C3.js: D3-based reusable chart library - <AUTHOR> http://c3js.org/ <comment><USER2> Out of raw d3.js, nvd3.js, cubism, and rickshaw.js, I've by far had the best experience with nvd3.

I was particularly pleased with the way nvd3 supports sliding data off line charts without any extra work.

D3.js is an excellent, low level visualization library. But you will find yourself spending days to a couple weeks with custom styling, tooltips, legends, etc. Many high level charting libraries are nice because they have this out of the box.

However, I want a library that lets me make visualizations that I can run on my monitor for 10 days straight without running into obscure bugs. Rickshaw failed me in this regard. I have a caching scheme in my client-side application. Rickshaw has its own local copy of data which requires the developer to write custom, messy javascript to evict. I found that rickshaw actually has some custom 'sliding window' logic. I was unhappy because I had to go to stackoverflow to discover that feature rather than using the documentation.

nvd3.js simply worked for me.

<comment><USER3> nvd3.js is awesome. However It always crashes for very large dataset. I had to reduce my dataset size for nvd3.js to not crash, however programs like MATLAB has no problem visualising really large dataset where you can zoom to individual data point. Its in my TODO list to make nvd3.js handle large data set so that it can compete with MATLAB/Python.

<comment><USER4> Just happen to come by this today: [http://i.imgur.com/5zE08DX.png](http://i.imgur.com/5zE08DX.png)

<comment><USER3> MATLAB gets more hate then it deserves. Do you know some of the language stuff in MATLAB are being adopted in the next iterating of javascript ? MATLAB has amazing consistency and a really good learning tool. It is really good for fast prototyping for numerical algorithms, its just very old.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The type of chart I've found most useful is heat map charts, and none of the charting library I've looked at provide that:

Here's an example from a Datadog dashboard: [https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1189716/4064956/6...](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1189716/4064956/6eacbc08-2e16-11e4-827b-d21f8cd5f020.png)

I wish such a chart style was more common, it's so much more useful than a typical line chart of the median/p9x. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with D3 and such to write my own; it would likely be crap.

<comment><USER6> For work, we had to fork jqplot to add features like heatmaps, zooming, etc.: [https://github.com/scattering/jqplot.science](https://github.com/scattering/jqplot.science)

We also have the notion of "interactors" which allow you to add draggable widgets to a plot: [http://ncnr.nist.gov/instruments/magik/calculators/calcR_wf....](http://ncnr.nist.gov/instruments/magik/calculators/calcR_wf.html)

To see the heatmap in action, you can look at: [http://ncnr.nist.gov/ipeek/singleplotwindow.html?instrument=...](http://ncnr.nist.gov/ipeek/singleplotwindow.html?instrument=NGB30SANS)

There are of course glitches, but hopefully you find some of this useful!

<comment><USER7> phpChart ([http://phpchart.org](http://phpchart.org)) is a higher level charting library for jqplot if you don't wan to spend days to learn custom styling and scripting.

<comment><USER8> We made a decision to go with phpChart in June. It works well in our use case. We can still add custom javascript when something is outside its offered feature set.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This totally goes against the whole point Mike Bostock (creator of D3) laid out when he talks about creating reusable charts...

[http://bost.ocks.org/mike/chart/](http://bost.ocks.org/mike/chart/)

"To sum up: implement charts as closures with getter-setter methods. Conveniently, this is the same pattern used by D3's other reusable objects, including scales, layouts, shapes, axes, etc."

You get none of that with C3.js...

<comment><USER10> There are some things that you can't easily do with Mike Bostock's method. Namely, it's not a good format for storing, examining, and modifying charts. And that's perfectly fine. It's good for what it's good for. But not everyone has the same needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I build visualizations with d3.js for my clients ([http://muyueh.com/42/](http://muyueh.com/42/)), and I have always wonders whether I will be one day replaced by library such as c3.js.

I have been watching closely different library, and felt that most of the library are just providing default value to d3.js, plus adding some nice plug- in (such as tooltips). If we are looking for a bar chart, then it's very fast to use a bar chart library to build what we want. Yet some problems may occur:

1\. Control, we thought that we need bar chart, but we actually need bar chart'. In my process of developing effective visual, I often need to access different part of the API.

2\. Choice, currents charts provided by most of the library are available in Google Charts and Excel. This might a question of time: these library are fairly new, and maybe in the near future these library will provide all visualization available in the d3.js page. But maybe it's not because of time, but of complexity. If these library were providing better abstraction, it should be easier to develop more complex charts.

3\. Extendability: We probably don't just need the bar-chart as a stand alone visual, but as building block that can interact with other component (texts or maps).

An interesting question is to ask why d3.js was designed so "low level", why not directly releasing a "high level library"? My hypothesis is that maybe this is the right level of abstraction. When you tried to get "higher", you actually lose power/control over your visual. Maybe that's the reason why people are sharing a lot of their work on [http://bost.ocks.org/](http://bost.ocks.org/), doing some small experiments, laying down some building block, perhaps currently that is the most efficient way of building re-usable chart.

I shared my thought on the issue, in hope that people challenge my hypothesis: my current work depends on it.

<comment><USER12> Nice work. I really like [http://muyueh.com/30/hexagon/](http://muyueh.com/30/hexagon/)

First find attempt I got 85 seconds Second 23 seconds Third 185

<comment><USER11> Thanks, that one together with Chernoff's facial hairs ([http://muyueh.com/30/chernoff/](http://muyueh.com/30/chernoff/)) are two visuals that I really enjoyed doing, but a bit too "geek" for the average user (Your compliments was actually the first one I get from that graph).

It was part of my initiative 30 days of d3.js, a pretty solid way to learn d3.js by the way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't intend to diminish the hard work you put into this. It looks clean and useable. Congratulations.

If you (people in general) are using d3 for simple charts you are doing it wrong.

d3 is a visualization library. It excels at helping you make non-trivial things. For the trivial there are some great chart libraries such as Highcharts. I build visualizations at work and for those I use d3. Whenever I need something as simple as a stacked area chart I simply use Excel or Highcharts. Everytime I've tried to use Highcharts for a complex viz, or d3 for a simple chart, it's been a waste of time. I've used NVD3 as well as some other D3 based charting packages. None of them are as simple as Excel or Highcharts IMHO.

<comment><USER14> Highcharts is amazing, but it is not distributable with open source software. My team at edX recently migrated away from Highcharts to nvd3 for this very reason. The state of charting is such that good packages are expensive. There are some mediocre packages for free. D3 is the only package we found that met our needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Careful, this has pretty much zero documentation and inconsistent options available for each chart type. I started a project with it and after a great start realised I had to scrap it all and start from scratch with some more complete alternative (haven't started looking yet).

<comment><USER16> I think thats why it's still at version 0.3

But they do have a lot of examples, a lot more than eg. nvd3.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I like C3, but I discovered it has some major performance issues with thousands of data points a couple months back. It has something to do with the pie chart rendering code: [https://github.com/masayuki0812/c3/issues/172#issuecomment-4...](https://github.com/masayuki0812/c3/issues/172#issuecomment-47270494)

I've been evaluating HighCharts, Vega, Rickshaw, NVD3, C3, but the one I've been impressed with in terms of performance thus far is Epoch: [http://fastly.github.io/epoch/](http://fastly.github.io/epoch/)

</comment><comment><USER18> I also like [http://nvd3.org/](http://nvd3.org/). We almost now need an index of the various D3 based charting libraries.

<comment><USER19> How about a... chart?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> We evaluated Rickshaw and Dimple ([http://dimplejs.org/](http://dimplejs.org/)) for awhile (to migrate some custom charts initially built with D3.Chart [http://misoproject.com/d3-chart/](http://misoproject.com/d3-chart/)). We went with Dimple and I've been very pleased with it. There is ample documentation, the source code is readable, and the developer behind it is responsive to questions and issues. Also, it's very easy to get access to the underlying axes/series/legends/etc if you want to do more complicated work not provided out of the box and are familiar with d3. I would highly recommend it if you're looking for a d3 chart library.

</comment><comment><USER21> I'm currently using this for a project. My only complaint is that there is no API documentation, so you just have to look for a relevant example every time you want to do something.

</comment><comment><USER22> This is nice, easy to use. It is however only using an extremely limited subset of d3 capabilities, which makes me wonder what added value is brought by the fact of making this d3 based compared to other "pure" and lightweight chart libraries which have the same functions [1]

My usual go to library: Flot [http://www.flotcharts.org/](http://www.flotcharts.org/)

<comment><USER23> I find it's usually easier to roll my own solution, because these libraries often don't provide the level of customisation I need (or may need in the future). The cost of moving away from them is also nonzero.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Great, but I dislike the combined JS filesize. 267kb is simply still too big for mobile websites, given that it is only a part of a website. It seems to consume a bit too much memory for my iPad2, the first time I saw a blank demo; had to re-open Safari. (combined: c3 is 120kb and d3 is 147kb) c3.min: [https://github.com/masayuki0812/c3/blob/master/c3.min.js](https://github.com/masayuki0812/c3/blob/master/c3.min.js) , d3.min: [https://github.com/mbostock/d3/blob/master/d3.min.js](https://github.com/mbostock/d3/blob/master/d3.min.js)

A charts library that has no dependecies (no d3, no jquery, etc), has a filesize of less than 100kb and still looks great and offers useful features would be awesome. SVG vs. Canvas2D is another hot topic.

</comment><comment><USER25> This looks like an interesting project. The struggle I've had in the past with similar libraries is the level of extensibility provided by the API. It's not clear from he docs how to add your own custom viz. I would love a d3 based chart library that would provide an easy to use chart api,such as we see in c3js. Which I do like. But also a DSL that is not as low level as D3 but provides enough flexiblity for creating new visualizations. There have been some nice declarative charting libs posted on HN, which links I can't find right now. Keep up the good work, I'll be following this project closely.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm not familiar with all the available chart libraries built on top of d3.js,but having used vanilla d3 on several projects, my first response to this article was that c3 looks really useful/cool... That said, it's probably worth mentionting that there are some useful examples of "reusable charts" on mr. bostock's website, and constructing a customized version of this JSON chart format probably wouldn't be too difficult, although making it performant on large datasets might be.

</comment><comment><USER27> This is how demos are supposed to be done. Seriously. Spare me your video, your soundtrack, and all of your BS. Just show me the thing working and let me play with it.

</comment><comment><USER28> I'm a long-time highcharts user. What are the advantages of this over highcharts?

<comment><USER10> It appears to support more data formats than highcharts. It allows you to pass data in both column oriented or row oriented forms. Highcharts didn't have that ability last I checked.

Also, C3 is MIT licensed. I'm sure there are other differences as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I could have sworn there was a ClojureScript wrapper for D3 that was also called C3.

Taking a quick search shows that it is actually called C2[1], from Keming Labs.

[1]: [http://keminglabs.com/c2/](http://keminglabs.com/c2/)

</comment><comment><USER30> [http://dimplejs.org/](http://dimplejs.org/)

<comment><USER31> I just switched a project from dimple to c3. Dimple's requirements for data organization were very rigid and it was extremely slow on datasets more than a couple MB. Docs are sub-par for both but c3's examples were much more relevant and understandable (at least for my case).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> C3 looks nice, but it'd be really great if the library didn't demand passing things in object format. Why can't we have something that implements chaining like D3? It seems a bit counter-intuitive...

<comment><USER32> I actually prefer passing a declarative configuration object rather than issuing a series of API calls. It is one of the things that had me switch a project from D3 to C3 + crossfilter a while back.

<comment><USER9> Really? Perhaps it's just a matter of preference, but this coding style drives me up a fucking wall. Clutters the hell out of your code.

<comment><USER32> I guess that depends on whether the settings you are passing to the chart are coming from somewhere else (say, an API call). If you can just get a JSON object from a backend and pass it directly to the chart, things become _much_ simpler in your code.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> dc.js has similar goals (though more focused on large, multi-dimensional data sets), with 1 extra year to mature

[http://dc-js.github.io/dc.js/](http://dc-js.github.io/dc.js/)

<comment><USER32> Note my comment elsewhere in this thread about switching from DC to C3 + Crossfilter.

Since we wanted the set of charts to be driven by dynamic data, we were looking at either implementing functions to take a configuration object and translate that into a series of DC API calls, or switching to a charting library that already took configuration objects and hooking the charts together with Crossfilter ourselves.

The latter approach won out, largely because the C3 default look and feel was closer to what we wanted as well, compared to the DC defaults.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> while ago yeah [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6771393](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6771393)

</comment><comment><USER35> I like hearing about other options, but I wish the top rated posts were about the OP, not alternatives....

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm looking for a chart library that can plot real-time data, can anyone give any suggestions?

<comment><USER37> I have used HighCharts before for this. You'll want to look at their "Dynamic Charts" section: [http://www.highcharts.com/demo/dynamic- update](http://www.highcharts.com/demo/dynamic-update)

<comment><USER36> That looks pretty nifty, thanks

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> annnd it suffers from the same problem as other javascript libraries: the documentation is awful.

If you want your reusable library to be adopted widely, you have to write good docs. I was hoping I could replace NVD3.js with C3.js but the docs are on par.

<comment><USER39> The documentation is nice... it's just incomplete.

<comment><USER38> Right and that incompleteness will leave you taking hours to do what should be done in minutes because you're digging through the source code.

/said as someone who's had to do that with multiple libraries :(

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> How does this compare with nvd3?</comment>


Uber is leaving Austin letter - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@hartator/uber-leaving-austin-letter-ed1f14abdd0c#.998u6abxa <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11652614](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11652614)

</comment><comment><USER3> Doesn't say anything about why they "simply cannot operate" in Austin. Sounds like they just don't want to anymore. The voters made their decision and Uber/Lyft are taking their ball and going home, I don't see why the Council should be "backwards".

</comment><comment><USER4> Anyone complaining about how changing laws destroy businesses, remember that coca cola used to contain cocaine and 7up contained uppers (lithium citrate).

Entrepreneurship is about making it work within the regulations society think it needs.

<comment><USER5> I find this type of assertion with respect to Uber, Lyft, and startups in general uninteresting because it avoids taking a position on the wisdom of the regulations.

I realize that there is room for reasonable people to debate as to whether Uber, for example, has played by the existing rules but that is a categorically different discussion as to the value and wisdom of those rules.

So there seems to be four positions:

        1) the rules are proper and should be followed                 (status quo)
        2) the rules are proper and should not be followed             (self contradictory)
        3) the rules are improper and should be followed until changed (rule of law)
        4) the rules are improper and should be actively resisted      (civil disobedience)

Arguing in favor of adhering to the rules without taking a position on the propriety of those rules (failing to choose between 1 and 3) is what I find uninteresting. Pick a side and make your case.

Even more confusing and destructive to reasonable discussion is asserting that the rules must be followed as a response to someone arguing that the rules should be changed. That is a category error and adds nothing to the discussion.</comment></comment>


Many Bitcoin Miners Are at Risk of Turning Unprofitable - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-18/bitcoin-miners-facing-a-shakeout-as-profitability-becomes-harder <comment><USER2> What a colossally stupid waste of resources. Right now its costing somewhere between ~3500 and ~9000 USD to mine a single bitcoin (on average). To me, we've essentially engineered a mechanism to capture and trade something that represents the value of squandered electricity.

1) we're generating a ton of co2, further destabilizing the planet ecosystem 2) if we ever _do_ sort out cold fusion energy, crytoholes are going to abuse the shit out of it.

I feel like cryptocurrency and perhaps nuclear weapons are a built in 'kill switch' by nature to make sure only useful species ever get off the planet.

<comment><USER3> How do you define waste?

Is bitcoin mining more wasteful than gold mining?

<comment><USER4> Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is, that it is not the mining itself which creates the bitcoin, but an arbitrary challenge set up to earn the bitcoins. So by definition, any energy used is completely wasted.

<comment><USER5> That's right, the difficulty adjusts to match the level of competition so that a bitcoin block is mined on average once every ten minutes. If fewer people were competing or if they competed with less powerful hardware, the network would adjust and the same amount of bitcoins would be mined. Increasing your hash power increases your odds of getting that block though.

But when bitcoin prices are high, there is an increased risk that someone could launch a 51% attack and start double-spending bitcoins. Keeping the level of competition high does protect the network to some extent. But really it only has to be expensive enough to be unprofitable to launch an attack. Pushing difficulty right up to the point of any mining being unprofitable is a waste.

<comment><USER6> (to concur with your point:)

People tend to think of the rewards as set in stone, but they're completely arbitrary (they just have to be agreed-upon by participants). For example, there's no need for them to taper off over time, we could keep them constant.

It's just a question of what you can get consensus for. The geometrically- decreasing rewards of Bitcoin are probably not optimal, but without centralized control there has to be some kind of pre-determined issue rate.

We could just as easily agree to halve them right now (which would probably reduce electricity utilization as well as network security, as miners go offline). And that's essentially what Ethereum is planning to do - a major decrease in block rewards in the near future, so that they can create deflation (dumb as hell, but that's what happens when you let a 17-year-old run an economy, he has big holdings of Eth and just wants to see the number go up).

<comment><USER5> Yeah, I think a decreasing block reward was a good idea, but I think it's on the wrong schedule. Following something like Metcalfe's Law, the value increases geometrically but the reward isn't decaying fast enough yet. That means at some point in the "middle", the value of the block reward will be increasing much faster than the amount of the reward is decreasing.

[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=n%5E2+%2F+(2%5En)+from...](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=n%5E2+%2F+\(2%5En\)+from+0+to+10)

That's where we are now, and it means the reward will be large enough to drive bad behavior at least until the next halving (probably two years from now [http://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/](http://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/) ).

<comment><USER6> The whole idea of discrete halvings of the block rewards at specific block heights also grinds me in general... why is this not a continuous function? Oh yeah, because that's how some guy set it up in 2012 before he disappeared.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Aside from the electricity usage concerns, this presents a big risk for bitcoin.

Centralization of mining power was one of the biggest issues of the BTC vs BCH debate. BCH proponents wanted bigger block size. While BTC proponents argued that bigger block size will lead to centralization, as not everyone will be able to propagate bigger blocks. So, if Bitmain et al. do end up controlling 90% of the hashing power, they might be able to control voting and other aspects of the network. They could prioritize their own transaction, pay lower fees etc.

Now this will lead to two things. First, cryptocurrency circles love perfect game theory. The argument is always going to be - Bitman etc are not going to harm the network even if they take over. The reason being it will always be in Bitmain's favor to ensure bitcoin's sanctity. If things go downhill they will lose tons of money and mining worthless coins. So, people should not turn away from bitcoin.

Second, we are talking about human nature and not a perfect prisoner's dilemma. So, Bitmain etc will be sneaky and maybe even vote against some BIPs they don't like. Some of their behavior will warrant people to leave bitcoin. But, then bitcoin supporters will bring up the first point again. Game theory, hence HODL.

This will at the end become a roundabout discussion:

Step 1 - News - Bitmain etc does X which is very bad. People should leave a centrally mined coin.

Step 2 - Bitcoin supporters - Game theory says Bitmain etc wont harm the network as their coins will worthless too. HODL.

Rinse and repeat.

The irrational belief in perfect math and game theory will give lot of leeway to anyone who captures Bitcoin's mining power.

<comment><USER8> > The argument is always going to be - Bitman etc are not going to harm the > network even if they take over. The reason being it will always be in > Bitmain's favor to ensure bitcoin's sanctity.

Wait wait... there are bitcoin supporters arguing this?

Now s/Bitmain/US government/ and this is basically the argument for dollar. (Or any fiat currency, for that matter.)

<comment><USER7> Satoshi said as much in the Bitcoin paper. To quote:

 _If a greedy attacker is able to assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wasn't part of the promise of Bitcoin that no single entity or cabal would control it? It would be a distributed platform, owned by the masses?

<comment><USER10> The promise was that no single entity would want to control it since nobody else would want Bitcoin if they did.

<comment><USER11> That's a dumb promise, since all it takes is one third party with the desire and means to control multiple entities for non financial reasons; for example, a state actor with treaties and regulations.

<comment><USER12> They would not be able to capture it unless they get consensus.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Similar thing happened with the internet when a lot of bedroom servers disappeared. A very similar thing also happened to radio some many years before. If anything, this could be a sign of maturity.

<comment><USER14> In other words "this is good for Bitcoin"?

<comment><USER13> More like "nothing extraordinary"

<comment><USER14> Having a bunch of people making millions by racing to compute SHA256 collisions is very much extraordinary IMO. Drawing parallels with the server and radio markets is not very convincing.

Furthermore the way mining happens is pretty irrelevant to Bitcoin adoption and maturity at this point. Having a million miners or only 10 doesn't really change much in terms of usability or price volatility.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > I feel like cryptocurrency and perhaps nuclear weapons are a built in 'kill > switch' by nature to make sure only useful species ever get off the planet.

There are a lot of potential Great Filters [1], but crypto currencies doesn't seem like one of them. They will might slow mankind down and waste a bunch of energy&resources, but beyond that doesn't particularly hurt our survival chances. Kind of like a lot of entertainment we produce has marginal benefits. But prof of work based crypto currencies have real chance to end up irrelevant once their novelty wears off (and the interesting parts of it might even be adopted elsewhere).

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

</comment><comment><USER16> Just imagine how bad space heaters based on electricity are. Baseboard heating, radiant electric heat it's all terribly inefficient and turns 'steak' (electrons) into hamburger (IR radiation).

</comment><comment><USER17> ""We've returned to some level of rationality," Flack said."

Uh, not quite.

</comment><comment><USER18> Aren't the "guy in a dorm-room" operations already pretty much out of the game? Couldn't GHash.io do pretty much whatever they want with the blockchain at this point?

<comment><USER19> Yup. As a self-described guy in a dorm room throwing his single GPU cycles at some crypto for self-education purposes, people are using multi-coin pools that mine ASIC-resistant coins and flip around depending on which is most profitable (often monero/litecoin).

That said, pools like nicehash pay out in BTC anyways, effectively locking altcoins to the BTC index price. Where goes bitcoin, so goes the market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Does this mean consumer GPUs will come back down in price?

<comment><USER21> No. Bitcoin isn't mined with GPUs.

<comment><USER20> Good point, yet the value of other crypto currencies are correlated to bitcoin.

So what happens to bitcoin should impact the crypto market?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Many Bitcoin Miners Are at Risk of Turning Unprofitable, they will go bankrupt, and after two weeks bitcoin difficulty gets adjusted and mining is easy again, just as designed. So the problem is not really a problem for people that understand how the system works. But it's far easier to bikeshed about electricity, gpus and everything related to cryotocurrencies but not the topic submitted.

</comment><comment><USER23> If a single org does end up with 51% mining engine de-facto control of BTC, what happens next? Would people transition off of BTC to another ecosystem, or would people just accept that BTC is now under the auspices of a (one would hope) benevolent dictatorship?

<comment><USER24> It is hard to verify if separate pools aren't controlled by single entity so we won't know when it happens.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> If this happens to too great an extreme, it's a major security problem. If at any point there is enough old-and-not-quite-profitable mining hardware around to mount a 50% attack, then a 50% attack becomes reasonably cheap.

<comment><USER26> Like many things with computers, scales can be deceivingly large.

 _I want to preface this with a note that I haven 't done even napkin math on this, so there's a good chance my numbers are WAY off_

All of the CPUs in the world probably won't be able to match even a handful of ASICs. It's probably the same with GPUs.

Each generation of ASICs is hashing about 4x faster with roughly the same power usage as the last. So after a generation or 2, you quickly run into the same sorts of issues where there is a good chance that all of the Antminer S3s in existence won't be able to hold a candle to a medium sized current-gen install.

And to mount an attack like that, you'd need to buy and power a monumental amount of these devices. The current hashrate is roughly 30,000,000 TH/s The current generation of Antminer can do roughly 14 TH/s

You'd need a million current-gen antminer S9's running at 1.3 gigawatts of power to get 50% of the hashrate (and from my extremely rough guesses, 4 million S7s, 12 million S5s, etc... Each generation also multiplying the power needed by some amount as well). And that kind of buying, manufacturing, and power generation isn't going to be easy to conceal.

Not to mention that evidence of a 50% attack will basically end bitcoin, making all of the money, time, and power spent on that attack truly worthless as you are left with a million completely worthless SHA256 hashing machines.

If you are able to pull off that kind of hashrate, you might as well just be a good player at that point, as you would be making $50,000 every 10 minutes at current prices.

<comment><USER25> > If you are able to pull off that kind of hashrate, you might as well just be > a good player at that point, as you would be making $50,000 every 10 minutes > at current prices.

You're missing my point. If there is a pile of unused unprofitable hardware (because energy efficiency is too low given the mining rewards), then you _can't_ use it to make an honest profit. That means that it has very little value to honest miners and might be sold for a non-crazy amount of money. A dishonest buyer could use it to mount a 50% attack for a few million dollars of electricity, but I bet a dishonest miner planning such a thing could arrange to benefit in an amount far exceeding a few million dollars.

(I bet that the actual major cost would be the connections involved in acquiring the power, not the power itself. But there are many, many GW of working-but-idle non-base-load power plants in the world. You can't buy their power at rates that make honest mining profitable, but short-term dishonest mining may be an entirely different story.)

Some people may attach considerable value to the destruction of bitcoin if nothing else.

<comment><USER26> But you missed the fact that the difficulty is increasing at a rate that makes old un-efficent hardware mostly useless, even in big numbers.

Even ignoring the power required, you'd need 67+ MILLION AntMiner S3s, and those still are just barely profitable if you are able to get power for $0.03 per KWh, and are still sold for over $100 a piece.

I'd be willing to wager that even if you were able to buy every single S3 that exists you wouldn't even be close.

<comment><USER25> So... what happens if the price of Bitcoin stabilizes and then drops enough such that even the most recent generation of miners are no longer profitable if all of them are running?

<comment><USER26> In that case Bitcoin might be caught in a "big freeze". Bitcoin takes about 2000 blocks to adjust difficulty, so if it becomes worthless overnight, the amount of hash power could drop enough that no new blocks will ever be found, and without any new blocks the difficulty will never adjust.

So one player would need to buy the vast majority of all miners, and even then they would only be capable of doing a double spend attack on a dead blockchain.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> So how well will Proof of Stake be able to solve the ecological and mining cost issue, here, for the cryptocurrencies that moved/are moving to that?

<comment><USER19> In theory, PoS would fix the energy waste. Unfortunately, aside from ETH, nobody has a real roadmap so I doubt it will make much of a dent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> this is good for gamers

<comment><USER29> Bitcoin miners use ASICs, so this wouldn't affect gamers at all.

It might make it worse, actually, since people who had mined Bitcoin may move to Ethereum.

<comment><USER30> ETH is going POS, I would be very skeptical as an ETH miner to buy something new.

<comment><USER31> I'm really curious about the logic of this move. As I understand it, PoS will award miners who have the most coin with an increased likelihood that they'll be able to mine a coin. In other words, the more coins you own, the higher probability you can mine more.

This seems to be designed to fail, or at least designed to create a mining market which is highly central to only the wealthiest players.

Anyone care to refute this?

<comment><USER32> The idea is to not have the huge block reward.

(the main incentive for participating in the consensus finding is the ability to do transactions)

<comment><USER31> I get that, but doesn't this still create a network where the most coin- holding miners wield the most power?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Looking forward to the flood of "uneconomical" graphics cards. Pricing got stupid.

</comment><comment><USER34> Doesn't the dorm room miner not pay for their electricity? Or am I being too literal?

<comment><USER35> Mining at current prices is a $5 billion a year industry, mostly run on specialised chips at scale. Dorm room miners aren't a significant factor.

Regardless, there's also capital expenditures on the equipment.

The problem is that the price is so volatile. As with any industry, new entrants will keep joining in until total cost will approach total revenue. But if total revenue can just drop by 50% in the span of a few months, that can put a large portion of participants out of business, even if hypothetically one of their cost factors (electricity) is free, some participants will have to go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Wouldn't fewer miners = higher prices with all else being equal?

<comment><USER37> Also isn't fewer miners => reduced difficulty => higher chances of solving the puzzle => greater chance of a successful mine => potential profit?

<comment><USER38> Fewer organizations mining doesn't necessarily mean lower hashrate.

As new hardware comes online for the big miners the hashrate could still increase whilst the number of organizations mining decreases.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I came here to check if there was a Napalm Death joke, and I am serious disappoint.

[https://youtu.be/ybGOT4d2Hs8](https://youtu.be/ybGOT4d2Hs8)

<comment><USER40> This comment would be more appropriate for Reddit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I like the possibility of having tons of high-end GPUs being sold for bargain basement prices on eBay.

One of my never-started projects is to build a big GPU=based cluster shaped like a Cray-2. The original machine had, IIRC, 11 lobes and, therefore, having 11 GPU cards feels right (or 10 and use one lobe for the motherboard controlling everything. A Xeon Phi (if we are going crazy with GPUs, we should go crazy with the motherboard as well) has 36 PICe lanes, so I assume it'd be a fine choice. All this would be immersed in 3M's Novec 649 to keep the bubbly looks.

<comment><USER17> GPU's have not been used for mining Bitcoin for years. They are being used to mine other cryptocurrencies.

<comment><USER42> He wants a gpu compute cluster, not a notebook mining machine. They would be on the market because bitcoin's price is so tightly linked to many others including ethereum.</comment></comment></comment>


Dreddit; Reddit + BTC on Lightning - <AUTHOR> https://dreddit.cryptocontrol.io/?ref=hackernews <comment><AUTHOR> So basically it's a link aggregator with a different kind of incentive structure; unlike Steemit or Reddit. Users can tip each other in BTC and that BTC can be withdrawn via the Lightning Network. By allowing users to tip each other, the focus is more on creating content that people would like to tip. People who tip also earn Karma points which help in increasing the popularity of their posts & comments.

<comment><USER2> nice! I've been a steemit user for quite some time but the quality has seriously detoriated. I'm going to try this out? looks like there's a tipping frenzy happening?</comment></comment>


Show HN: A game I wrote in a day - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/otdav33/spelunko/ <comment><USER2> Loved the simple concept. I made it to the end of the game, and was a little sad because of what had happened. Nice touch.

</comment><comment><USER3> Love it. Good job. I actually felt more emotions than while playing some AAA games.

<comment><USER4> I know, right? You're just thrown right in And you don't know whats going on. And this thing is following you. You walk and walk around, and then run.... and THAT HAPPENSSSS........ and it was so sad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Cool concept. What happens when I can't get to water before the lava gets to me? Is that game over? That happened to me but I didn't get a "gave over" or some other message.

</comment><comment><USER6> Cool concept. But the screen was freezing a bit for me.

And I had to go really far to the right before the first message.

Also I think the the time to get to the water should be cut in half, by making the board a bit smaller.

</comment><comment><USER7> Unable to play on mobile unfortunately. But great execution on an idea that came to you in your sleep.

</comment><comment><USER8> Pretty fun game. I'm always inspired by stuff like this; tired of writing CRUD apps.

</comment><comment><USER9> Why do you need a gametick(setInterval) when all the update happens on key event ?</comment>


Ask HN: Review our startup: MovieListr - <AUTHOR> http://movielistr.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Little background: A friend and I have always been huge movie fans, and our movie libraries have been growing steadily for years now, so we thought it'd be really cool to have a place online where you can catalog your movie library, while also mapping it to actual places where you have stored the movies.

For example, you can add a movie to your library and tag locations to it. Lets say you own 12 Monkeys in your Black hard disk, etc.

Anyway, we're looking for feedback. Registration is free and fast. Thanks a bunch.

</comment><comment><USER2> Another suggestion: Please link to <http://movielistr.com/recover/> ("forgot my password" page) on the login page. The only link I could find was on <http://movielistr.com/account/>, which requires that you log in first.

</comment><comment><USER2> Can't register because your email field is too short (30 characters max).

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed, thanks for bringing this to my attention.

<comment><USER2> Great, thanks! Sounds like a good idea, and something I might actually use.

1) I want to be able to upload a list.

99% of the people who start using this site are going to have a bunch of movies already. We're not just starting our collection, so you need to make the "transaction cost" of starting to use your site very low. How many people do you see sitting there entering 100 movies one-by-one?

First get search working well. Then I want to be able to do cd ~/Movies && ls > list.txt, upload that file, and have the movies auto-added to whatever location I type in.

For me, adding the movies is so painstaking that I'm just not going to do it. But if there were an easy way for me to add them, your startup would be pretty useful for me.

2) [deleted and too lazy to change numbering]

3) Search should allow me to put the year of the movie.

I wanted to add "Hannah Montana- The Movie". When I searched "Hannah Montana" (shut up, it's my sister's), a bunch of movies showed up, and I thought putting the year in would narrow it down, but it simply eliminated all the movies (since none of them have 2009 in the title)

I'm not sure if I'm the only user who would try to put the year in, but that's just feedback on how I used your site.

3.1) Search doesn't work very well. A title with a 100% match should usually be the first result, shouldn't it?

3.2) What's "added on" mode? Is this the date the movie was added to your database, because I wouldn't think that has much connection to search relevance.

4) Where do you get the "score" from?

5) Clicking on the heart ("add to wishlist") button should add/remove from wishlist (not just add to it)

It's confusing that the same button does something different whether you're on the "movies" or "wish list" page

6) I initially thought the "comments" was my personal comments, not a social feature.

I personally wouldn't make this a social feature because it's unlikely to ever reach the level of commentary that IMDB or other sites have.

But since it is a social feature, you might want to make this more clear. I was going to put something in there like, "on bottom shelf", or "in thin CD case"

If you think other users might use it for that purpose, but you want to keep the social feature, maybe there should be a "make this comment private" check- box.

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the comments Frazz, they're definitely great input and I'll try and start working on a lot of the items on the list, especially on the import feature.

<comment><USER2> No problem, they are just my opinions so take them as you will :)

If you ever do get that import feature working please get in touch with me!

<comment><AUTHOR> Definitely will, it's one of those things you just didn't think about but as soon as someone mentions it, it goes straight to the top of your to-do list. I'll probably be working on it this weekend, so I'll holler asap. Thanks again.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google interview - <AUTHOR> http://ifdefined.com/blog/post/2008/03/Google-interview.aspx <comment><USER2> The guy is 52, no wonder they rejected him. Not saying they discriminate, but would they rather hire a guy with kids and family or single 20-something geek...? I think the inclination for the latter has always been there for Google (and others?) and it's not really a secret.

<comment><USER3> _"... The guy is 52, no wonder they rejected him. Not saying they discriminate, but would they rather hire a guy with kids and family or single 20-something geek...? ..."_

Yeah I hear that Guido is getting on a bit. What about that Vincent guy or Martelli. Over the hill! Don't trust anyone over 30 or googles case _"Don't trust anyone over 29.7"_ ~ <http://efactor.blogspot.com/2005/10/i-dream-i- conquer.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "I did learn something, though, in the course of the phone interview: that cosmic rays can cause computer memory chips to flip a bit. Did you know that? I didn't know that. I wonder if in my career I've ever spent time investigating a bug that was cosmic by a cosmic ray?"

<http://xkcd.com/378/></comment>


Here's a little dentistry hack I did. - <AUTHOR>

First off, I don't recommend anyone try doing your own dentistry based on my experience.<p>I had a dark, tea-stained porcelain cap on one of my front teeth.  It was really starting to look bad, so I did some online searches hoping to learn how to bleach it to match my other teeth.  I was disappointed to learn that you can't. I finally decided that what my cap needed was to be polished, so I inserted a pencil point-side-down into a cordless drill and spun the eraser to polish it (being careful not to rub against my natural teeth or gums).  It took about 30 seconds and completely removed the discoloration. <comment><USER2> If you'd accidentally rubbed the metal eraser binding on a tooth while doing that, it probably would have done some damage.

How did it taste?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah. It was a nice full eraser and it really didn't wear much. There wasn't really a taste, or bits to spit out or anything.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> How much damage would it actually cause if you hit a real tooth? Dentists polish people's teeth all the time with fast spinny tools.

</comment><comment><USER4> Sounds like you probably removed the enamel. Lack of enamel can cause tooth decay. Although you have a cap, which could protect you. Still, did you think about that?

Did you at least discuss with a dentist first?!

<comment><USER5> He removed the enamel from his artificial cap?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> What the fuck man? You've got balls of steel.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you sell at a conference without booth? - <AUTHOR> After years as consultant/developer, I started my own company less than 2 years ago. I now find myself alone at some big conference for the next couple of days, supposedly to get people interested into my services, but I could not afford a booth. How do I go about it...? <comment><USER2> If the conference has an app or some sort of attendee list I would take the time to go through it and ping everyone who you think could be a potential client and set up a time to meet. When I go to a conference I pretty rarely actually go to the talks, I mostly am meeting people I set meetings up with beforehand or going to the networking bits.</comment>


Ask HN: what level of education have you reached? - <AUTHOR>

I want to know about the hacker education culture. So have you dropped out of high school? or have you gone to college and graduated with honors?<p>What level of education have you reached? <comment><USER2> High school drop out. Did pretty well in school, but fucking hated it. Don't regret dropping out for a second. I learned more during that time than I probably ever will again.

Previous salaries in the last five years $120 - $200K. Currently founder of a startup with $1.25 million funding.

Do not recommend anyone drop out of high school though. That it worked out okay for me is probably the exception rather than the rule.

<comment><USER3> Don't be a fool - stay in school.

Anyhow, I too dropped out, got my GED and am doing quite well for myself. Any company that has had an issue with my educational background without taking in to consideration that my work experience now fully outweighs educational experience, is a company I just wouldn't want to work for in the first place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> <http://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Created a Poll <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1881630>

</comment><comment><USER5> I completed my B.Sc some 10 yrs ago... Considering doing a Bachelor of Laws. :P

</comment><comment><USER6> I am currently in college for my bachelors degree in computer science.

</comment><comment><USER7> Currently studying for my bachelors.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm pursuing an LL.B.</comment>


Show HN: Compare How Pants Fit Without a Size Chart - <AUTHOR> https://www.tryfitfirst.com/home/pant-fit-comparison-tool <comment><AUTHOR> Hey everybody. A little bit about this.

My partner and I have been creating a database of over a thousand pant measurements that we've personally gathered over the past year or so. We've found it irritating that the only way to shop for apparel is pretty much by trial and error (fitting rooms, manually looking at size charts and hoping that they're accurate). I have a super small waist-to-hip ratio (and a super small waist) for a man, so I run into two problems

1\. Usually stores don't carry the right waist size for pants I want to buy, so I can't try them on.

2\. When I buy online, stuff that's in my size is usually too tight around the seat of my pants.

That's why I thought it'd be fun to create a way of browsing pants that let you see the differences between two pairs of pants so you could figure out if something is even worth trying to buy.

Over the past couple days, my partner and I put together a tool in D3 that overlays pants and compares their measurements everywhere.

Let me know what you think, and let me know if you have any technical questions about it.</comment>


School Districts, Test Scores, and Income - <AUTHOR> https://randomcriticalanalysis.wordpress.com/2016/05/09/my-response-to-the-nytimes-article-on-school-districts-test-scores-and-income/ <comment><USER2> If intelligence and success are truly largely determined by genetics:

\- How will our culture ever allow us to even admit the possibility?

\- If it's true and the truth becomes widely accepted, how do we prevent problems ranging from basic discrimination, to a push for eugenics policies, to full-on Nazi "kill all the inferior races in our glorious society"?

The answer since WW2 has been basically "that's not the way it works" \-- but then that means we suppress evidence that points in that direction, and so blind ourselves to the possibility that it is actually the way it works.

If what the author's saying is the truth, are we better off being willfully blind to it, and avoiding the grave social problems such a truth could potentially cause if widely accepted? Or should we pursue the evidence wherever it leads?

We like to think that our modern scientific society is far more ethically advanced than the primitive, superstitious idiots who put Galileo on trial -- but it seems like this issue may be an example of the same forces at work, and it seems like a lot of the people might come down on the side of suppressing unfavorable evidence.

For the record, I don't really support the author's point of view. I'm just playing devil's advocate by asking yourself: If the author's right, what evidence would he need to present in order to convince you?

<comment><USER3> I wonder... Dogs are all the same speices, Canis lupus, yet some breeds are known to be highly trainable while others are not.

What _else_ could this be other than genetics?

Dogs are mammals, aside from their proportions their bodies are nearly identical to ours.

Therefore, ought it not be possible to selectively breed for humans for traits such as trainability, calmness, and emotional stability? These are all traits some dogs have been selected for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The problem with this type of analysis is there is always a motivation behind it.

This kind of analysis is deployed as an argument that it is okay that wealthier kids get better-funded schools with more opportunities to advance. Because (supposedly) the analysis proved the poorer kids are being held back by genetics, not the inequalities of the system.

And this kind of analysis is used to justify racism. Since race is genetic, and socioeconomic outcome is correlated to genetics, then SES correlation with race is to be expected. So (the racist argument goes) racism is rational and justified, and efforts to counter it are pointless.

The linked article does not go this far, true. But ask, what is the motivation for making the arguments he is making?

<comment><USER5> It's true that these kinds of analyses are often politically motivated, but if they're sound, they're sound, regardless of the motivation. My problem with them is that they focus on the wrong thing. They ignore the fact that while human traits, including intelligence, have Gaussian distributions, wealth and income have distributions closer to a power law. This suggests that there are strong, systematic amplifications of wealth that have little relation to real merit, regardless of the biological source. Compared to the differences in wealth, the measurable biological differences are in the noise. And _that 's_ what we should be analyzing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nobody seems to want to touch this with a ten-foot pole...

<comment><USER7> It's unfortunate how great analysis is ignored because it's politically inconvenient.

<comment><USER8> There's a great deal of fear that linking academic success with genetics will embolden discrimination in society.

It's much easier to 'cut your losses' and overtly under-educate a certain group of people if you can legitimize that 'they won't excel anyway'.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's true, some of the most disgusting behaviour in history has used social darwinism as a justification for oppression. I guess I'm torn between an interest in and fear of the topic. I'm surprised that such compelling evidence is ignored in public discourse, however it could be that this is a good thing?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> TL;DR: the apple can only fall so far from the tree.</comment>


Ask HN: What should I learn to become a computer scientist? - <AUTHOR>

My 14-year-old cousin came over to my place, woke me up, and asked me (a career software developer) "What should I learn now to become a computer scientist?"  I didn't have a really good answer for him. I told him to pay attention to algebra, take a class in symbolic logic if he could find one, and take any programming classes he could find.  I started learning to program in college (not counting little games in BASIC and hello-world level stuff in C growing up).  I'm sure there's plenty of good teach-yourself-to-program books aimed at people his age, but I don't know what they are.<p>TL;DR: What does HN recommend as a course of study for an aspiring young pre-CS student? <comment><USER2> MIT's OpenCourseWare is an excellent way for him to study CS on his own while in high school.

I would recommend, at 14, getting him utterly hooked on the mindset of CS and related subjects. Godel, Escher, Bach, etc. If you can get him fascinated with the field, he'll find all the information he needs on his own better than any list of required reading you'll get.

<http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm>

<http://www.amazon.com/dp/0465026567>

</comment><comment><USER3> Does he want to study computer science or software engineering? If he wants to study computer science he should take lots of math, particularly courses that involve proofs. I recommend algebra, graph theory, and combinatorics in particular. I'd recommend Haskell or SML as programming languages since they have so much theory behind them. Haskell has a great community and is really nice to use, but SML is simpler to start with and has a concise definition.

<comment><USER4> Erm.... this is all well and good, but is this really something you'd want to start a 14 year old out with?

<comment><USER5> How is 14 early to take courses on graph theory or combinatorics, or learn SML? He sounds like a bright kid, or else he wouldn't be asking his cousin how to study computer science. He might or might not actually be interested in these things, but if he's interested in them, then he should learn them.

<comment><USER6> I think if a kid wants to learn something is asking about it, then there should be a way. I think instead of starting straight with high school Math, he/she can be started with some basic stuff of upcoming classes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd recommend the little schemer: <http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/BTLS/>

I think if I'd seen this book when I was about that age, I'd have _loved_ computer science.

<comment><USER7> Another ebook I recently came across is: <http://inventwithpython.com/>

It teaches python through building basic computer games. A fun way to learn.

<comment><USER8> seems very nice!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Get a TI calculator and try making some simple games for it in TI Basic. The calculator is nice because you can program in your not-so-great history classes or whatever.

Also start messing around with Python, there is no overhead and you can get started quickly.

Paying attention to math is important, but more important is honing your problem solving skills.

(Addressed everything to the OPs cousin for readability)

<comment><USER10> This is basically what I did in 8th grade, then in 9th grade I joined the FIRST robotics team in our high school, which I would strongly recommend if there is one available.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Well maybe he doesn't understand the differences between: computer scientist

computer programmer

software engineer

You might think they are the same thing but they're not. A computer scientist would end up in academia doing research. A computer programmer writing programs and a software engineer design then building systems.

Learning to program for a budding computer scientist is the worst possible thing to do. It contaminates the mind with what ever preconceptions the chosen language may provide. Ok, maybe Lisp and Scheme not so much - but still ...

</comment><comment><USER12> For a computer _scientist_ (as opposed to developer), study maths.

<comment><USER13> Yes.</comment></comment>


Twitter Announces Developer Labs and the Next Generation of the Twitter API - <AUTHOR> https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/topics/tools/2019/building-the-next-generation-of-the-twitter-api.html <comment><AUTHOR> Upcoming TapIntoTwitter developer event in NYC [https://tapintotwitterny.splashthat.com](https://tapintotwitterny.splashthat.com)</comment>


Why No One Wants to Work With a Perfectionist - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200715-why-no-one-wants-to-work-with-a-perfectionist <comment><USER2> I always found it weird hearing someone call themselves a "perfectionist". My usual challenge has been to ask if they ever achieved anything that was "perfect" (which I take to mean "cannot be improved further")?

With the expected (and common) response of "no", I can only assume that they strive for improvement. Now, it is my belief that majority of people (if not all) strive for improvement, but the important point is what parts of our lives or ourselves we try to improve.

I've never met a person who _does_ focus equally on improving in _all_ areas of their life, so I generally just assume that they have not thought things through and are lying to themselves, or simply they are focusing on things most other people are not. ;-)

Sorry to all the "perfectionists" out there, but I think we are all equally perfectionists, meaning that nobody is! :D</comment>


Why Java is Most Popular Language? - <AUTHOR> http://9lessons.blogspot.com/2008/10/why-java-most-popular-language.html <comment><USER2> A few points..

\+ On what basis does he assume java is "most popular language"[sic]?

\+ What on earth is the relationship between java being the most popular language and virus attacks?

\+ This article does not make sense

</comment><comment><USER3> I think the reason is timing. Java took a huge market share during a software boom. It looked attractive at the time because it was an improvement over, but still similar to, existing languages. It also appealed to a perceived need of the time, making it hard for mediocre programmers to screw up.

We've learned since that it's much more important to make it hard for mediocre product managers to screw up by using a language that encourages rapid iteration. However, Java still gets chosen by occasional intelligent programmers because it developed a few robust libraries.

</comment><comment><USER4> _The first point Java is a platform independent language it works any where. How it works and why C, C++ and .Net not works._

That paragraph needs to be put on a t-shirt.

<comment><USER5> No paragraph

<comment><USER4> LOL, So like what, you've taken the first paragraph of your article away now? That was the best one! Are you planning on keeping it for your own t-shirt line?

Seriously though, all in good fun dude. I certainly don't expect people whose first language is not English to write perfect English. It's none the less amusing - from the point of view of the native speaker - to see what people come up with sometimes.

One of my favorite non-native English snippets from another forum (in the context of something bad possibly befalling one of the conversation participants):

 _You know this happen, this happen you._

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This article is so bad it's almost funny. It's a shame there isn't a Bulwer- Lytton contest for technology articles.

</comment><comment><USER7> Asside from the gawd awful language, the thing is that java is nothing special.

If its platform native code vs VM, well we got: Java (woo)

Ruby (woo-er)

Python (woo-er-er)

Haskel

Lua

Freaken' Emacs and it's lisp

tons of lisp derivitives

The list goes on. Java is not the only VM on the market. This article would have been good in 1996.</comment>


Skirret: a forgotten Tudor vegetable - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/howtogrow/fruitandvegetables/11421128/Skirret-the-forgotten-Tudor-vegetable.html <comment><USER2> Cited as "silum" in capitulare de Villis (8th century).

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

<comment><USER3> And here's the article on it: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sium_sisarum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sium_sisarum)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There are loads of interesting fruit and veg not available in most supermarkets. I'm growing: medlars, perilla, quince, kohlrabi, sloes, rosehips, wasabi, horseradish, kinkan, yuzu, naranjilla, damsons ... In fact the reason to have a veg patch is to be able to source these ingredients.

<comment><USER5> > wasabi

I thought that was supposed to be pretty difficult to grow.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasabi#Cultivation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasabi#Cultivation)

I recall reading about some company trying to do so in Oregon and failing at it, despite the climate being pretty good.

<comment><USER6> My reading of that link is it's difficult to grow commercially, which is a long way away from difficult to grow in your own garden.

<comment><USER5> Could be. Here's one thing in Oregon, not sure if it's what I remember, but I don't think so because it appears to be a going concern: [http://www.oregonlive.com/foodday/index.ssf/2011/10/real_was...](http://www.oregonlive.com/foodday/index.ssf/2011/10/real_wasabi.html)

"Mountain streambeds are the plant's natural habitat. Though some Japanese wasabi is cultivated in soil, the highest quality product is water-grown, with plants sprouting from gravel-laced terraces through which streams are diverted."

Still sounds tricky compared to a lot of stuff.

<comment><USER7> Makes it sound perfect for aquaponics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I should do a veggie dive at a local market here in southwest China and show you guys what you are missing variety wise. There are so many awesome ingredients here it's ridiculous! All the stuff everyone else has mentioned plus seaweed, ferns, rhizomes, various gingers, dried and fresh persimmons, pomegranate, Buddha's hand, fresh spices you can have ground on the spot, loads of tofus, many different types of eggs, greens and melons you've never seen, huge amounts of fresh nuts, adzuki beans (wild here for 1000s of years), marijuana seeds (wild here also), dozens of types of fresh rice and wheat- based noodles, at least a handful of types of mushrooms year-round and tens more in wild 'shroom season, fresh bamboo shoots, various bean pastes and sauces, etc. Mmm. Hungry. Must go eat.

<comment><USER9> There are over 2000 known edible land plants.

So everyone is missing out everywhere

<comment><USER8> A meaningless statement. Obviously we are dealing with relative diversity, not absolute. Western supermarkets in my experience (US, UK, continental Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are all very poor in diversity compared to markets in this particular area of China. Also, mushrooms are not classed as plants and this area has the largest diversity globally.

<comment><USER10> The power of the supermarkets seems to have been the main driver of this. Unless it's available globally in enough bulk to have permanent stock they just won't carry something any more.

Most of my favourite varieties of fruit and veg from less than 20 years ago are simply not available any more in supermarkets. I can remember regional variations and seasonality, even in Tesco. Now for apples it's Golden Tasteless, Braeburn and a few Gala and Cox if you're lucky.

We all lost something significant (taste) when they started caring more for supply chains than customers. Of course it's our own fault for preferring to get all groceries in one store.

<comment><USER11> Red "Delicious" if you're unlucky. Chosen for their shelf life, thick skin, and red color, and by the marketing spend of the organizations behind it. Chosen lastly (if at all) for their taste.

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2005/08...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2005/08/04/AR2005080402194.html) [http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/the- evil-r...](http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/the-evil-reign- of-the-red-delicious/379892/)

<comment><USER10> _...paid Hiatt for the rights, and then renamed the seedling the Delicious as a marketing ploy._

Says it all really.

If you have to tell us it's delicious, it isn't. Much like the GDR and democratic.

Meanwhile hundreds of regional varieties are being pushed to extinction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I haven't had much trouble growing skirret. It sprouts well from seed with a little bottom heat. I haven't tasted the roots yet. I'm hoping they're as good as I've read about

<comment><USER13> look a bit fiddly to prepare to me - try to peel them like a parsnip and there wouldn't be much left.

<comment><USER14> I have cooked salsify which looks similar. It is a bit annoying to prep.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This reminds me of the paw paw. Apparently they grow wild near where I live. I keep telling myself that this will be the year I go find some.

[http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2011/09/29/140894570/the...](http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2011/09/29/140894570/the- pawpaw-foraging-for-americas-forgotten-fruit)

<comment><USER16> I can definitely recommend the pawpaw. It's like pudding in a fruit. I've harvested from a remotely-located patch for years, but getting to that patch in late August/early September has been a challenge the last couple of years. I try to tell myself that it's okay to leave them for the bears, but no, screw the bears; they can eat grass or roots or something.

<comment><USER8> Pawpaw with lime juice is amazingly tasty and very good for your liver, apparently.

<comment><USER16> We're talking about the temperate fruit pawpaw, not the tropical fruit papaya which is commonly called "paw-paw".

<comment><USER8> Woah, America has its own pawpaw, that's nuts :)

I think the global use for the other fruit is far more dominant, you guys should consider switching to using the term 'Asimina'. Wikipedia says some people call it 'prairie banana', too. I've eaten that somewhere but can't remember where. Not bad, but not as nice as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annona_squamosa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annona_squamosa) which we get here also.

<comment><USER16> I haven't heard "paw-paw" in place of "papaya" outside of Asia, so I wouldn't call that global. We're not going to change the lyrics of all our old pawpaw- celebrating folk songs just to accommodate someone else's regional dialect. b^)

<comment><USER8> It's like metric vs. imperial. I think you'll find that Asia, Australia, New Zealand, UK all use pawpaw for one fruit.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Beer and Data Science – Looking at topic modeling in multi-aspect reviews - <AUTHOR> http://nbviewer.ipython.org/gist/benjamincohen1/d7caaa3d07bbb89cd39a

<comment><USER2> Nice read. I did something sort of similar with the same dataset about a year ago. I compared LDA (Latent Dirichlet Allocation) to TF-IDF as tools to find similar beers based on their review text. Lots of intuitive and funny topics discovered.

I suggest you play with LDA, it seemed to work really well at generating topics. There is also a lot of fascinating, very readable research using it. Check out SNAPs work on the same dataset [1] and some of the Yelp Dataset challenge winners [2]. If you end up interested in doing so, Gensim [3] was pleasant enough to work with.

[1] [http://snap.stanford.edu/data/web- BeerAdvocate.html](http://snap.stanford.edu/data/web-BeerAdvocate.html)

[2] [http://www.yelp.com/dataset_challenge](http://www.yelp.com/dataset_challenge)

[3] [https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/wiki.html#latent- dirichlet-a...](https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/wiki.html#latent-dirichlet- allocation)

</comment><comment><USER3> Great post! I've been thinking about writing something similar with that same BeerAdvocate data. Good job beating me to it :)

Instead, I ended up writing a satirical beer snob bot [1] which tweets nonsensical beer reviews using Markov Chains. Some are bad, but some are pure gold. You can read about it here [2]. The code's also on GitHub [3].

[1] [https://twitter.com/BeerSnobSays](https://twitter.com/BeerSnobSays)

[2] [http://www.gregreda.com/2015/03/30/beer-review-markov- chains...](http://www.gregreda.com/2015/03/30/beer-review-markov-chains/)

[3] [https://github.com/gjreda/beer-snob-says](https://github.com/gjreda/beer- snob-says)

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool stuff, followed! Feel free to steal any parts of my work you think may improve it. May be cool to be able to control the polarity of the review you're tweeting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> For anyone interested in beer and data science, my startup[1] uses machine learning and artificial intelligence to build flavor profiling and quality control tools for craft beverage producers.

Our models flag and predict flaws, taints, contaminations, and batch-to-batch deviations in real time from human sensory data. We then leverage our clients quality control data for flavor profile optimization, demographic targeting, and cognitive marketing - helping them sell consistently better products to their most valuable consumers.

[1] www.Gastrograph.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool stuff! And nice last name!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I just came across a relevant site this morning. Hilarious hipster brew review satire: [http://vicioustasting.com/](http://vicioustasting.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow, that's pretty well done. Any indication how it's made? Looks too good to be an HMM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Love the license =D

<comment><USER7> heh, logged in to post it :)

\-- spoiler alert --

[...]

If the Author of the Software (the "Author") needs a place to crash and you have a sofa available, you should maybe give the Author a break and let him sleep on your couch.

If you are caught in a dire situation wherein you only have enough time to save one person out of a group, and the Author is a member of that group, you must save the Author.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BLAH BLAH BLAH ISN'T IT FUNNY HOW UPPER- CASE MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THE LICENSE IS ANGRY AND SHOUTING AT YOU.

\--

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> How to get data ?

<comment><AUTHOR> I grabbed the data from here awile back: [https://snap.stanford.edu/data/web- BeerAdvocate.html](https://snap.stanford.edu/data/web-BeerAdvocate.html) Unfortunately it appears to no longer be available for download. This ([https://snap.stanford.edu/data/web- RateBeer.html](https://snap.stanford.edu/data/web-RateBeer.html)) seems to be a similar dataset which may be available for use.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there a website that provides a feed of events/exhibits/trade shows? - <AUTHOR> I've been unsuccessfully looking for a long time for a website that provides a feed of events/exhibits/trade shows based on my interests. For example I would be really interested to know about upcoming robotics-related events.<p>Normally I get to know about those from news when it's too late to make accommodations. Thanks! <comment><USER2> In general, I'm surprised that events are not served as (e.g. iCal) streams more regularly. Consider also cinema/ theatre/ concert listings - this is (should be) extremely structured data, but the only way to keep up with a bunch of venues is by visiting their websites regularly. Or is there an easier way that I am missing?

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly, same problem is for entertainment, although it's in a bit better position - there are a few websites that serve related information.

As for fairs and exhibits - so far the only usable site I was able to find is www.expodatabase.com, but I wasn't able to get the feeds working and it looks horrible on mobile devices...

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I made this for startups. A side project from a long time ago that still keeps chugging.

Http://www.3cosystem.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, interesting site. But I need broader topic coverage, search by keywords, and an ability to stream new events as a feed.</comment></comment>


The future of education: (re)Learning to make mistakes - <AUTHOR> http://startupjuncture.com/2014/05/14/the-future-of-education-relearning-to-make-mistakes/ <comment><USER2> Interesting insights by Robert, thanks for sharing!</comment>


MIT cuts ties with Walter Lewin after online harassment probe - <AUTHOR> http://tech.mit.edu/V134/N60/walterlewin.html

<comment><USER2> That was 6 months ago. There was plenty of discussion about it [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8720064](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8720064) and this specific link was posted already at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8721987](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8721987).

Since that time, there was also a link to "Complainant in 'unprecedented' Walter Lewin sexual harassment case comes forward" at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8937683](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8937683) and "More details on the Walter Lewin case" at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9384745](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9384745) .

</comment><comment><USER3> Taking down the videos does seem a harsh response, but I guess cutting all ties to Dr Walter Lewin means nothing of his can be hosted on anything that is owned by MIT.

Does feel a little like a book burning, but I get why they cut ties with him.

<comment><USER4> > I guess cutting all ties to Dr Walter Lewin means nothing of his can be > hosted on anything that is owned by MIT.

This really doesn't logically follow. It's perfectly reasonable for a university to, say, host a video-taped panel discussion with folks who have committed crimes, or publish a book by someone with immoral views.

The defense of taking down these courses is ostensibly based on the idea that they need to prevent _new_ bad behavior from taking place, i.e., that the on- going courses actually represent a danger.

> MIT says it removed Lewin videos for fear of continued harassment

But of course, there is almost certainly a way to do that while preserving the course material.

Here are Scott Aaronson's thoughts:

[http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2091](http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2091)

As the comments allude to, MIT keeps copies of Mein Kampft in their library. It doesn't mean they endorse the work.

<comment><USER5> Yes, but it's course material that sets him up in a position of authority. It's fine for people to study Nazi-ism, but people would probably question MIT if Joseph Goebbels were giving the lectures.

TL;DR; context matters, he's not a unique snowflake the sum of human knowledge hasn't been impacted.

<comment><USER4> > people would probably question MIT if Joseph Goebbels were giving the > lectures.

If Joseph Goebbels had something useful to say that would add to the intellectual discussion, then MIT should host him. This could be him trying to defend himself, or it could just be him lecturing on a topic completely unrelated to his horrific views.

Some people would surely strongly object, but they would be wrong.

<comment><USER2> I have something to say which I think would add to the intellectual discussion. Should MIT host my comments?

In any case, there's no need to reach towards Nazis - plenty of people protested when the war criminal Kissinger wanted to teach at Columbia. See [https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1350&dat=19771108&id=...](https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1350&dat=19771108&id=0gpPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XwIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2888,5024985&hl=en) for example, where he made it in to Georgetown but mention that 135 faculty and 1,000 students at Columbia "registered their disapproval and Mr. Kissinger withdrew from the negotiations."

<comment><USER4> > I have something to say which I think would add to the intellectual > discussion. Should MIT host my comments?

It doesn't matter whether _you_ think you would add to the intellectual discussion, it matter whether MIT think so.

> In any case, there's no need to reach towards Nazis

Agreed. There are many real life cases. There are lots of things that go into who you should hire as a professor (which is obviously distinct from who you should host for a discussion), but there mere fact that a bunch of people registered their disapproval doesn't much speak to them.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Linus Torvalds: Locked Down Technologies Lose in the End - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2011/11/18/linus-torvalds-apple-lockdown/

<comment><USER2> Whether locked down technologies "tend" to lose depends on what categories of technologies you count.

A common mistake when speaking of closed vs. open systems is to look at a very narrow set of technologies and product categories, often limited to PCs, and extrapolate from that to other kinds of technologies, like smart phones. But the world of technology is bigger than that, much bigger.

You've got everything from enterprise solutions, to consumer electronics, to embedded technologies. People want "open" and "freedom" in general purpose computing solutions, but people _(regular people)_ tend to not even reflect on that in consumer electronics, like gaming consoles, GPS-devices, or the software in their cars. And, the last few years, many classes of computers are becoming more and more like consumer electronics devices, and less like PCs.

Suffice to say, there are quite a few markets and product categories that are traditionally completely "locked down" or "closed" or "integrated", or whatever you want to call them, that _absolutely do not_ "tend to lose in the end".

<comment><USER3> I'll add to that the amount of software we use that's not even really on our computers at all, but on a server somewhere else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> A better way to put it would be to say "Locked down technologies tend to not become as ubiquitous as their open counterparts".

Linux is a good example - other proprietary UNIX systems are not everywhere as Linux is (openness being relative). Windows is another - it was more open than OS X. Both proprietary UNIX systems and OS X lost in terms of market share.

Another example is Sony's proprietary formats - Memory Stick Duo Pro or whatever it was called.

So there is a definite history of markets preferring open alternatives when they were practical and at least in the same ballpark of usability of the closed/proprietary counterparts.

Also the context is important as the article points out -

 _.. in Brazil, where Apple iPhone users cannot buy games for the device, due to specific legal requirements from the Brazilian government. Apple has reacted by simply removing the games category for users in Brazil altogether. Because of its secretive corporate culture, Apple has recently been criticized in Brazil for being the "most closed company in the world."_

<comment><USER5> I don't think it makes sense to compare Windows and OSX and say that OSX lost because it was less open. By the time OSX came around Windows had been a monopoly for some time. OSX hasn't gotten any more open over time (probably less so, in fact) but its market share has gone up and Apple is now worth more as a company than Microsoft - so who's lost there?

<comment><USER4> We are talking ubiquity here. And relative openness. Windows 7/Vista/XP are ubiquitous OSes that are more open (put it on any piece of hardware you want as long as it is x86{_64} etc.). Mac OS and OS X were open - but locked down to hardware. Both Mac OS and OS X were and are less ubiquitous (i.e. 5% market share vs. 95% for Windows for a long time now) than any version of Windows. Apple making more money or Steve Ballmer's whims are not the contentions here - ubiquity of products is.

<comment><USER5> No, sorry, I wasn't talking about ubiquity - I don't disagree that OSX runs on less hardware than Windows. I simply didn't think it made sense to say that OSX had "lost" since it had very little market share at first and has grown a lot (I also disagree it's been holding steady at 5% for a long time), whereas Windows started out as a monopoly with nearly 100% and has declined somewhat since. That doesn't sound like any definition of "lost" I've ever heard.

If you want to include classic MacOS as well, I'd tend to agree more, but originally you just said OSX.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you want an interesting perspective on this idea, check The Master Switch, written by Tim Wu.

[http://www.amazon.com/Master-Switch-Information-Empires- Vint...](http://www.amazon.com/Master-Switch-Information-Empires- Vintage/dp/0307390993/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321640163&sr=8-1)

Amazon Book Description: It is easy to forget that every development in the history of the American information industry–from the telephone to radio to film–once existed in an open and chaotic marketplace inhabited by entrepreneurs and utopians, just as the Internet does today. Each of these, however, grew to be dominated by a monopolist or cartel. In this pathbreaking book, Tim Wu asks: will the Internet follow the same fate? Could the Web–the entire flow of American information–come to be ruled by a corporate leviathan in possession of "the master switch"?

Analyzing the strategic maneuvers of today's great information powers–Apple, Google, and an eerily resurgent AT&T–Wu uncovers a time-honored pattern in which invention begets industry and industry begets empire. He shows how a battle royale for Internet's future is brewing, and this is one war we dare not tune out.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think Linus got it wrong.To me(I am no expert) technologies that work win. People(companies, government, etc) don't really care about openness, they care about usefulness. I believe that when it comes, to choosing a technology for a certain task, the best technology for that task, will tend to win marketshare.

<comment><USER8> What I've found is that it isn't the best technology that wins every time: an option that is good enough but is heavily marketed or backed by a virtual monopoly is likely to beat out better technology.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> That's easy for him to say, but is there any evidence that this is, in fact, true?

<comment><USER10> Some. Interesting paper from some years ago on trends and missed opportunities in the computer industry. Unfortunately, it leaves off just where things get interesting: <http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/wpawuwpio/9406003.htm>

The general trend is that the more general, more flexible, lower-cost, more modular solution tends to win out in the long run. That's been different solutions at different times, but "more open" is a good general rule.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Linux on the desktop is a fantastic counter example.

<comment><USER12> You're cherry-picking an example. Linux in general is a counter-counter example. In addition to running a large proportion of webservers (actually the open-source Apache server hosts over 50% of all websites), Linux also runs on the majority of smartphones sold.

<comment><USER3> Another way of looking at it though is that businesses choose open technology platforms, but consumers choose integrated/closed end products.

I'd like to believe that consumers will, in the end, choose open technology (directly or indirectly). Maybe it has something to do with the rate of technological change, and it's just a matter of time before the benefits of open technology are demanded. But the evidence is not conclusive.

If anything tips the scales, it will be when consumers start to figure out that they don't own their devices _or the content on them_. People are getting a vague sense of that with locked-down mp3 players that make it hard to copy songs around. It will be a bigger deal when the person that gives all their books away because now they have electronic ones becomes furious when they find out they are forever beholden to amazon (and its book-deleting whims) to be able to read them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right before our eyes, consumers are choosing an open technology platform for smartphones - Android - which had 52.5% market share on smartphone sales in Q3 2011. Compare 16.9% for Symbian, 15% for iOS, 11% for BB and 1.5% for Windows Phone.

<http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1848514>

<comment><USER13> Don't you think the manufacturers are choosing Android?

<comment><USER12> Manufacturers seem to like Windows Phone 7 too, but those phones aren't selling very well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The only question here is what "in the end" means.

I can make a bet that, say, OSX won't exist in its current form in twenty years. But that doesn't inform any particular action I should take today. "The end" can be a long time away, and in technology empires rise and fall in a span of three to five years.

<comment><USER15> Agree. Long run behavior is mostly useful when deciding between two competing alternatives in which the short-term consequences are unimportant.

I'd assert that the widely-accepted "in the end" kinds notions are noxious, and speak to a "happily ever after" narrative that has always been false. "In the long run we're all dead."

Another such poisonous idea is "the truth will out" -- sure, maybe. But once it does it could no longer matter, and there will likely be other far more significant falsehoods to worry about. Similarly, "Markets can remain irrational a lot longer than you and I can remain solvent." When it comes to knowledge, this might be translated as "populations can remain ignorant and make stupid decisions long enough to have irreversible disastrous consequences."

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Then¹:

 _I actually think secure boot makes a lot of sense. I think we should sign our modules. I think we should use the technology to do cryptographic signatures to add security; and at the same time inside the open source community this is so unpopular that people haven't really worked on it._

Now:

 _I'm an optimist: openness is successful in the long run, secure boot is another one of these passing fads._

Not implying that he is being incoherent or, even worse, that he cannot change his mind. The passing fad of secure boot meant by Linus is probably using it to lock down a device.

¹. <http://www.muktware.com/news/2865> and <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3196098>

</comment><comment><USER17> Mr. Torvalds is confusing market freedom with the freedom to install other software on your devices. Market freedom is the ability to choose those products which suit your needs. Given the growth of apple in the last few years, it is quite obviously the case that the "free" market is working. I'm also not entirely sure what he means by "losing in the end". Apple and Micorosft have no responsibility other than to return value to their shareholders. They are, most decidedly, winning in this regard. If he means, losing simply based on adoption of a technology than only time will tell, but even if Apple and Microsoft fall in the long term it will still be an example of the free market at work.

</comment><comment><USER18> "Most people want freedom". Yes. Also, most people want their technology to just work. So how about we add: Complicated Technologies Lose in the End.

But we can use Occam's Razor to shave both statements down to the truth: most _technologies_ lose in the end. Because most things go obsolete.

That includes open technologies.

</comment><comment><USER19> Hasn't hurt the gaming industry at all. That's probably where things are heading for general purpose computing.

</comment><comment><USER20> Secure Boot isn't a Windows 8 feature, it's an EFI feature that Windows 8 will require. the concern being that Microsoft will convince manufacturers to lock out non-Windows OS's from being installed.

I think that distinction is pretty important.

<comment><USER21> I don't think it is so much Microsoft convincing OEMs to lock out other OSes, it's more like MS relying on OEMs being lazy and not putting the option to load your own keys into the BIOS.

<comment><USER20> Maybe, maybe not. Microsoft DOES have a history of strong-arming OEMs into being Windows-only. If they get lazy it'll only be because they don't see Linux as a threat anymore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Take what Linus says about locked down technologies losing in the long term and consider that technology is often a "winner takes all" game and we have an interesting scenario playing out for iOS in the future.

<comment><USER23> Technology is not often a "winner take all" game. The PC industry is the anomaly. Which other technology industries have one winner? Sure isn't cellphones or TVs.

<comment><USER24> In terms of interchangeable commodities there is space for many players. But in terms of more fundamental standards such as Windows vs Mac , JS vs Flash , VHS vs Betamax there tends to be one strongly dominant winner. The Mac only became really popular once it basically became a PC with a different GUI. In terms of cellphones pre smart-phone most were basically interchangeable since they were all capable of making voice calls and SMS over GSM , there was limited interest in developing applications for them by 3rd parties.

The disadvantage that iOS has in terms of becoming dominant is that only apple at present makes hardware which can run it (officially anyway) so it is in Apple's interest to keep the hardware cost relatively high since they make allot of money from selling it.

Once the it gets to the point where everybody wants a smartphone and tablet computer there will be allot of pressure for low cost products which Apple has no interest in providing. Android & similar can win bigger here because google does not make money from the hardware. They make money from the advertising etc so they are mostly interested in making sure that there are as many low cost products as possible that can run their software.

<comment><USER23> I still think if I listed every category of electronics, you could not find a dominant player in the majority of them.

I find it interesting that you ignore Apple's behavior with the iPod. Apple was more than willing to provide a low cost product. I really don't see why people think that trend won't be repeated.

<comment><USER24> You might not find a dominant _manufacturer_ but you would find dominant standards where compatibility is concerned.

The iPod is an interesting example I agree, but it is still generally towards the high end of the MP3 player market and it still supports the standard MP3 format making is compatible with all the music you already own.

So switching from another brand of MP3 player to iPod (or vice versa) is pretty easy, there's no real case of having to choose.

If Apple had chosen a different audio format for the iPod for example , that meant you would have to buy your music in a format that was only compatible with it then I doubt it would have enjoyed the success.

The only reason the iPod is cheap anyway is market pressure from competing manufacturers. If Apple had per my previous example gone with a different audio format and been the only player in town they would have kept their prices high and it would have become inevitable that a competitor would have entered at some point with a lower cost product.

The only thing that would keep people from buying the competing product at that point would be that all their music would be stuck with apple , making them a defacto monopoly but over time the lower prices of the competitor would either force their prices down or drive them out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> hello-trolls <$</comment>