs - <AUTHOR> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/itdojo/tonido-a-dropbox-alternative-for-smbs/3966?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

<comment><USER2> As the owner of a TonidoPlug2, the wifi doesn't stay connected (proprietary kernel module crashes). Also the web interface software is slow and dated (but capable). It would be awesome to have OwnCloud on the TonidoPlug hardware.

</comment><comment><USER3> What does SMB stand for?

<comment><USER4> Small and Medium Business

<comment><USER3> Thanks. Thought it's Samba, but doesn't make any sense

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'd recommend wuala, free 5gb with encryption. <http://www.wuala.com/>

</comment><comment><USER6> And this is superior to decentralized solutions like git-annex (for devs) or owncloud (for non-devs) how?

<comment><USER4> Tonido is self hosted solution like git-annex and owncloud. It is much simpler, more nature and comprehensive support for all mobile platforms

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> What's wrong with Dropbox again?

<comment><USER8> There are many reasons:

1\. Security 2\. Dropbox is not suitable for professionals like Lawyers, Accountants, Tax professionals and Healthcare providers 3\. EU and Canada Data privacy laws require certain companies to store data inside the country 4.You cannot brand dropbox for your business. You can brand Tonido. 5.You cannot run dropbox in your domain. With Tonido you can.

Do you want more reasons?

<comment><USER9> At least 50% of your comments/submissions are plugging Tonido.

Do you work for them?

<comment><USER8> I am stating the facts here. If you have anything to refute the facts let us talk about that. So what is your interest in Dropbox?

<comment><USER10> No, this is not how we roll here. If you have any association with the company, you put it in disclaimer to reveal bias.

<comment><USER11> Alternativly you could just point out where he is wrong or show that Tonido isn't a unique player in the market.

I agree, biases should be revealed, but just berating him and not his argument doesn't move anything forward.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Jungle disk FTW</comment>


Ask HN: How did you meet your Mentor and what drew you to them? - <AUTHOR>

I am on the lookout for a Mentor, I was wondering how you guys met your Mentor and how you connected? What is the secret sauce for a successful Mentor-Protege relationship according to you guys? <comment><USER2> Honestly, this is going to sound cheesy at first, but it's not, I promise you. My dad was the first mentor I had. Entire time I was a kid he was trying to get different businesses off the ground. After I moved out he actually succeeded for a while, but that eventually imploded. You see, my dad isn't a very skilled person. He's lacking a large amount of business sense. He's really not even very bright. However, he's one hell of a salesman. He could always sell the product, but couldn't keep the business together. I saw him fail repeatedly, and learned from his examples. Essentially, I had a decade of failed startup experience before I was trying my own. The end result? He was a mentor by showing me a large number of ways to fail.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting, I totally agree with you. I considered my dad my Mentor too early on. But as one grows and our world view changes we probably start looking out for other people to look up to and learn from. Have you connected successfully with a Mentor after your dad?

<comment><USER2> I've had (and have) many mentors over the years. The way I found most of them was I'd have a question on something I couldn't get answered. I'd go to IR and ask the question. Whether anyone knew the answer or not, I'd hang out for a while answering other folks questions or just chatting. It was never anything formal, but eventually there would be people I considered experts who didn't mind an email with questions. Thing is, it goes both ways a lot of times now. People who I would consider mentors for some things would likely consider me a mentor for others.

My advice would be to not look for a mentor, but instead put yourself in situations where there are knowledgable people to meet.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the sound advice :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I am not sure whether my mentors are aware that they are my mentors.

I am a freelance developer and security guy. Trying to go from services to something more scalable.

My business mentor is an about 60 year old African business man, who is my client since about 8 years. He grew up very poor and is now owner of many companies, providing jobs for several thousand people. I am still fascinated about how he approaches new things and try to learn from him whatever is possible. I try to see him at least every 1-2 years in person, but we exchange emails more or less every month.

Then I have my coding mentor. We shortly worked together in a project some years ago. I realized that he is a genius and started calling/emailing him when I had something interesting to say or to ask.

I would give the following advice to find and keep a mentor: Do not expect anybody to ask you for your progress. Present your work. Ask for opinion. Do not be afraid to question the advice of your mentor. And you should care about your mentor too. Give your opinion on your mentors work.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great Advice :)</comment></comment>


Sixpack: A language-agnostic A/B testing framework - <AUTHOR> http://sixpack.seatgeek.com/

<comment><USER2> I saw this a while ago and played around with it. Pretty cool app, and a nice implementation of AB testing. Even if you don't have a good use for it, you can learn some good techniques by poking around the Flask code.</comment>


Dart 1.0 launch is imminent - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+dartlang/posts/SmWgF4fGzT7 <comment><USER2> I've been holding out spending any extended amount of time on Dart until 1.0 as the API for it kept changing fairly dramatically since it was first announced (it was first announced on October 10, 2011 at the GOTO conference).

There isn't anything super amazing about this language from a language perspective, but I think you need to look at what Dart really brings to understand why it may be a nice alternative to JS.

* Optional typing. While typing data is completely ignored at runtime, even in the DartVM, it can help a lot for tooling if you are working on a large project. If you don't care about typing, you can just use "var" for everything.

* Batteries Included: IDE, package manager, core libraries. This means you get decent IDE to start coding in. If you don't like Dart's eclipse-based IDE, JetBrains has been maintaining a Dart plugin for their IDE (IntelliJ or Webstorm). The core library includes a lot of useful classes (not to the level of Java, but definitely has a lot of useful default packages). The package manager is nice to ship with the product as well to maintain use of 3rd party libraries.

* Nice development story. Sure, no shipping browser has the DartVM in it, but when you are doing initial development, you can use Dartium (chormium build with the DartVM in it) to do fast, iterative development. When you need to cross-browser test, you deploy to JS and see how things go.

* Speed. If/when the DartVM starts to ship in Chrome, it should help performance of apps that ship as Dart code. Specifically the runtime performance can be better as their DartVM doesn't have to support a lot of legacy syntax/behavior that JS VMs have to worry about. Along with that, the DartVM supports Snapshots. These are basically a heap dump of an application right before main() is run. This allows Dart apps to start up a lot faster on subsequent reloads.

<comment><USER3> Why not TypeScript?

<comment><USER2> For me: because my background is mainly Java. While I understand prototype inheritance, I'm not as familiar with the programming style of Javascript. I like being able to create strict class structures and use those. Prototype structure allows for ad-hoc creation of a class. This makes code analysis and tooling a lot more difficult to do properly.

(I do have to deal with the fun that is Perl on a daily basis, but I'm still more a fan of Java style OOP).

Also, my entire professional career has been working on projects that are worked on by 30+ people with a very large code base. When you have large teams using a language that doesn't enforce strict structure, you tend to miss things that could have easily been found at compile-time with proper tooling. This can be accomplished in languages like Javascript, but it requires strict internal controls. Having the language give you that kind of support out of the box is nice to have.

<comment><USER3> TypeScript is a typed superset of JavaScript. It has classes, interfaces, static typing, and object oriented polymorphism. TypeScript is designed to be used on larger projects.

<comment><USER4> TypeScript also lets anyone ignore all of that and play cowboys and indians with prototypes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Has Dart gained much traction? It doesn't seem like it's been picked up nearly as much as Go or AngularJS but I may just be looking in the wrong places.

<comment><USER6> I think a better comparison would be TypeScript which is similar minus the alternate VM part. MS is very good about getting their developer community to use stuff that they officially support so I wouldn't be surprised of TS becomes the norm for the Visual Studio developer crowd.

<comment><USER5> Interesting. Just to note I wasn't trying to compare Dart to Go and AngularJS past the point that they're maintained/created by Googlers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was hoping Dart 1.0 with this quote: "Hey, we are ready to launch and so is Google Chrome with Dart VM!". But no, not going to happen.

<comment><USER8> This. Will dart ever ship in a browser? It was one of the design goals of the language, sure, but the lack of actual end users is the thing holding Dart back in many areas. Until they make this jump, Dart is just another compile- to-js language among many.

<comment><USER9> There's a build of Chromium with a pretty-well-integrated dartvm (Dartium) in every dart-sdk download.

I don't know if/when this will show up in mainstream Chrome builds, but technically it's been possible for a while now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This seems really close to the Chrome Developer Summit ([http://developer.chrome.com/devsummit](http://developer.chrome.com/devsummit)) so I guess it will be launched there!

</comment><comment><USER11> I was pretty excited for Dart before I found out it could be compiled into javascript. Is this a superficial feature, or is Dart built with this capability in mind? I was really hoping for a replacement entirely.

<comment><USER12> why does it have any effect on if people should be excited about Dart? You can compile C++ to C but that doesn't mean they're the same language.

<comment><USER11> Because if all you're looking for is a different way to write javascript then we already have coffeescript for that. A low level programming language that can be compiled into a lower level programming language, like c++ and c. Is not on par with compiling into a scripting language.

<comment><USER13> C and Java and god knows what else has been compiled to Javascript, so I'm not sure I see what you're point is.

<comment><USER11> I am skeptical of Dart's utility since it is limited to what Javascript is capable of. At the same time I lament about how tired I am of javascript. What I'm saying isn't difficult to understand at all you're just being dickish.

<comment><USER4> JavaScript is turing complete. That's not a very meaningful limit.

You seem to be implying Dart's semantics are influenced by JavaScript's because it compiles to it, but that's not the case. It's true for CoffeeScript because CoffeeScript doesn't try to add semantics to JavaScript, it's just a syntactic translation.

Yes, there is an aspect of "works best in Chrome" performance-wise, since Dart VM will be faster than dart2js, but if you were sold on Dart before hearing about dart2js, I don't know why that would make you change your mind. You were hoping for a JavaScript replacement, and Dart is exactly that. Compiling to JavaScript is just something to ease the transition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I remember when dart was first presented to me at google. I am amazed with the progress in 3 years.

</comment><comment><USER15> why the f do i need a google+ account to download Dart?

<comment><USER16> You don't.

<comment><USER15> I know I don't. I was making a joke referencing a youtube co-founders's only comment in 8 years. It got quite a bit of play on this site recently.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6695904](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6695904)

I apologize if it was too meta.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Learning Clojure - <AUTHOR>

Does anyone know of any Clojure resources aimed at someone familiar with FP (Haskell, LiveScript) but new at Lisp? <comment><USER2> I suggest buying the books. They are excellent. If you have to pick two, I would suggest the O'Reilly book[0] and the Joy of Clojure[1]. The first is an excellent primer and the latter is really great at explaining the thinking behind the language. I also enjoyed Amit Rahore's Clojure in Action, as well as Programming Clojure by Stuart Halloway. I haven't read Practical Clojure.

The books are the best resources if you're trying to learn the language at a fast pace, but there is plenty of information to be found through Google as well. In the end the best way to learn is by doing.

Good luck and welcome to the Clojure community!

0: <http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920013754.do>

1: <http://joyofclojure.com/>

</comment><comment><USER3> The official cheatsheet is great for looking up how particular library functions work. Additionally, you can browse it to get an approximate idea of what the standard library offers. <http://clojure.org/cheatsheet>

4clojure offers many quiz-style questions designed to introduce various concepts of the language. <http://www.4clojure.com/>

</comment><comment><USER4> The logs of the clojure IRC make fascinating reading <http://clojure- log.n01se.net/>

</comment><comment><USER5> <http://www.findingfarm.com/?topic=dev-clojure>

Disclaimer: finding farm is my project. If it isn't what you're looking for I apologize in advance.</comment>


Jørgen was wrong (he did it) - <AUTHOR> http://www.onemilliongiraffes.com/blog?id=558 <comment><AUTHOR> Original discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1323607>

He's got a book coming out too, which hopefully will pay for some of the time he put into the project.

Just goes to show you that Seth Godin is on to something in Tribes (<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1591842336>). Be passionate, be a leader, be successful.</comment>


Loos, Lewdness, and Literature: Tales from the Boghouse - <AUTHOR> https://publicdomainreview.org/2019/04/17/tales-from-the-boghouse/ <comment><USER2> related but far, far older: a searchable collection of graffiti from pompeii.

[http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%2...](http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%20Pompeii.htm)</comment>


Non-Traditional Chips Gaining Steam - <AUTHOR> https://semiengineering.com/non-traditional-chips-gaining-steam/ <comment><USER2> Question for the collective:

As data rates in cables have gone up, designers have resorted to putting codecs into the housing at the end(s) of the cables to keep up. In some cases this has made for connectors that are only slightly smaller than those from the 90's.

Can flexible circuits switch at a high enough rate to perform these signal processing tasks? I'm imagining building the circuits into the ends of the cable itself (under the strain protector?) instead of the housing. Or do we just wait for smaller chips?

<comment><USER3> _resorted to putting codecs into the housing at the end(s) of the cables_

AFAIK that's just DisplayLink and one Apple dongle and it's more due to backward compatibility than data rates.

 _Can flexible circuits switch at a high enough rate to perform these signal processing tasks?_

Maybe, but I don't think the economics work. It's probably much cheaper to just use a proper high-speed PHY in the first place.

<comment><USER2> Thunderbolt cables have noise cancelling logic in them, to increase the max cable length by several multiples.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "The whole market is getting closer to reality," Freeman says. "I don't think substrates are a gating factor. We're still looking for that killer app."

How about an inkjet printer that can print OLEDs and circuits? People can design light-up signs and even have small circuits to control changing patterns. I want to print a processor with RAM/ROM on one side and some kind of display on the other. This would be both widely usable and a boon to electronics education.

<comment><USER5> Would be amazing... but realistically I think the only way we could do that is with a material like graphene/graphite and that probably is several decades away.

<comment><USER4> I have a memory of an article about an early OLED display that was made using an inkjet style printer with special materials. That was at least a decade ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Can someone help me understand - is the non-traditionalness of these chips enabled by continued shrinking of transistors, or something else?

Are we on a new learning curve?

<comment><USER2> From the article, it's defining traditional chips and those built on wafers cut from crystalline silicon.

Hybrids are circuits built on top of something other than these wafers. Often a flexible material (for flexible chips) or on glass (eg to build the display logic into the surface of an LCD Panel)</comment></comment>


Reuters uses AI to prototype automated video reports - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/simonchandler/2020/02/07/reuters-uses-ai-to-prototype-first-ever-automated-video-reports/ <comment><USER2> _Today, it has announced a prototype for a world first: a fully automated, yet presenter-led sports news summary system._

The title is wrong! Sogou has the world-first here. Reuter's thing is specifically the "first" presenter-led _sports_ news summary system, emphasis on sports.

<comment><USER3> Sogou is the CCTV version of an ai presenter

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > we use an algorithm to combine Reuters real-time match photography and > reporting with a minute-by-minute data feed of what has happened in the game

.. so that they can create 'presenter led' summaries at 'greater scale' \- yet, you still have to have people taking the photography and generating this minute-by-minute data.. so, why don't they just give the summary?

<comment><AUTHOR> Because that's already a different job?

e.g. the NHL has people recording plays second by second (not just minute) and photographers of course. But those people aren't the commentators, or the people in the studio. And the 6min and 30min condensed game recaps just have the commentary from the clips they include; they could make more sense with a generated track.</comment></comment>


McDonald's reports lowest quarterly profit in 13 years - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/b7824dbf-8de2-4369-913d-fb63086c485a <comment><USER2> I would've assumed the opposite, given their ability to service customers in a socially distanced way.

Does the article explain why? I can't bypass the paywall.

<comment><USER3> Offhand guess: commuters aren't stopping for breakfast/coffee and people working from home aren't stopping for lunch.

I heard a similar story. A neighbor works accounts for a fire/security sensor service. They said the local McD franchises were the only ones who paid their balance in full, but said their revenues were down 30-40%. They were doing the best of any other food service companies that were customers.</comment></comment>


Autodesk Burns the Planet - <AUTHOR> http://autodesk.earth <comment><AUTHOR> Here's also an article and a podcast about this story: [https://www.drillednews.com/post/computer-aided- destruction](https://www.drillednews.com/post/computer-aided-destruction)

<comment><AUTHOR> For German readers: [https://www.golem.de/news/klimakrise-autodesk-der- bagger-290...](https://www.golem.de/news/klimakrise-autodesk-der- bagger-290-und-der-hambacher-wald-2004-148069.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> It's odd they are going after Autodesk rather than the people/company running the mine. Autodesk has no control over what people do with their software.</comment>


Tips for Hackathon Success - <AUTHOR> http://appsembler.com/blog/10-tips-for-hackathon-success/ If you've never been to a hackathon, they are typically a 24-48 hour event during which time your team needs to build a working prototype for a product, usually a web or mobile app, but some teams build actual hardware devices. I've been to a lot of these hackathons, and have observed some patterns for what makes for a successful hackathon experience. <comment><USER2> The instant chat window must be one of the most annoying things I've seen on a website currently. Not only do I hear a beep when opening a tab but it also takes about half of my browser space (netbook). Good content tho, too bad it's surrounded by bad design decisions.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've disabled the proactive chat as many found it annoying. Thanks for the feedback.</comment></comment>


Mozilla Firefox Start Page - <AUTHOR> http://search.yahoo.com/firefox <comment><USER2> Interesting - have Google dropped their funding for Firefox?

<comment><USER3> There's a Google-Firefox search page as well: <http://www.google.com/firefox></comment></comment>


Free VBA developer tools in 2019 - <AUTHOR> https://www.xltrail.com/blog/developer-tools-for-microsoft-excel <comment><USER2> The version control section is gold!

I researched this extensively some time ago, and couldn't find a viable solution, other than using rubberduck to export/import, and manually place those sections under version control.

The aim was to assist a less technical person to get their VBA work under revision control, and the whole approach was just asking for trouble.</comment>


Molten Salt Reactor Claims Melt Down Under Scrutiny - <AUTHOR> http://www.powermag.com/blog/molten-salt-reactor-claims-melt-down-under-scrutiny/ <comment><USER2> Nuclear engineering undergrad at NC State from 2009-2013. It's very easy to get overhyped about molten salt anything. Our groups senior design project presented at the ANS student conference at MIT was on a novel way to pyroprocess SNF to get only Uranium out one end and Plutonium & Radioactive Crap out the other, so it would be proliferation resistant. And continuous.

The theory and simulations all lined up. But we still were cautious about claiming any sort of breakthrough, because we needed empirical experiments to prove the theory. And the government doesn't just hand out SNF (as my Navy Nuke classmate learned when he asked the Pentagon).

The most exciting thing at the ANS student conference at the time was a presentation by a German Graduate student and her work on ceramic cladding of fuel rods. So, its an industry that doesn't naturally lend itself to hype.

<comment><USER3> What do you think of Pb-Bi eutectic?

<comment><USER4> It's good in that it gives you a very hard neutron spectrum (good for efficient breeding) without being chemically reactive. It still has potentially unsolved problems in corrosion, required pumping power (i.e. power density limits) and erosion. There's been some recent work on oxygen control that really helps with the corrosion issue.

<comment><USER3> Thanks, I was wondering the issues around corrosion and servicing were being addressed. It always seemed like the best hope for a balance between a good breeder reactor, and non-proliferation concerns to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Oh that's awkward. Worse than not being 75 times as efficient, and instead only twice, is this other quote:

 _In addition, it now specifies that the design "does not reduce existing stockpiles of spent nuclear fuel" or use them as its fuel source._

To me that was the most inspiring aspect of this idea. I'd still one day hope to have a nuclear reactor in my back yard, but to realise that dream we've got to keep the science as well as the engineering on point.

If nuclear scientists goof like this, it does not inspire confidence to the public and all we will end up is projects like Shoreham.

<comment><USER6> > If nuclear scientists goof like this, it does not inspire confidence to the > public and all we will end up is projects like Shoreham.

To be fair, the claims were made by grad students. Good on them for experimenting, hoping, testing, and failing. The true calamity would have never been to test.

Their failure is not a reflection of their character, ambition, or talent. Well perhaps a little bit their talent. But they could've done like many (most, arguably) grad students and worked on some fundamentally useless but "safe" path to ongoing work in the Ivory tower.

So let's hope they keep trying to identify and test the hard problems whose resolution would improve life for humans, and do better next time.

<comment><USER7> >Smith thought the claims for the technology were bogus, based on the physics, notified the MIT hierarchy, and launched an inquiry. The magazine quoted him, "I said this is obviously incorrect based on basic physics."

Grad students should know the basic physics of their respective subfields.

<comment><USER8> At the very least, if it doesn't match up with the basic physics, to do the legwork to show why they are right and the apparent contradictions with basic physics are incorrect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I enjoyed the bit about "in MIT's highly regarded magazine, Technology Review". I don't know anybody from MIT who doesn't think it's worthless (except for the alumni news bound into the back of the alumni editions they send out free. It's only connection to MIT is that they pay the alumni association for the right to use the name (and agree to send alumni notes out).

A friend of mine (also an alum) refers to it as "the magazine of things that will never happen".

<comment><USER10> Why does the alumni continue to agree to license their name to a publication that drags down MIT's reputation?

<comment><USER9> It funds the alumni association. And it would take more than one dumb magazine to put a dent in the institute's reputation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Sigh. Claims made by a few people about a particular molten salt reactor design do not stand up to scrutiny. Molten salt reactors, on the other hand, are proven technology.

<comment><USER12> How many of them are in commercial use today? Where?

<comment><USER13> БН-600 & БН-800, Russia.

<comment><USER4> Those are both liquid-metal cooled solid-fueled reactors (sodium-cooled fast reactors). Sodium in elemental form is a metal, not a salt like sodium- chloride. There has never been a commercial molten-salt reactor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Last paragraph:

inally, who cares about reprocessing fuel? At this time naturally abundant U235 prices are so low and projected to continue to be low for this century that all this effort to recycle fuel and burn longer seems completely unwarranted on market principles, despite how cool and hip it sounds to "close the fuel cycle" or produce "100 times" less waste. Last I checked, fuel and disposal was a tiny fraction of the real costs of nuclear electricity, and certainly far smaller of an engineering problem than the public likes to believe.

I wasn't aware that anyone had solved the problem of spent fuel. last I knew there were thousands of tons of the stuff sitting around in swimming pools next to reactors all over the country/world. I don't recall the status of the project to bury the stuff under mountain in Nevada either, but I don't think that plan is approved.

WTF is wrong with breeder reactors that consume the otherwise spent fuel? Yeah, yeah, proliferation risk. If the stuff is that hard to contain then why all the waste sitting around?

<comment><USER15>
      Yeah, yeah, proliferation risk. If the stuff is that hard to
      contain then why all the waste sitting around?

I think the concern about breeder reactors isn't so much the proliferation risk of the fuel and waste itself, but that a commercial market in breeder reactor technology will proliferate the knowledge and equipment necessary such that state actors will find it easier to build breeder reactors quickly and secretly.

But maybe that's just a misperception on my part.

Before Beowulf clusters, building supercomputers required tremendous expertise. The U.S. thought it could keep China from building supercomputers by controlling the export of supercomputers and supercomputing-enabling technology. But once supercomputing moved to clusters of commodity hardware, most of those export controls became useless almost overnight. China didn't spontaneously develop an expertise in chip design and fabrication; rather, because of the technological shift in the West, supercomputing know-how and equipment simply became impossible to contain.

<comment><USER16> The idea state actors could building anything quickly and secretly is a misconception.

<comment><USER15> Depends on the complexity and on our intelligence assets.

Because of our lack of intelligence assets, China and North Korean have done spectacularly well. Pakistan got away with selling nuclear plans for years without our knowledge. There's probably all manner of less complex projects underway that U.S. intelligence is oblivious to.

Like China and North Korea, Iran is something of an outlier. Israel has long had strong intelligence assets in Iran, and in addition to benefiting from those, the U.S. seems to have been able to beef up SIGINT fairly quickly with arguably better than usually results.

It's highly dependent on the technology and the country in question. Sure, at the end of the day it's impossible to keep the genie in the bottle. But the goal is never forever. A country's strategic interests always have an implicit time component. If you can suppress tech long enough for a "rogue" state to become a respectable player in the international system, then you've won. Long enough might be only a few years.

Conversely, if you can develop tech faster than the U.S. can learn about _and_ act upon it, you've won. North Korea won that race, and might have been able to win it even without China protecting it. And how did North Korea win that race? Largely with exogenous skill, importing Soviet talent after the fall of the USSR.

Also, need I remind anyone the intelligence disaster that was both 9/11 and the Iraq War? It's not so much that the intelligence community was wrong, but that there's rarely any certainty in their assessments. If you don't know for certain that something is true, how do you justify your policy decisions? It gets muddy very quickly.

<comment><USER16> > Because of our lack of intelligence assets, China and North Korean have done > spectacularly well.

I don't think that's fair. Maybe China and North Korea have done well because there are knowledgeable and determined who live and work in those countries.

> Pakistan got away with selling nuclear plans for years without our > knowledge.

How do you _know_ that?

<comment><USER15>
      I don't think that's fair. Maybe China and North Korea have
      done well because there are knowledgeable and determined who
      live and work in those countries.

No doubt that's true. There are many capable scientists in those countries. However, in the case of North Korea for example, from all available publicly known information North Korea had been trying to build both ballistic missiles and a nuclear program since the 1960s. But there appears to have been few significant advancements until the fall of the USSR and the immigration of some well-known Soviet scientists, after which their programs made significant advances over suspiciously short periods of time.

      How do you know that?

I don't know, just like I don't know that Obama isn't a secret Muslim, that Trump isn't a Manchurian Candidate, or that you're not an extraterrestrial alien.

However, for whatever reason the Illuminati saw fit to disclose that Pakistan sold nuclear secrets to North Korea; which apparently went on for over decade before the initial disclosure; that many high-level U.S. officials (politicians, appointees, and civil servants alike) went [apparently] apoplectic upon disclosure; and that the fall-out seemed to be widespread and persistent.

We also "know" that South Africa had the bomb and Israel has the bomb. And despite official denials it seems clear that Israel, minimally, had the tacit approval of the U.S. if not outright assistance, and that South Africa's program was also under surveillance at the time. In other words, once details of these programs became publicly known it also became publicly known shortly afterward the extent to which the U.S. knew about those developments. In the case of the Pakistan sale of nuclear secrets, and in multiple situations wrt North Korea and China, by all public accounts the U.S. was and still is often readily taken by surprise. There are plenty other historical examples (including recent examples) of the U.S. being taken by surprise, although obviously not all were so strategically consequential.

<comment><USER17> There is no need for the scare-quotes around "know" \- President de Klerk gave a speech in which he admitted that South Africa had built and subsequently dismantled a nuclear weapons program. There are public IAEA reports on the verification process following SA's accession to the NPT.

(An interesting insight into late cold-war politics is that it was the Soviet Union that tipped off the United States that South Africa was preparing to test a weapon).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> From what I've read on other threads about Thorium and Molten-Salt reactors is that they are highly corrosive.

I found the experimental Oak Ridge one that's talked about in the article:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten- Salt_Reactor_Experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten- Salt_Reactor_Experiment)

..but I thought there was one fully operational and connected to the grid for years before it was shut down. I can't seem to find that one though.

<comment><USER19> Possible corrosion issues aside, does the article have any negative implications for the much sought-for development of molten-salt _thorium_ reactors?

<comment><USER20> Your zeroth-order mental model of a Thorium reactor should be "exactly like a Uranium reactor". It's a different radioisotope; it ain't magic.

<comment><USER21> Your first-order mental model should be that (1) thorium requires breeding and that works in a thermal spectrum, (2) uranium doesn't require breeding if you're content with fissioning U235, and (3) you can have a breeding uranium reactor but that requires a fast spectrum.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The Powermag.com site seems to be melting down as well. After giving up on loading the page I was able to google a bit and found this article:

"Nuclear Energy Startup Transatomic Backtracks on Key Promises" [https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603731/nuclear-energy- sta...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603731/nuclear-energy-startup- transatomic-backtracks-on-key-promises/)

2x the energy per ton of uranium is decent, but I wonder how they ever thought they could get 75x.

<comment><USER4> They thought they had a breeder reactor I guess. Typical reactors burn mostly U235 and a bit of bred-up Pu239 for an average burnup of the mined uranium of roughly 10 MWd/kg. Breeder reactors, on the other hand (both Thorium thermal MSR breeders and Uranium-Plutonium fast breeders) can get up very near the theoretical maximum of ~930 MWd/kg. The latter figure really demonstrates the sheer magnitude of the nuclear force in atoms. What a wonder to behold!

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> This whole discussion is misplaced. Economically, the cost of fuel for a nuclear plant is almost negligible, about half a cent per kWh! Up-front capital costs are the vast majority of the total. That's where research and venture capital should be focused, not on squeezing down the half-cent.

<comment><USER24> Is that the commodity cost of the ore, or does it include the cost of the fuel rod assembly and assorted middlemen costs?

<comment><USER23> Everything up to the final fuel rods. See here (go to Operating Costs): [http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic- as...](http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic- aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx)

<comment><USER24> Thank you for the link.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I was reading like 'Morton Salt Reactor' and thinking do we really have one of those.

<comment><USER26> drove past there today; Geiger counter didnt budge, so i guess not :/

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> even 2x is pretty damn good, though not being able to consume spent fuel is a huge bummer.

what of the claimed safety benefits? and how completely can it use up _new_ fuel (thus reducing its own waste)?

</comment><comment><USER27> Not a nuke guy -- if you slow/stop the reaction, and the salt solidifies in all the piping, how do you get it started again? Sure, the salt near the reactor becomes liquid again, but there's no flow through the pipes to the pumps & heat exchanger and all you have is convection flow in/near the vessel itself, and maybe the heat eventually works its way through the plumbing.

Do you wrap all the pipes & pumps in heat tape?

<comment><USER28> They use salts that melt at low temperature, and don't boil easily.

So they are unlikely to ever get cold enough to solidify, and if they do, can be melted with external energy.

And yes, they do insulate the pipes. So heat from the reactor would eventually flow and melt all the salt.

<comment><USER4> They also do run heater wires along the pipes. Same with liquid metal cooled reactors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> While doubling the efficiency is still great, I'm not sure we should trust people who make errors in such basic calculations to build a freaking nuclear reactor.

75x should have been the red flag from the first mention, it's such a huge figure. It's not like they are switching from fission to fusion.

<comment><USER21> It's actually feasible with fast reactors. Conventional reactors fission U235 and a little plutonium which gets bred from U238, but most of the U238 and plutonium just ends up as waste. Fast reactors fission the plutonium just fine, and ultimately can use up virtually all the U238. So they produce very little waste, most of that is short-lived, and they get up to 100x more power out of the same amount of uranium ore.

But Transatomic isn't a fast reactor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Also interesting: [http://www.ted.com/talks/taylor_wilson_my_radical_plan_for_s...](http://www.ted.com/talks/taylor_wilson_my_radical_plan_for_small_nuclear_fission_reactors)

</comment><comment><USER31> "technology journalists all too credulous." ha, I guess so.

</comment><comment><USER32> Sounds like another would-be Theranos.

</comment><comment><USER33> This title is extremely misleading. Makes it sounds like there has been a nuclear accident, and subtly stokes fears of nuclear technology.

<comment><USER34> Guys. It's a pun. This how article titles work. Welcome to the last 50 years of American journalism.

<comment><USER35> HN has been on an extreme title pedantry kick for a bit now. Hoping it cools off a little.

<comment><USER36> What is the expected half-life of the cooling period?

<comment><USER37> I thought the pun was obvious; after all, that would be a waste of unspent material.....

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Misleading title. The way this is phrased, it sounds like a reactor meltdown occurred (!) and is now under scrutiny.

In reality, it's just an energy startup's exaggerated performance claims that "melted down" (were proven incorrect) when examined by the community.

<comment><USER39> Are you a native speaker of English? If so, how would a Molten Salt Reactor make any claims?

<comment><USER40> The title is a garden path sentence trying to be too clever with using "melt down" in the context of nuclear reactors. I had to read the first few sentences to have any idea what it was talking about. You don't need to question people's language skills for this. Regardless, it's easy to take "Molten Salt Reactor" as the name of a company, just as if you saw a title saying "Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant claims meltdown".

<comment><USER39> I'm just tired of people on HN complaining about misleading titles like if they were something that kicked your dog. If you are a native speaker that was familiar enough with nuclear power to know what a 'molten salt reactor' might be (the journal is 'powermag', after all), then for you to read that title as "omg! there might be a meltdown" is just being lazy.

Please don't demand the dumbing-down of content for everyone else because you want to be spoon-fed.

<comment><USER40> I really find your tone unnecessarily aggressive. There's nothing dumbed-down about titles that read clearly on the first scan.

<comment><USER39> Two centuries of journalistic tradition disagree with you. Newspapers have _always_ dones this, hence my comment on the native speaker. If you're a native speaker, you will have grown up with this kind of pun happening around you all the time.

And yes, my tone might be a bit aggressive, but people making trivial complaints about titles has been on the rise at HN recently. I've been hanging around here for years, and it's never been a problem before. You then talk about (horror!) having to read the first two sentences of the article to realise that it's not in fact a nuclear meltdown, though really you should have realised there wasn't a nuclear meltdown when it mentioned students a dozen words in.

Besides, reading it the way you're suggesting would mean that the supposed nuclear meltdown was _caused_ by the scrutiny, which is just nonsensical.

This is what frustrates me into making these comments; that people prefer to be spoon-fed content rather than use their brain a little.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Are we close to peak bullshit for this cycle? I've about had enough.

<comment><USER42> Thank you for your deeply insightful contributions.

<comment><USER41> Read my profile.

<comment><USER35> Your abysmal attitude probably contributes a hefty amount to your feelings about this place. You basically just told that dude to go kill himself. What a nice guy you are.

<comment><USER41> ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Theranos 2.0...

<comment><USER44> no, theranos actively lied about their product, this crew got their stuff reviewed and has since revised their claims (which seems to still be pretty good improvements)

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> people need to end this ridiculous obsession with fission for energy. solar and wind. thats all we need. all the nuclear stuff should be limited to research. when fusion is ready then we can do that. solar, wind and batteries are here and ready to go. they are already rolling out. anything else is a complete distraction and waste of time. im so fucking tired of this.

<comment><USER46> The appeal of fission is really dead simple: each fission event releases 200x more energy than the equivalent chemical reactions. It would also take very large amounts of land to replace a single nuclear reactor with the equivalent in wind or solar.

I'm not 100% sold on nuclear as being a panacea, but it is hardly a waste of time.

<comment><USER4> You're right in sentiment. But by my figuring (which is energy per mass of fuel consumed), nuclear reactions release 2 million times more energy that chemical reactions. [1]

If you got 100% of your energy as an average American (transportation, electricity, heat, etc.) for your entire life, you'd consume 1.5 soda cans of nuclear fuel. The tiny footprint associated with this incredible resource is why nuclear matters.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densitie...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densities_of_common_energy_storage_materials)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Alarmist misleading title. Downvote.

There are other companies (FLIBE, Lightbridge) researching LFTR MSR that have promise. Just because some grad students made ridiculous claims, it shouldn't throw shade on the whole industry.</comment>


Ask HN: Ordinary user focus groups re: perception of regular SSL cert vs. EV SSL - <AUTHOR> Specifically I'm looking for documentation of focus groups or polls conducted of ordinary, non-technical end users, asking them their opinions of the trustworthiness of an ecommerce site with regular SSL certificate (standard lock displayed in browser GUI) vs EV SSL (green bar with lock and company name displayed in browser GUI).
With EV SSL certificates at $99/year now, and the paperwork not too onerous, it seems only logical that any site accepting credit cards online should be EV.
I'm looking for data to support this assertion. <comment><USER2> I appreciate your thoughts, it is really logical that website accepting payments online and want to secure their website with best GUI of Green Address Bar; should have to represent few documents. Unfortunately you won't be able to find exact data you are looking for, you should have to look for various survey conducted on EV SSL and also on Standard SSL.

I would like to give you links for few surveys.

[http://www.reportlinker.com/p02779349-summary/Global-EV- SSL-...](http://www.reportlinker.com/p02779349-summary/Global-EV-SSL- Certification-Market.html) [http://www.netcraft.com/internet-data-mining/ssl- survey/](http://www.netcraft.com/internet-data-mining/ssl-survey/) [http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2011/04/18/extended- valida...](http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2011/04/18/extended-validation- ssl-certificates-4-years-of-growth.html) (OLD) [https://casecurity.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/04/CASC-Consu...](https://casecurity.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/04/CASC-Consumer-Survey-Report-2015.pdf)

Old discussion: [http://ask.metafilter.com/116185/EV-Extended-Validation- SSL-...](http://ask.metafilter.com/116185/EV-Extended-Validation-SSL-vs- Standard-SSL-Certificates)

You can find all documents required to get EV SSL Certificate on below website, just search for 'EV SSL Validation Process': [https://www.cheapsslshop.com/ev-ssl- certificates](https://www.cheapsslshop.com/ev-ssl-certificates)</comment>


Advertise on Google? Use +1 Now. - <AUTHOR> http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2011/04/01/facebook-1-a-win-for-adwords-ad-units/

<comment><USER2> Seems that there are two reasons to do this. For search, isn't this just a Blekko-inspired (read: crowdsourced) way to improve Google's search results? And for advertisers, isn't this creating a knock-on, viral effect? Seems like the +1 approach is a pretty good idea.</comment>


Chinese ISP (AS23724 CHINANET-IDC-BJ-AP IDC) hijacked 10% of the Internet - <AUTHOR> http://bgpmon.net/blog/?p=282

<comment><USER2> Interesting story, but I think you misunderstood; The Chinese ISP(s) did not hijack 10% of the internet.

The story states, "Normally [the Chinese ISP] only originates about 40 prefixes, however today for about 15 minutes they originated about ~37,000 unique prefixes ... only about 10% of these prefixes propagated outside of the Chinese network" (Toonk para 1-2.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I copied it from the author

<http://twitter.com/atoonk/status/11840096467></comment></comment>


Show HN: DevMeetie – Community to discover developers events - <AUTHOR> https://www.devmeetie.com/ <comment><USER2> Not much to see, but I subscribed anyway because Lanyrd [1] is basically dead and I am not a huge fan of Meetup's interface.

[1] [https://twitter.com/AhmadNassri/status/1005090197917327363?s...](https://twitter.com/AhmadNassri/status/1005090197917327363?s=19)</comment>


Show HN: Get more information about your users - <AUTHOR> http://signup.getjsonip.com/

<comment><USER2> You sir, have written an informative blog about how not to soft launch. I haven't thought about the inverse voter ring effect, and it looks to make sense.</comment>