Indie game made by 2 people out-selling Spore, Left 4 Dead, & Fallout 3 at Amazon - jim-greer http://2dboy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/amazonnumber2.gif

<comment><AUTHOR> If you haven't already bought it, you should do so right now. A downloadable, DRM free version is available at 2dboy.com -- support these guys.

Btw, this game was supposed to have a 90% piracy rate.. Though their method of calculation wasn't very scientific.. <http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/>

<comment><USER2> It is the only game i have on my mac. it is engaging, thoughtful and emotionally engaging. truly superb work of craft.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> And this is how it all started:

<http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051026/gabler_01.shtml>

<comment><USER4> I still have that in my downloads folder. Hopefully we see a shift that brings the focus back to game play and away from vertex crunching/pixel pushing. If i wanted realism I'd go outside. I'm sure that's heresy in the halls of nVidia.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I feel like Fallout 3 and Left 4 Dead are probably moving better through retail and Steam. Amazon isn't exactly the marketplace where gamers go to order games so they can wait a few days to play it. Most games I buy are impulse purchases, and if I can't have it now then I can't be bothered to get it. World of Goo seems like the kind of game that parents and non-gamers would buy, and I would guess that that demographic shops more on Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER6> That's very cool -- has it been like that for a while or is it temporary spike?

I remember when my book hit #56 on Amazon for one hour, right after it was reviewed by Slashdot. I was so happy to have a screenshot where I was just ahead of Michael Pollan.

<comment><USER7> World of Goo has been consistently well on Steam, so I think it's a general trend.

For every World of Goo there are many other indie games that languish in obscurity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Shockingly popular indie games aren't really anything new--its just that people seem to be noticing them more, especially in this day and age of extremely high budget games. People are always surprised to see one or two-man projects earning money on the same level as games like _Crysis_ , but it seems to have been going on for quite a while.

See my post at <http://news.ycombinator.net/item?id=398305> for another example of a very successful indie game developer.

</comment><comment><USER9> It's World of Goo, right? (The title could be clearer, for those of us who don't play).

Anyone played it? I was thinking about grabbing a copy for the boy.

<comment><USER10> It is World of Goo. I own it and love it, the game idea and environment are very nice, the physics engine makes the game truly interesting and trying to hit the "OCD" bonuses, which are advanced goals like collect 21 goo balls or complete the level under a certain time, are challenging in a thoughtful way.

You can try out the demo first to see if you like it, that's what I'd recommend. It's available on steam as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> And let's not forget the user shared levels, available at <http://goofans.com/> \-- extending the playtime immensely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> jim-greer Update: now it's #1!

[http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/229575/ref=p...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/229575/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_vg_1_2)

</comment><comment><USER11> Rapid-iteration and rapid-prototyping seems to be slowly gaining traction in the gaming industry. The high cost of game development plus high risk makes for an environment where trying out things in small increments and with quick turnaround is very valuable.

This dude talks about it a lot: <http://lostgarden.com>

</comment><comment><USER12> Is there a mailing list for Linux users who want to be updated when a linux version comes out?

Edit: Nevermind, kind of found it <http://2dboy.com/mailman/listinfo/announce_2dboy.com>

</comment><comment><USER13> " ... coming soon for Linux..."

:(

<comment><USER14> Cheer up! At least it's coming to Linux :-)

<comment><USER13> This is true, and that's encouraging.

In the meantime, I may just grab it for win32, see if it plays OK under Wine, and if not use it on a VMware image of XP.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you look carefully you'll notice quite a significant price difference.

<comment><USER16> The difference is most of those games realistically cost over $100M to develop, and World of Goo most probably cost under $100,000. Just goes to show how stale the gaming industry is; even when a large-scale game like Mirrors Edge is released, it's bashed for not being realistic enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> i bought the Wii version (it's online in the Wii store or whatever it's called) for $15. It's a lot of fun.

<comment><USER18> I also bought the Wii version, makes great use of the Wiimote. Lots-O-Fun, Highly recommended.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Well, I guess they are not Indie anymore!

</comment><comment><USER20> i suggest people buy left4dead to catch it up. because THAT game is funtastic.

you have no idea

<comment><USER21> Shame it's massively overpriced for what it is. The only reason I bought it was it was sub-£20 from Amazon at the time, and even that's pretty steep unless they're planning some epic free expansions for it.</comment></comment>


12 Ways to Improve Your Instagram Organic Reach - <AUTHOR> http://www.amyshamblen.com/12-ways-to-improve-your-instagram-organic-reach/ <comment> atom-x The author is a designer, and so I'm puzzled by the choice they've made to use faint header and typeface colors... the whole page looks washed-out, except for the images. Very strange.</comment>


Ask HN: I keep doing the same thing over and over, how do I change? - <AUTHOR>

So in the past 4 years I worked on creating a SaaS product in a particular niche and it goes down something like this:
1) Build product
2) Get a few paying customers
3) Start working on improving it for customers
4) Realize product is bloated or is pretty lacking in features.
5) Build more features.
6) No increase in sales, keeps building
7) Gets tired, refund users, abandon working on it.
8) Starts hating 9-5 job, repeat the whole cycle again.
Is my problem, finding a market fit first? I automatically assumed that because of poor sales, I must be lacking in features so I immediately start building. But I get really burnt out by doing this. I almost always end up refunding my customers because I realize what I spent months building is lacking.
The biggest problem I have is, when I start to make incremental changes to the product, I keep having the urge to restart from scratch. However, it's a huge time sink to do this again and again (4 times already). I'm beginning to think this is just an issue with me.
I'm basically in my fourth iteration and I think it's finally clicking. Something is deadly wrong with my thought process.
Any insight would help.
I built the product. I built the website. I got a few customers. Then I get burnt out building more features or making it "perfect". Then I can't work on it anymore and so I look for a job.
After 4 years, I either introduce a change in my process and turn this into a sustainable income or I just give up completely. <comment><USER2> Usually poor sales isn't an indication of lack of features so much as _the wrong_ features. Features that users don't use are _worse_ than features that don't exist, because they clutter up the UI and make the product harder to use for everyone that doesn't use them.

Start building into your workflow a regular evaluation of "Do my users seriously love this feature? Does it engender a strong positive emotional reaction for a significant fraction of people?" If the answer to that is "no", then kill it. Remove it from the UI and rip the code out of your codebase. As a side benefit, you'll have less of an urge to rewrite from scratch all the time, because the codebase will be smaller and more manageable.

</comment><comment><USER3> Were the paying customers actually using it? Did they love the product (ie, would be a 9 or 10 on an NPS survey)?

If yes, then you should have worked more on sales and marketing.

If no, then you built the wrong feature. Blindly adding a collection of features won't help. You need to figure out what the one feature is that will make customers rave about the product.

The core problem might be that your product ideas were "pretty good" ideas and not "very good" ideas. "Pretty good" ideas are deadly, because they are just good enough to suck you in, but not good enough to make a product that customers rave about, and thus not good enough to make with a product that is easy to market or spread by word of mouth.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes they were. They did like it, I don't know about an NPS survey.

My product was similar to others already existing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> No advice but I am impressed you've been able to build multiple products and get people to pay for them. That's pretty cool all by itself! Way farther than I've gotten :)

</comment><comment><USER5> Although there's a lot more in-depth, actionable information out there, this blog post by Amy Hoy seems tailor-made to your question:

[http://unicornfree.com/2013/how-do-you-create-a-product- peop...](http://unicornfree.com/2013/how-do-you-create-a-product-people-want- to-buy)

<comment><AUTHOR> its really good article. I wish someone would upload amy hoys course its like really expensive.

<comment><USER5> I hope you're trolling.

If not: I think you'll find find the HN community doesn't react well to either stealing content or complaining about the (quite reasonable, in this case) cost of people's products.

<comment><AUTHOR> I wasn't. I can't afford a couple grand for a dozen power point slides. If somebody wants to share it then I would be thankful, definitely won't view him as a thief. You are not an ambassador for the entire HN community and their view on digital copyright or ethics for that matter. People complain about cost of people's products all the time on Show HN if you haven't noticed.

<comment><USER5> I didn't realize the comment I was responding to was from the OP. I really am sorry if I came off as harsh, but I stand by my comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think the key bit is 7) Gets tired...

If you get tired of working on a profitable side project - sell it! Don't refund users or abandon it. There are lots of people that would like to get started and learn from an existing product.

Decide what is the most enjoyable part for you. Finding the idea, building it, solving problems, selling? Try to do that more.

Maybe you end up building SasS products for other people, partnering on a project you really love.

Like you say, you can't keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results. The only reason to do something over and over is if you enjoy it.

</comment><comment><USER7> What are you doing to market the product?

From the outside, it seems likely that you have the common developer mentality of "If I build it, the customers will come."

If a business does not have a reliable, repeatable way to acquire customers profitably then any success they may have is based on luck. It is much easier to just try to code that problem away, but likely you need to step away from the code and start talking to customers so you can find out what they really care about and where you can find more people like them.

<comment><AUTHOR> literally I just put it out there and it gets organic traffic.

I'm working on discovering channels and selling to that niche. One way is linkedin but it's a tough sell.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Maybe the problem is perfectionism. For me it's often hard to know how important what is. So it's easy to get stuck in a problem that is not that critical right now.

I hope that helps a bit, Martin

</comment><comment><USER9> Would you consider telling us what the past projects were? I've been in a SAAS idea drought for six years now. Or perhaps you'd want to sell one of your past projects?

</comment><comment><USER10> Don't do it alone?

<comment><USER11> That's the first thing that went through my head. Thought I've not had the OP's success, I've had some of his problems. Doing it alone makes those problems worse.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Laundromatch – Community-based laundry services - <AUTHOR> https://www.laundromatchapp.com/

<comment><USER2> Is it just me, or is this kinda gross? I totally understand if it's just me.

<comment><USER3> Ripe for abuse, but not gross in principle.

This trend of "crowd-source everything" is getting a bit silly though. It really just makes more sense to operate a laundry service with pickup/dropoff. If there's no demand for that service, then there is no demand for this one.

<comment><USER2> I agree and disagree. Like the comment below, I could see this being really useful in some metro areas. I think what these crowd-source apps are missing are dynamic pricing based on purchasing power. $10 for a load of laundry in San Jose? Yeah, that sounds great. In Austin TX that's pretty high.

<comment><USER4> True, but I'm from Austin Texas and just moved to San Francisco, so I have some insight into this. I'm not sure if there's as big of a demand for laundry pickup services outside of dense urban areas like New York and San Francisco (where many residents do not have in-home washers and dryers). In Austin, most people have laundry machines, so it might not make sense there.

For crowd-sourced apps more generally I think you have a valid point with respect to cost of living adjustments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hi HN, I'm one of the co-founders of Laundromatch, I would be happy to answer any questions!

<comment><USER6> Is pickup/delivery $10 per load or $10 per pickup/delivery?

What happens if the host ruins my clothes (because, for example, they didn't follow the included instructions)?

<comment><USER5> The pricing is $10 per load to do wash/dry/fold and extra $10 if you want pickup/delivery. For example, 2 loads with pickup would be $20 (for laundry) + $10 (for delivery), total of $30.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> $10 for a load of laundry seems really expensive to me. What am I missing?

<comment><USER8> Really depends on the size of a "load". At least a dollar per pound is standard. If their "load" is more than 10 pounds of clothes, then it's easily within range.

<comment><USER4> The average front-loaded laundry machine can hold ~18 lbs. Washio and wash and folds cost around $1.60 a pound, so this is close to $20 cheaper. Still $10 cheaper if you get delivery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My closest laundromat does 10lb of laundry for $12.5 with separate washes for colors, white and whatnot, AND fold.

This seems absurdly expensive.

<comment><USER10> Out of curiosity, how much is 10lb of laundry? I don't think I have any idea how much my clothes weigh.

<comment><USER4> Found this on housekeeping.com:

Front loading washing machines can hold as much as 18 lbs of clothing. So how many items are in a lb. of clothing? To find out how much your loads weigh, you can weigh yourself holding a load of dirty clothing, and subtract it from your weight without the dirty load. While weight varies with type of material, these are some general guidelines. Twin Sized Quilt-3-5 lbs. Complete Child Outfit-1-3 lbs. Complete Adult Outfit-3-5 lbs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Are these prices for real? I'm paying 3.50€ for a load in the laundromat next door.

<comment><USER12> Most self-serve laundromats in the US charge $3-7 per washer and dryers cost $0.25-0.50 per 10 minutes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> The name sounds a lot like our old mobile game "LaundroMatch" (with an updated release coming soon).

[http://laundromatch.com/](http://laundromatch.com/)

</comment><comment><USER14> > Why pay ~$27/load at local wash and folds?

Does one load of laundry in NYC really cost this much? Where I live, it's ~$7.

<comment><USER4> You have $7 wash and fold places in New York? Or are you talking about laundromats? Because the ones in San Francisco run you about $25-30 a load.

<comment><USER6> He said it's $7 where he lives; he didn't say he lives in New York.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> amazing idea! i love it</comment>


Lack of women developers is hurting the industry - <AUTHOR> http://blog.codengo.com/2015/08/state-of-developer-nation-where-are-the-women/

<comment><USER2> great article!</comment>


Why is SO running a promoted tweet with scaremongering Wikipedia misinformation? - <AUTHOR> https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/401137/why-is-so-running-a-promoted-tweet-with-scaremongering-wikipedia-misinformation <comment><AUTHOR> The tweet was deleted, the image [0] is all that remains. I'm off to check dev tools on a few Wikipedia pages. Just in case fiction becomes reality.

[0] [https://i.stack.imgur.com/Rv9egl.jpg](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Rv9egl.jpg)

<comment><USER2> I'm guessing it was some kind of failed humor response to Paul Ford's thread about his 8-year old vandalizing a wiki page.

[https://twitter.com/ftrain/status/1298350509221388291](https://twitter.com/ftrain/status/1298350509221388291)

<comment><USER3> It's humorous but I don't like normalizing the idea that it's OK for authority figures to lie to the people they are charged to protect. That's part of the mess we're in with policing.</comment></comment></comment>


For C programmers that hate C++ - <AUTHOR> http://users.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/~ttsiod/cpp.html <comment><USER2> I like the idea of this article, but I'm not sure that he chose a very good example. He's gone from showing a fragile run-time solution in C, to a slightly clunky compile-time approach in C++. But if this is the whole goal, why not just create a separate function for each of the three pixel types in C?

For me, the interesting example would be showing how elegantly one can do the run-time solution in C++. In C, I'd probably give the structs a common header and add a rasterize function pointer called from a common loop. What's a more elegant way to do it in C++?

[edit: The author does point out elsewhere that in this case he really does want a compile-time solution, although I'm not sure I understand his reasoning: [http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/fzwlh/for_c_pro...](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/fzwlh/for_c_programmers_that_hate_c/c1jx5ml) ]

<comment><USER3> This example becomes much stronger when you have more than one rasterize function. Writing 3 separate functions for 3 pixel types is reasonable. Writing 9 functions for 3 pixel types * 3 rasterization styles is repetitive and error-prone. Writing 27 separate functions because you added 3 blend modes is very, very bad.

At that point in C, you either start writing "creative" preprocessor macros, write a custom code generator or give up and eat the performance penalty of the run-time solution. A rasterization function needs to perform on the order of 1024x768x30 calls per second on the low end. Compared to inlinable static function calls, function pointer overhead becomes a big deal at that scale.

"Creative" template abuse can be much worse than "creative" preprocessor abuse. However, elegant application of templates, such as policy-based design, can solve code permutation situations without repetition or performance problems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Generic rant from someone who doesn't actually understand (and perhaps has not even heard?) the arguments people make against C++.

<comment><USER5> Not a rant. Plenty of code, not just talk. And he made a very good point, at that.

<comment><USER4> Nothing about a rant that precludes it from having code...

Everybody recognizes that C++ is generally _safer_ to program in than C. This article doesn't discuss the real issues C++ has, it only addresses strawmen arguments against C++ that in reality are never actually seriously considered.

<comment><USER5> It addresses pretty relevant issues concerning C vs C++.

C++'s major faults are addressed not by C but by a higher level language.

<comment><USER4> How about: C++ is absurd to parse compared to higher level languages that address it's _numerous_ flaws, and compared to C.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


MV(Game): Need help with game ideas for 1Millioncoins.com - <AUTHOR> <comment><AUTHOR> I've decided to pivot my 1millioncoins.com domain to a game. it would be similar to Pokemon. What are somethings you would like to see in a game? Its going to be a mobile app.

Would you refer other people to the game if you could earn coins or earn portions of coins from them finding coins.

It's got 2 stages when you can just find coins and when all the coins are gone and everyone has collected all the coins. maybe you can trade coins for trivia questions, cool, funny content(images etc) not sure. This is why I need help.</comment>


NSA growth fueled by need to target terrorists - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-growth-fueled-by-need-to-target-terrorists/2013/07/21/24c93cf4-f0b1-11e2-bed3-b9b6fe264871_print.html

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm curious: How do they detect the location of a cell phone that is turned off?

<comment><USER2> "Some handsets can't be fully powered down without removing the battery; for instance, some Nokia models will wake up when turned off if an alarm is set." ([http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html](http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html)) I'm guessing that there even might be models with built in battery backup for this kind of functionality.

<comment><USER3> And with that: Cellular devices are designed to transmit some kind of pilot signal even when turned off but with operational battery

[http://www.endoacustica.com/gsm_interceptor_en.htm](http://www.endoacustica.com/gsm_interceptor_en.htm)</comment></comment></comment>


Why Learning to Fly (or Code) Is Easier Than You Think - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/01/why-learning-to-fly-or-code-is-easier-than-you-think/69324/

<comment><USER2> _Why Writing For_ The Atlantic _Is Easier Than You Think_

I expected there to be some sort of rigorous process--a waiting period? a physical? some paperwork?--before I'd be allowed to publish an essay to hundreds of thousands of readers. But here's what happened instead: On a whim, I called a friend of mine who's a columnist for his local alt-weekly and set up an appointment for a $79, 45-minute lesson. Two weeks later I picked a mildly unusual experience of mine and gave a brief, rushed overview of it, remaining about as deep as a kiddie pool throughout.

Thanks to my friend, I knew the secret to writing modern middlebrow pop- culture essays -- just draw some arbitrary connection between your topic and another topic that seems, at first, to be totally unrelated. Unfortunately, I ran out of time before my deadline, and I never really found an interesting connection. But it's hard to complain when you're playing in the clouds.

<comment><USER3> On a related note, is it just me, or everyday are we seeing articles from theatlantic.com?

I didn't notice so many a year or two ago. Seems like every time I bring up the front page any more, there's an article from there.

Not complaining really -- some are really good articles (although I'm not so crazy about this one, and many do have a tendency to run on a bit). Just weird.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When I was in my 20s during the dot com boom, I decided I'd take up flying to peruse a lifelong dream. I was loving it. After a couple of months I was almost ready for my first solo flight.

Then I started looking at my total monthly expenses for instruction and plane rental. When I looked at the numbers, I decided that this must be a good time to buy a house. I was spending what was, for me, a great deal of money. The money I was spending on flying easily paid for a house payment once I made that decision.

One other thing that was quite unexpected. At the time, I was working as a consultant doing large ERP system implementations for fortune 500 companies. As anyone who does this for a living will tell you, this can be a very stressful occupation. The multitasking aspect of flying was like: watch 15 things all at once, make sure nothing goes wrong, and if you screw up, the consequences will be extremely dire, and everything is very time critical, and all eyes are on you as you make very important actions. At some point, it occurred to me: "hey! This is exactly the same kind of stress I feel at work!"

Another thing that surprised me initially about flying small planes. It feels like being in a flying lawnmower, nothing at all like being in a commercial jet. It made me feel very sick at first. They say you get used to it with time.

I think, though, that at some point the situational awareness and multitasking becomes second nature, and you can do it feeling merely alert instead of stressed and overtaxed. But I never spent enough money on flying time to get to that point personally.

There's nothing like the fun of staring at a map and plotting where you're going to go, though, I hope I'm financially successful enough to get back into it some day when other affairs are in order.

</comment><comment><USER5> Flying is easy, paying for the lessons and gas is not.

</comment><comment><USER6> One of my advisors once summed up aviation-as-a-hobby in one sentence: "The times in your life during which you've got adequate free time to devote to the hobby, you don't have the money... and when you've got the money for it, you don't have the free time."

</comment><comment><USER7> "The net effect of which is to make "programming" an exercise in (a) wanting to do something, (b) realizing that someone's probably done it before, (c) looking up what they did, and (d) tweaking it a little bit. As I tweak I begin to understand, and to become less a user of all this wonderful mess than a contributor to it."

I wouldn't say that's what programming is. I would say that's a good way to just create something simple. A thoughtful understanding of the entire stack is necessary to create a solid base, but given the fact many people just wan't something quick his approach should be fine.

</comment><comment><USER8> Maybe its just but I couldn't get any connection between flying planes and coding from the article. But I do have learning to fly planes on my to-do list

<comment><USER9> Try a discovery flight. It's a cheap, no-commitment way to see what flying small planes is like.

After you're back on the ground you'll probably find yourself bumping up the priority of flying lessons on your todo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Except the penalty for crashing when you fly is much more severe than when code crashes.

<comment><USER11> unless your code flies the plane :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but - as interested as I genuinely am in learning to fly one day, why is it that so many flying-related articles tend to crop up on HN over the months?

<comment><USER13> It's an interesting question. The logic of the article isn't great, but perhaps there truly are some deep similarities between flight and code. As he points out, both have a tradition of learning by on the job experience, and providing a sense of freedom to those willing to master the basics. Both also have an somewhat uneasy interplay between the 'professionals' and the 'amateurs'.

From the article, the most salient part for me was the "World War II attitude". There are tons of regulations for flying, but in end one is truly in charge of the vessel. Pilots and engineers are among relatively few professions where one can answer 'unable' and presume that the rest of the conversation will take this as fact. You may have to deal with the consequences later, but in the moment you are the expert in control.</comment></comment>


Intact, Packed Etruscan Tomb Found - <AUTHOR> http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/intact-packed-etruscan-tomb-found-151204.htm <comment><USER2> "One of the sarcophagi, made from stone, bears a long inscription". Given that these sorts of inscriptions are usually very stereotypical and therefore not very revealing linguistically, this sound intriguing, is it too much to hope that it will advance our knowledge of the language ?

</comment><comment><USER3> A video (in Italian) at [http://corrieredellumbria.corr.it/video/203001/Citta- della-P...](http://corrieredellumbria.corr.it/video/203001/Citta-della-Pieve-- nuove-immagini.html) Interesting parts from 0:20 to 0:50 and after 1:15. That pike scares me a little but hopefully they know what they are doing. The man being interviewed says that they're not using heavy machinery because it would destroy all the chances of doing a stratigraphy analysis.

</comment><comment><USER4> The Etruscans are fascinating; they're _so_ close in time to the early Roman and middle-kingdom Egyptian civilisations that we know so much about, and they were demonstrably very familiar to both of those civilisations, yet we know so very little about them for certain.

<comment><USER5> There is a theory that Romans destroyed many records and artifacts of it. They were subject to the Etruscan kings early in its history and were not very fond of that aspect of their hostory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm always suspicious of Etruscan finds. Some original 'tombs' were empty when first recorded, then mysteriously full of artifacts decades later. Something fishy going on.

And the finds are always so 'pat'. The museum I visited had amphorae with amusing graffiti, toys and knickknacks, even a 'pencil cup' with the Etruscan and Greek alphabets written around the top. So convenient! So that everything else could be instantly translated, this 'Rosetta stone' was included no extra charge.

And now a complete tomb found, with just the right sort of cool stuff to get the tourists coming back for another 10 years. Ok.

<comment><USER7> So your theory is there was no such thing as an Etruscan people?

<comment><USER8> This is the first I've heard of counterfeit Etruscan sites, but it's not entirely dismissable. Early archaeology was a mix of wholesale grave looting and falsifying finds to generate interest in the site and give glory to the discoverer. Egyptian mummies floating around Europe during "Egyptomania" (after Napolean's visit) were often much, MUCH younger than ancient Egypt.

It seems unlikely to me that any modern sites are actually digging up planted relics, but inflating the finds at tourist sites by importing from one site to another, or creating replicas to make up for assumed grave robbery? Almost harder to believe that doesn't happen.

<comment><USER7> Going to the length of making up a language, as that guy suggests?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Basic Income Observations Log: Entry One – The Importance of Security - <AUTHOR> http://www.scottsantens.com/basic-income-observations-log-entry-one-security <comment><USER2> The article gives some interesting perspective. It talks about security vs. stress. What will be interesting is security vs. motivation. Wondering to what extent the author is motivated by his goals vs. a sense of obligation to his patrons, and how that compares to the motivation generated by insecurity.</comment>


Twilio launches UK SMS at $0.04 in/out - <AUTHOR> http://www.twilio.com/blog/2012/01/twilio-expands-uk-capabilities-with-sms-launch.html

<comment><USER2> Awesome work Twilio, been looking forward to being able to play around with SMS as much as I have calls without having to use a US number.

 _Important Note for non-UK Customers: if you would like to use a UK number for SMS please note that this is a domestic messaging product for sending messages to UK numbers only. Additionally, we are not able to guarantee delivery of international senders sending messages from non-UK phone numbers or from locaitons outside the UK._

This isn't something I've come across before - have I just ignored it from other services, or is this an issue unique to Twilio? Not that it will be of much importance I don't think.

<comment><USER3> Its not a huge issue, but we found some customers were getting confused and since the majority of our customer base is still in the U.S. right now we're trying to make things as clear as possible. In the ideal world, you'd be able to seamlessly send text messages anywhere in the world, but that's now how it works with Twilio... yet.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Works out to 2.6pence each. Which is exceptional for outgoing, but charging for incoming as well is a new one, we don't really do that here.

<comment><USER4> Its actually fairly standard practice for bulk SMS providers to charge for receiving messages as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> The UK based sms service I use doesn't. But theres a monthly fee for the number. I'm sure this was the case with others when I was shopping around as well (again, UK based).

<comment><USER5> At Twilio are focused on creating a platform that enables developers to build value-added applications for their customers. To this end, we have never offered a product that allows developers to send out messages without a number to receive replies. We believe two-way messaging offers our developers the ability to create unique application experiences and has real value to our developer community. As such, we choose to be agressive with cheap outbound pricing and charge for incoming messages.

This is our first foray in to SMS outside of North America though so please send me feedback on your thoughts at patrick [at] twilio

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> From the documentation, it seems that you need to set a "from" number when sending an SMS. Does anyone know why this would be the case? Is it possible to send no-reply style SMS messages with this service?

I'm thinking along the lines of phone number verification, and I wouldn't want to be charged if people accidentally replied to the message.

<comment><USER5> All messages from twilio MUST originate from a real phone number that you have purchased from twilio.

If you do not wish to receive replies you can clear the URL associated with your number.

<comment><USER6> Thanks for the clarification.

Just to confirm (as it's a real number), if a user sends an SMS to that number, but no URL is associated with it, will I be charged? I would assume not, but worth checking!

<comment><USER3> Nope, you won't be charged if you remove the URL associated with that number

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Ireland has also been added but unfortunately Twilio doesn't support SMS in Ireland yet.

edit: Also Austria, Denmark, France and Poland: [http://www.twilio.com/blog/2012/01/twilio-launches-phone- num...](http://www.twilio.com/blog/2012/01/twilio-launches-phone-numbers-in- five-european-countries.html)

<comment><USER8> If it's SMS you're specifically looking for WebText.com† supports Ireland (and is based there), as well as most other countries.

†API docs: <http://www.webtext.com/api-documentation/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> FWIW Nexmo charges $0.0376 per SMS in the UK (<http://nexmo.com/pricing/index.html>) and supports over 200 countries. (I am not affiliated w/ Nexmo.)

<comment><USER10> Their web site also thinks it's still 2011.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> If you are so inclined, you could take the DIY route and go straight to the source: <http://voxbone.com>

<comment><USER12> Don't forget bandwidth.com. That's one of the main providers Twilio uses in the US for all their local numbers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm not sure what the big deal is. Tropo has much better international coverage and costs less.</comment>


The Printed Word in Peril - <AUTHOR> https://harpers.org/archive/2018/10/the-printed-word-in-peril/ <comment><USER2> There's two major oversights in all the arguments like this:

1\. Books are more analogous to vinyl than they are to CD's. People think they're cool, they like having bookshelves. In the age of screens, having something physical that you can set on a coffee table is refreshing.

Print might be more niche, but it will no go anywhere in our lifetimes.

2\. It assumes that digital reading experiences are inherently the way we see them right now.

I can't for the life of me read anything lengthy on my phone, but I'll tear through thick old books on Kindle.

A big part of that is the kindle screen will show almost the same number of words as a printed page.

My iPhone shows less than half of that. Paragraphs that read smoothly in print or E-ink devices don't even fit on the screen. Social posts and tiny snippets fit well. Throw in some notifications and why would anyone be able to stay undistracted while using a phone?

The more I look at these things the less it looks like something inherent to print and digital and more like a collection of design decisions and consequences on what happens in the screens, not the screen themselves.

</comment><comment><USER3> The Norman Mailer anecdote seems strange. I think I read more than average; I finish about 30 books a year, most of which are literary fiction or history books. Still, I haven't read a Norman Mailer book anytime recently. There's literally thousands of years' worth of literature from all over the world; why him, in particular?

Some other things that strike me: I agree that a phone or iPad isn't much good for reading a novel, but I love reading on my Kindle (and the built-in dictionary makes it easier to approach foreign-language works, although I still don't do this as often as I feel I ought to).

The idea that books have to compete with more stimulating technologies isn't new either: radio, movies, and TV were there first. Is this a wholly new trend or the acceleration of an existing one?

The distraction of always-on Internet is certainly real, though, and exacerbated by smartphones. And it is striking that even journalists and political leaders often don't seem very well-read, particularly when you go back and look at 19th-Century rhetoric rife with allusions to the Bible or Greek myth that are opaque to much of the modern audience.

<comment><USER4> > _The Norman Mailer anecdote seems strange. I think I read more than average; > I finish about 30 books a year, most of which are literary fiction or > history books. Still, I haven 't read a Norman Mailer book anytime recently. > There's literally thousands of years' worth of literature from all over the > world; why him, in particular?_

Well, 4-5 decades ago ago he was for US mainstream literature world what Led Zeppelin were for 70s hard rock fans...

So, the essay author explains very well why he asked the question: to show the very short span of literary glory, from someone who was ubiquitous and celebrated not long ago.

He also adds, when 2 out of 300 raise a hand: "Frankly I was surprised it was that many".

Half a century or so ago, and for a long time before that, people didn't just chose from "thousands of years' worth of literature from all over the world" \-- they knew the authors of their time, and the times before, with many overlaps that formed a canon, not a free choice among thousands of works (if that, since many don't read that much, period).

> _The idea that books have to compete with more stimulating technologies isn > 't new either: radio, movies, and TV were there first. Is this a wholly new > trend or the acceleration of an existing one?_

Does it matter? Both are comparatively recent -- there are people alive in the US who were born when none of them (radio, tv) were available at any home.

<comment><USER3> Sure, and once upon a time Mr. Ed was wildly popular. Nonetheless, nobody would start off an article about the death of television by complaining that he asked a roomful of people and nobody had watched it recently.

<comment><USER4> That's because television is a real time medium. At best you get re-runs. Reading is an on-demand medium, and popular authors can very well stay on the reading lists of subsequent generations, the way Mailer himself would have read Melville, Hemingway, Poe, James, and so on.

TV is also shallowly based on technical quality (people wont see black and white shows etc), whereas the written word on paper is a stable technology for centuries, if not millennia.

<comment><USER5> >television is a real time medium

Arguably that's less the case than it used to be insofar as you can get your hands on many older TV shows if you want to.

That said, TV--and, especially, historic network TV--is a lot more rooted in its time and place than a lot of writing is. It's partly for technical reasons as you say. The production values of a lot of older shows are going to be a distraction even if the content were otherwise modern. But TV shows also tend to reflect (to an arguably greater degree than the typical film) the period in which they were made. Not just the look but a lot of the sensibilities.

I'd wager than there are very few TV shows dating to the 1970s and before that are really watchable today whereas there are plenty of films going back to almost the beginning of "talkies." (There are some good silent films too but obviously those have to be approached with a somewhat different mindset.)

There are some exceptions. For example, episodes of The Twilight Zone or a series like M _A_ S*H can still be appreciated, but for the most part, no. (ADDED: For example, All in the Family was a groundbreaking show when it aired. But, although I haven't seen an episode in years, I'm willing to bet it would come across as very much a period piece today.)

<comment><USER6> Some other exceptions; Dr. Who, Pippi Longstocking, Battlestar Galactica, Logan's Run, Star Trek, The Tripods, Chocky, Colditz, Cosmos with Carl Sagan, all good series which are still watchable

<comment><USER5> I think you're being very generous--or at least not representative of people in general. Even a lot of the original Star Trek doesn't hold up very well and, personally, I didn't care for about half that list even at the time they aired.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I find particularly interesting the claim that

        the literary novel ha[s] quit center stage of our culture and [is] in the process,
        via university creative writing programs, of becoming a conservatory form,
        like the easel painting or the symphony.

Drawing on Bakhtin, we can see BDDM (bi-directional digital media) as having precisely the qualities previously celebrated in the novel:

        Among genres long since completed and in part already dead, the novel is the only developing
        genre. It is the only genre that was born and nourished in a new era of world history and
        therefore it is deeply akin to that era, whereas the other major genres entered that era as
        already fixed forms, as an inheritance, and only now are they adapting themselves-some
        better, some worse-to the new conditions of their existence. Compared with them, the novel
        appears to be a creature from an alien species. It gets on poorly with other genres. It
        fights for its own hegemony in literature; wherever it triumphs, the other older genres go
        into decline.
        ...
        The novel parodies other genres (precisely in their role as genres); it exposes the
        conventionality of their forms and their language; it squeezes out some genres and
        incorporates others into its own peculiar structure, re-formulating and re-accentuating them...
        Those genres that stubbornly preserve their old canonic nature begin to appear stylized...
        Parodic stylizations of canonized genres and styles occupy an essential place in the novel...
        What are the salient features of this novelization of other genres suggested by us above?
        They become more free and flexible, their language renews itself by incorporating extraliterary
        heteroglossia and the "novelistic" layers of literary language, they become dialogized,
        permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally-this is the most important thing-
        the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic openendedness,
        a living contact with unfinished, still evolving contemporary reality (the openended present).

I don't know, I'm excited about computational media and the new kinds of reading and being we're developing. I wish we could make space for this in school without having to wait another 50 years.

</comment><comment><USER8> Hard to say.

"In March, I gave an interview to the Guardian in which I repeated my usual—and unwelcome—assertion that the literary novel had quit center stage of our culture and was in the process, via university creative writing programs, of becoming a conservatory form, like the easel painting or the symphony."

Hard to say. Various authors role out big literary novels at their pace: Margaret Drabble, Margaret Atwood, Jonathan Franzen come to mind, and they get respectable reviews.

"Furthermore, I fingered BDDM as responsible for this transformation, the literary novel being simply the canary forced to flee this particular mine shaft first."

I don't think that the RSPCA made it to the coal mines back then.

At the moment, I'm a bit too BDDMed to follow the argument all the way, though.

</comment><comment><USER9> What is BDDM? It is used throughout, and I can't find a plausible definition anywhere.

<comment><USER10> It's defined in the essay.

> " _I referred above to "bidirectional digital media," by which I mean the > suite of technologies that comprises the wireless-connected computer, > handheld or otherwise, the World Wide Web, and the internet. Henceforth I'll > abbreviate this term to BDDM._ "

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> _The printed books being sold are not the sort of difficult reading that spearheads knowledge transfer but picture books, kidult novels like the Harry Potter series, and, in the case of my own UK publisher at least, a great tranche of spin-off books by so-called vloggers (a development Marshall McLuhan anticipated when he noted that new media always cannibalize the forms of the past)._

I feel an issue behind this essay is that it makes assumptions of the purpose of literature. That literature should be difficult to read, and that difficult works are the only works that transfer knowledge, is not reflected in contemporary understanding of literature... anywhere. Although there are essays discussing the merit of difficult literature, they have always been in response to an equal or greater number of essays denigrating difficult literature.

 _I began to lose faith in the power of my own imagination, and realized, further, that to look at objects on a screen and then describe them was, in a very important sense, to abandon literature, if by this is understood an art form whose substrate is words alone._

This isn't true either. Literature has not (perhaps never been) purely a substrate of words. For much of history literature involved pictures, diagrams, spoken word. One only needs to look at modern mixed-media poetry to see that literature does not rely only on words. It is traditionally viewed this way but this view doesn't reflect the reality of literature.

 _And then we cleave to this new intimacy, one shorn of all the contingencies of sex, race, class, and nationality._

This isn't true either. Lots of literature is written involving the above, including many of the works referenced here. Even writing about this is its own contingency of nationality, as it heavily references national statistics of only one nation.

 _Moreover, the determination to effect cultural change—by the imposition of diversity quotas—is itself an indication of printed paper's looming redundancy._

Diversity quotas the way the author is referencing here either don't exist of have always existed in the form of "women's literature" (a term itself having undergone controversy long before technology's prime). Discussing diversity in literature must also acknowledge that women have always been writing. In fact, throughout the years, women have been a good number of contemporary bestsellers in their time. The only discussion would then be to discuss why women's literature are only rarely considered literature as relevant to the culture from which the literature is produced- but this discussion has been ongoing long before technology's time! An example is right in this essay, in which JK Rowling's Harry Potter series is simultaneously a cultural phenomenon and worth no literary merit whatsoever (described as "kidult")! In short, I don't think this point is relevant at all to technology.

 _It was only when finishing this essay that I fully admitted to myself what I'd done: created yet another text that's an analysis of our emerging BDDM life but that paradoxically requires the most sophisticated pre-BDDM reading skills to fully appreciate it._

With all due frankness (and my degree in English literature) this attitude of requiring sophistication in communication as fundamentally superior communication (as stated multiple times in his rhetoric) is not an established case. This essay should be read as an opinion of one guy on the state of literature and not the reflection of literature as a whole- and likely not even reflecting contemporary established academic views on this matter.

<comment><USER3> > I feel an issue behind this essay is that it makes assumptions of the > purpose of literature. That literature should be difficult to read, and that > difficult works are the only works that transfer knowledge, is not reflected > in contemporary understanding of literature... anywhere. Although there are > essays discussing the merit of difficult literature, they have always been > in response to an equal or greater number of essays denigrating difficult > literature.

"Literature" in the sense he's using it doesn't refer to every work of fiction. I don't know that literature has to be challenging to be good (A Farewell to Arms is pretty universally recognized and it isn't long or difficult), but an audience that reflexively gravitates only toward YA novels is demonstrating a certain lack of desire for thinking. The number of political takes I read that involve analogy to a children's book about wizards is somewhat hard to look at without thinking that our current literary environment engenders a lack of critical thinking.

I don't know that women's literature has "always" been respected; why did Emily Bronte (among many other Victorian woman authors) write under a male pseudonym?

<comment><USER11> Please note I specify that women's literature distinctly has not always been respected and in fact is rarely considered reflective classical literature of the time of the work.

<comment><USER3> Wow, I was led totally astray by mention of "diversity quotas," which weren't even your words. Sorry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Trees rejoice!

<comment><USER13> Paper production replants trees. Its not saviving any forrests. I would argue the enviromental toll from kindles and cellphones is magnatudes worse.

<comment><USER14> Any of those has non trivial impacts.

Your claim is valid, but we should take into account that cutting trees and planting new ones is not the same a leaving the trees alone in term of ecosystem. Just like burning down an old town an rebuilding a new one is not neutral in term of things lost.</comment></comment></comment>


Dec. 25, 1990: World Wide Web was born in Geneva - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-history-2010dec25,0,7810509.story

<comment><USER2> The article is actually misleading. It's not the WWW that was born on Christmas 1990 - it was the first edition of the WorldWideWeb _browser_ that was released exactly 20 years ago.

References: \- <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb>

Interesting stuff: WorldWideWeb (the browser) was written in Objective-C on a NeXT computer by Tim Berners-Lee himself.</comment>


Taylor Swift wins battle with Apple - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-22/taylor-swift-wins-battle-as-apple-backs-down-on-royalty-payments <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9756009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9756009)

</comment><comment><USER3> I don't see this as a zero sum game.

Apple have received a huge amount of publicity from this, and are now being viewed as a company on the side of the artists, and, unusually for Apple, as a company which actively listens.

<comment><USER4> To be honest, it's a win-win no matter how you look at it. Apple wins, Taylor Swift wins, musicians win. To me, I look at this as an example of how Apple does understand public perception and is a master at making themselves look good in the public spotlight.

<comment><USER5> If this was a intentional decision from Apple from the very start, then it isn't a win for the customers, since they were manipulated.

<comment><USER6> > If this was a intentional decision from Apple from the very start

Is there any actual evidence of this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I am currently in NZ and this was has been covered on every news station and have confirmed with friends it was the same in Australia as well as in HK as well. Both Taylor Swift and Apple have come out of this smelling like roses. Taylor for fighting for the poor, struggling artist and Apple for listening to consumers and for being a "historically progressive and generous company".

I can't remember the last time a backtrack has worked out quite so well for a company.

</comment><comment><USER8> Note to self: when there's something I don't like, get a celeb to voice their support!

<comment><USER9> Yes. That's partly how I got the Alan Turing apology in 2009. Really helps to get celebrities on board, particularly because it gives the media something to write about.

[http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/09/how-alan-turing-finally- got...](http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/09/how-alan-turing-finally-got-a.html)

 _On August 18, 2009 the petition made the national news with a major story in The Independent, and at the same time the first celebrity name appeared on the list of signatures: Richard Dawkins.

With one celebrity name and national press I began to think the petition might really get noticed. The following night Richard Dawkins and I appeared on Channel 4 News to talk about the petition (Dawkins was filmed looking regal in his garden; I was filmed in classic programmer clothing: bad shoes, dirty shorts and a crumpled shirt)._

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The meteoric rise of Eddie Cue hits a bump in the road here as the supposed uber-negotiator at Apple left them in a bad position with no leverage against independents who had literally nothing to lose by withholding their catalogs from the Apple Music launch.

</comment><comment><USER11> I wonder, given the quick the response has been, if Eddie Cue or Tim Cook wasn't really sure about not paying for 3 months. My guess is that Apple only agreed with labels.

Imagine this (you can replace Tim Cook with Eddie Cue and Eddie Cue with me other people at Apple):

\- Tim Cook: I guess we should pay artists during the free trial

\- Eddie Cue: We talked with the labels and they seem to be ok with us not paying during trial.

\- TC: Are you sure? Well, it will be a lot of money saved, but I'm not sure how well will it be received by musicians.

\- EC: I tell you, all the labels seems to say that's fine, it's a little long, but they understand if better on the long term.

\- TC: Ok, if you said so, go ahead

Yesterday

\- TC: I told you so. Fix it NOW

\- EC: Ups, yes...

</comment><comment><USER12> I don't liked the title of this submission. It wasn't a battle. It was a request from a potential customer, which the company understood and worked upon.

<comment><USER5> I see this as a company that has decided not to pay their partners, reversed their position. Hardly flattering.

</comment></comment><comment> noir-york Apple should have done the right thing from the first.

As it is, they're going to have to pay the royalties anyway - without also having to get hit with negative coverage.

The below must have stung:

"We don't ask you for free iPhones," she added. "Please don't ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation."

Apple's very quick U-turn on the issue is commendable.

</comment><comment><USER13> Am I the only one who thinks that Apple was turning around independently of Taylor Swift? It seems to me that they had heard the criticism before and then used it as an answer to Swift as a better story.

</comment><comment><USER14> Keep in mind that Apple has confirmed they will be paying a lower rate during the free trial that they will not disclose currently. So, nobody has won anything.

</comment><comment><USER15> How did Apple assume they could get away with not paying royalties the artists were legally entitled to? Have I missed something in the story?

<comment><USER14> Apple controls about 30% of the US smartphone market and their users are locked into the platform. Uniquely, iOS users don't have access to alternate music purchasing apps (Apple's required 30% cut makes it financially untenable) and iOS users can't download and add music to their music library on the go like other platforms. Plus, Apple devices are only high end (read: expensive) and their users have more purchasing power in terms of apps and music. So, Apple controls a larger piece of the monetary pie than their 30% market share would let on.

Apple will use this market power to make themselves more money. The reason Taylor Swift's piece had to be couched in so many "I love Apple" statements is because Apple controls a lot of her music sales in iTunes, so Apple is in a position of power over her income. Apple had previously threatened a couple of indie artists with being banned from iTunes if they didn't agree to stream their music for free. This could have been the result of a few bad apples at Apple and not policy, though.

Apple will use its power at the expense of artists if it suits their business model. Here, it did, until the negative PR proved it could cost them sales. So, they've made a deal to pay artists something during the free period, though it will likely be a lot less than the typical $0.005 per play streaming pays on average today. Apple has confirmed it will be less but won't say what the payment will be.

<comment><USER15> Thanks. I'm just (and probably naively) surprised that any contract an artist would make with Apple allows Apple to stream the artists music for free if that's what Apple want.

Good job I'm not a music industry boss.

<comment><USER14> Labels are part of it, since the major music labels control just about everything of the artists signed to them. And the 3 big labels all signed on with Apple Music but the details of what the labels themselves get will likely not be disclosed.

Apple may or may not be engaged in tying. Some indie artists report Apple threatening to boot them from iTunes if they don't sign on to Apple Music. Google did something similar with YouTube a few months back.

Independent musicians have almost no power or money in the industry, so they're stuck taking what they can get for the most part.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Adam Carolla's Settlement with Podcasting Troll - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/good-bad-and-ugly-adam-carollas-settlement-podcasting-troll <comment><USER2> It's hard to fault anyone for just wanting a problem like this to go away. It's harder still to say that anyone has a duty to go to court at tremendous risk and expense. That said..

If I understand correctly, Adam Carolla has been raising funds and support for his cause on the grounds that he's fighting this on behalf of himself and others. If people wanted to donate to keep the podcast alive (perfectly reasonable), it would shave been cheaper to settle earlier or pay a licensing fee.

It feels a little off. OTOH, this is scary stuff. I probably would have done the same.

<comment><USER3> He absolutely had a duty to keep fighting them because the money raised was by people who wanted just that; to fight until the bitter end. Instead he settled and thanks to all of donations and other podcasts chipping in to push money his way; he got off free and clear and with nothing to gain for other podcasters. This will come back to bite Carolla in the ass big time. I've been listening to him since Loveline and have been using his amazon link for months...

<comment><USER4> Anybody who expected him to risk $1.5M of his own money needs to re-evaluate their own expectations. He fought as hard as he could, given the resources he had available. The community didn't give him the resources to fight an open- ended battle, so he had to settle with what he could.

It is an unfortunate turn of events, but the battle is still being fought.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So what happens to the raised $500k? People were donating money to protect the podcast community with Adam's case being the proxy battle. Adam settling wasn't in their best interest.

<comment><USER6> On his podcast he said he spent it all and over 100k on top of it on the pre- trial legal and expert fees.

<comment><USER7> That is insane. $600k in legal fees for a case that didn't even go to trial? Is this normal?

<comment><USER8> Wasn't there a story just a few days ago about the huge oversupply of lawyers right now? Why isn't this driving legal costs down?

<comment><USER9> Because legal talent has a power distribution. Here are words litigants will hear: "get the best attorney you can afford, this isn't an area where you want to cut costs. A great attorney can save you money." Get the picture?

The huge oversupply of lawyers is coming from lower-tier law schools.

<comment><USER10> > The huge oversupply of lawyers is coming from lower-tier law schools.

Is there a relationship/correlation between a lawyer's capability and the school they come from? I'm sure informally it's something people assume but I have no practical experience dealing with or knowing about the quality of lawyers' work.

<comment><USER11> In my experience, there's only a weak correlation. You're much better off looking at their repeat clients. If they serve sophisticated parties on a repeat basis, it's about the best indicator you'll get.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I was hoping the EFF would let its readers make up their mind on Adam Carolla, instead of praising him. This did, after all, accomplish nothing, except setting a negative precedent for crowdfunded action against patents.

<comment><USER3> in regard to crowdfunding actions by individuals instead of established organizations like EFF. He just screwed that up for everyone else. He said over and over on his podcasts and on other podcasts he would not settle, even as late as a week ago before he took vacation. And he kept pushing people to use the Amazon link to boost the balance so the fight could continue and finish them. Unless we are missing something from this settlement, I think he will loose a lot of the good will he developed with other podcasters and those listeners he would not otherwise have had on his side.

<comment><USER13> It depends where the money goes to now. I doubt that he'll just keep it.

<comment><USER14> Pretty sure it's already spent just to get this result.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I come away from this article with the singular thought:

       *The justice system is broken.*

The patent troll problem would simply evaporate if the justice system worked properly - if, for example, the vast majority of the trial was conducted online with the aid of computers. If all of the mechanical work could be automated, motions filed in real time, the mechanics of the trial enforced perfectly and without delay...

(Fixing the justice system would also fix two other problematic areas: the criminal justice system that relies on prosecutorial over-reach, and improved consumer protection.)

<comment><USER16> (Upvoted. Seems like something worth further discussion amongst people that know the field.)

Other than tradition/inertia, are there reasons that trials are held in particular rooms and the ways they are? Could there be an electronic equivalent involving securely identified participants?

Could someone tackle this as a startup?

<comment><USER15> This is something I would love (lurve!) to tackle, because justice is a vitally important part of any society, and it's a place where "productivity improvements" could be vast (perhaps 100x faster trials?).

The way I'd move into this would be to get some experience with real trials and/or private arbitration. It would be ideal to get a JD and actually practice law, but that's probably not necessary. Arbitration is a good place to start because it's _relatively_ unregulated and easy to introduce new models of interaction and judgement, and there's a strong cost minimization incentive anyway.

I'd work on it but I've got other fish to fry at the moment. Maybe next year!

<comment><USER16> I have time or expertise in that field either but your comment resonated and I'd be happy to see someone sort it out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> He's also in litigation with his ex-business partner Ronnie. He never mentions it, but fighting on two fronts has to take a toll. While I'm a bit disappointed he did not fight this until the bitter end, I'm glad he used his platform to educate the masses about the problem of patent trolls. Good for him.

<comment><USER18> Can you elaborate on this or link to a source? And what's Ronnie's last name?

<comment><USER19> [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/adam-carolla- headed...](http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/adam-carolla-headed-trial- podcast-700812)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Marc Maron just tweeted this: [https://twitter.com/marcmaron/status/501483878444695552](https://twitter.com/marcmaron/status/501483878444695552)

Sounds like the deal might formally extend to at least some other podcasters.

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm a little surprised he settled --- he was pretty adamant (no pun intended) about fighting and invalidating the patent on the podcast. Guess it was too expensive after all.

<comment><USER21> The main goal was to make sure the industry survived and couldn't be bullied any longer. Even though it's a settlement, it sounds like he may have gotten that, which would be a big win for all the other (smaller) podcasters.

*edited for a tiny typo

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> If Personal Audio has already publicly stated they are willing to just walk away why keep this confidential? Only reason I can think of is they've actually offered something of value (such as paying Carolla's attorney fees).

</comment><comment><USER23> Carolla should donate that $500k to the EFF or similar anti-patent troll organization. He raised that money to fight the case. If he settled, he should pass the $$$ forward to the next defendant that wants to pick up the torch.

<comment><USER24> He should donate the remainder of that $500k to the EFF, whatever he has not already spent on its intended purpose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Someone should really get to trolls on shakedown grounds using some anti racketeering laws. They are nothing but racketeers, but somehow the legal system prevents from using those laws against them.

</comment><comment> at-fates-hands let me play devils advocate for a moment here.

Why do these articles make it seem like the patent trolls don't spend any money bringing these suits? I'm assuming they have just as many legal fees to take care of as Carolla does.

The only good side to this is these companies finally understand the ROI on cases like these are prohibitive to the company bringing them.

Despite Coralla settling, I'm pretty sure Personal Audio lost money in this mess.

<comment><USER26> I am pretty sure part of the whole patent trolling business model is the asymmetric costs. The plantiff's costs are amortized over a number of suits; the the defendant's costs are not.

<comment><USER27> Could Carolla publish the findings of his attorneys' discovery work, so that future defendants can use it? If so, that would serve as a pretty good deterrent to future litigation. Right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Nobody seems to mention that these guys _aren 't patent trolls_. It might be a stupid patent, you might think patent law needs an overhaul (I'm with you on both counts) but PA are the people who "invented" the patented material. A patent troll is an organisation who buys up patents other people are granted for the purpose of suing people.

<comment><USER29> I don't think the source of patents is what qualifys patent trolls, its what they do with them.

If this company generates 90% of their income from lawsuits and settlements, then they're a troll.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Now all Adam Carolla needs to do is return the donated money, since he didn't do what he said he was going to do with it.

As great as i think it is to donate money to a legal defense fund for a wealthy celebrity, so that they don't have to use their own money to dodge dubious licensing fees, maybe that money could have gone further if it had been donated to a different cause? Instead a few wealthy patent lawyers just lined their pockets with donated money then fled the scene.</comment>


Tell HN: I renewed my Developer Account with Apple and They Pulled My Apps - <AUTHOR>

I need your help hn! Three days ago I renewed my developer account with Apple by paying the $99 fee. Their checkout went a little weird, and so I called customer service just to make sure it went through. After being transferred 4 times, I got an email receipt.
Well, I woke up this morning with an email that all my apps were pulled from the App Store. In a panic, I called Apple again, and got transferred 5 times, finally in a business store saying they're closed on weekends.
I've paid the developer account fee again, but my apps are still down. Anyone know how to get my apps back up?
PS The reason I get that all my apps are down in iTunesConnect is:
iOS Developer Program Membership Expired Your membership has expired and your apps have been removed from the App Store until you renew. <comment><USER2> Seems a bit ridiculous that you waited so long to renew. I know from experience that they send that email far enough in advance that, if you did experience problems, there would've been time to fix. Also, you posted a "Tell HN" headline that's pretty linkbait/scandalous. It's misleading in that, the way it is written is intentionally designed to be shocking and make someone click your link. The details could really be boiled down to, "Developer waits until the last day to try to renew, a problem occurs during checkout, and Apple support is not open during the weekend. Developer must wait until Tuesday since Monday is a US holiday." If you'd posted an "Ask HN:" that's one thing but a "Tell HN:" is another. You aren't new here - you know the difference between the two. The Ask is for help, the Tell is for rants or, well, telling about something {good|bad|hacks|exploits|flaws|etc}.

Sorry for your trouble, but unless you tell us otherwise, this just seems to be the result of your procrastination, not "Apple pulled my apps and I did nothing wrong!"

<comment><USER3> Do we know that the user waited a long time? My reading was that he paid before deadline, things went a bit weird, he called support, got a receipt, but then everything blew up. It sounds like the state of his account was mangled in there somehow, not necessarily that he waited too long.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> 1\. Call credit card company and get your money back.

2\. Build something that is 100% your own and does not depend on middleman's platform.

<comment><USER5> 1\. Good advice 2\. The only thing he can really build that adheres to that advice is a pile of dirt in his back yard.

<comment><USER4> Even neighbors can complain and force you to remove pile of dirt. But building business that could be turned off in a second by flipping a switch at platform provider's side is an experience that could be avoided.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> DO they keep the apps on the server? Mine expired as well, curious if i can just turn it on again and get them selling again, or if I have to do the whole process again.</comment>


Ask HN: Are the pioneers dead? - <AUTHOR> Having been in the industry for the past 5 years, I have come to this very crude observation that the computing industry is out of breathtaking ideas. I believe this has to do with the lack of true entrepreneurship.
True entrepreneurship, is when one goes on a journey to finding truly great ideas. Great ideas take a very long time to generate and an equally long time to be properly executed.
I have also come to the conclusion that the entrepreneurs and business people around got into starting the business as they were not skilled enough for the competing job market. And this is the escape route they choose to stay relevant. I believe this lack of required skills and true entrepreneurship is the reason there are too many not-so-skilled entrepreneurs.
So, the question I was trying to ask myself and the community is that where are all the pioneers, the true entrepreneurs, the engineers? And have you ever come across such individuals? <comment><USER2> You're not alone. Alan Kay asks if there's been any new ideas in computer science in the past 50 years:

[https://stackoverflow.com/questions/432922/significant- new-i...](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/432922/significant-new- inventions-in-computing-since-1980)

He'd previously named spreadsheets and all the stuff from PARC:

[https://stackoverflow.com/questions/357813/remembering-a- quo...](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/357813/remembering-a-quote-from- alan-kay)

\---

We're probably in a commercialization/application phase of ideas. For example, lisp ideas are still being applied in other languages.

Perhaps all the low-hanging fruit has been gotten?

Or perhaps it's a bit like DNA and RNA transfer: the most ancient part of all livings things. It's probably not optimal, but you make faster progress by building atop it rather than starting over. Similar for cell structure, multicellular organization, neurons (worms have 'em), vertebrate anatomy, mammal design etc.

Industry has a habit of reinventing the same ideas every decade or so, in a different language, operating system etc.

\---

There _are_ new ideas, though mostly a combination of existing ideas at this point. The last example I noticed, several years ago, was _jq_ , which applies unix streams and haskell to json processing. (Though its author wasn't an entrepreneur.)

\---

I suspect there are golden ideas just one or two steps off the beaten track. But how much work they'd be to productize (and whether the market would adopt them) is another question...

If no one else is doing it, it's an opportunity - for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for a very good summary. I especially like your correlation with regards to our evolution. That made very good sense.

Apart from Alan Kay are there any other influencers that I might find interesting?

<comment><USER2> Not that I know of, he's the big critic of compsci progress.

Peter Norvig's argument with Noam Chomsky on AI as a _science_ is interesting, to do with knowing what we're doing.

More generally and optimistically on progress, you might consider Buckminster Fuller (and Ray Kurzweil).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Are you sure you're not playing a game of 'No true Scotsman' here?

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

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for reminding me this. I see the similarity with me going through a similar phase. However, I always try to coarse correct my arguments and ideologies along the way to reach a proper objective.

<comment><USER3> Having said that ... I sort of believe the next massive technological revolution will occur when we work out a way to manipulate energies one or more orders of magnitude more dense than we presently can.

Presently we have approximately 2kW electric outlets, approximately 100kW engines in our cars.

Imagine being able to manipulate 2MW at the home outlet, or 1GW in our vehicles.

I don't know what it would look like to be able to dissipate that much heat, we'd have to improve conversion efficiency to limit the waste heat.

I'm just thinking if we could work out how to handle that much power it would be truly revolutionary off-the-planet sort of business.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks.. I didn't think of this problem.</comment></comment></comment></comment>