Boeing delays 737 MAX software fix delivery - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/04/boeing-delays-737-max-software-fix-delivery/ <comment><USER2> Man oh man. Having (loosely) followed this saga, it sounds horrifically similar to every other "feature rush" I've ever seen in software development. I know this a fiction, but I can just imagine the scene - boss comes into SWE meeting, says "some other team implemented this thing that the higher-ups wanted, we have to change all of our stuff to make it work, and we only have X weeks/months" (common sin: deadlines before effort estimates). Then more issues are discovered in dev, SWE's try to push back but are ignored (common sin: concerns are not heard). "Scope is reduced" (common sin: this ALWAYS happens with hard deadlines, but SHOULD NEVER happen with human safety involvement, although it still does all the time e.g. healthcare).

It's not until some poor, senior engineer, who is probably one of their best staff, has a stellar reputation, and genuinely cares about their job, their team, the product, and the company ... they have to fall on the sword and TELL management what's going happen: we're not shipping this yet, IT IS NOT SAFE. Then that goes all the way up the chain, management at every level wrings their hands, "how oh how did this happen?" (although they specifically are talking about the missed deadline, not the safety concerns). It gets high enough that feeling is overcome by senior leadership wrath, which flows back down, and ultimately that engineer and their entire team is punished.

What a dumpster fire.

<comment><USER3> That's not really what happened here.

If you know what's going on, MCAS is quite safe - there are two highly visible switches that kill electric trim completely (thus disengaging MCAS) and allow the pilots to take manual control. Activating these switches is a memory item (i.e. pilots have to memorize the checklist) for runaway trim and would be universal across 737 variants.

Unfortunately, it appears that both the Lion Air pilots and the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did not recognize that this was a runaway trim issue at all (or until it was too late). If the Ethiopian Airlines disaster turns out to have an identical cause to the Lion Air crash, one has to question why the pilots did not take this simple corrective action.

<comment><USER4> > If you know what's going on, MCAS is quite safe - there are two highly > visible switches that kill electric trim completely (thus disengaging MCAS) > and allow the pilots to take manual control. Activating these switches is a > memory item (i.e. pilots have to memorize the checklist) for runaway trim > and would be universal across 737 variants.

> Unfortunately, it appears that both the Lion Air pilots and the Ethiopian > Airlines pilots did not recognize that this was a runaway trim issue at all > (or until it was too late). If the Ethiopian Airlines disaster turns out to > have an identical cause to the Lion Air crash, one has to question why the > pilots did not take this simple corrective action.

Not quite:

While the runaway trim checklist is a memory item, the symptoms that pilots train on in simulator presents runaway trim as a continuous event (the "classic" runaway trim being a relay becomes stuck and the trim just extends continuously).

So while they've trained on the correct _response_ to save the plane, they've never actually been exposed to the symptoms that an "MCAS runaway" presents (stick shaker on the AOA too steep side when the plane is patently not in stall combined with speed warnings and an uncommanded nose-down that goes away for several seconds when the stick is pulled back).

The "backs off" part is critical when combined with the speed warning alerts and lack of continuous trim, because this makes the nose down easy to interpret as coming from the 737's speed trim system, which has existed for decades, and the net result is that the combination of symptoms seems to overload/confuse the pilots.

We have, now, at least 3 documented examples of "MCAS runaway" \-- the two downed flights, and the prior Lion Air flight in which a deadheading pilot in the jump seat _did_ suggest to cut the automatic trim, but ONLY AFTER several minutes of confusion in the cockpit. And even after disabling it, they _re- enabled_ the auto trim initially and only re-cut it out when symptoms re- occured.

Which all boils down to: The MCAS system is in no way "quite safe". Safety is not a single line of defence, and the fact that at least 3 sets of pilots have struggled to identify the correct response to the MCAS issue indicates that the design of the system _is flawed_ , because no system is safe when its sole and only fallback relies on humans _100% providing the correct response to a never-before-seen set of symptoms_.

<comment><USER5> Some comments based on my understanding of the situation. I'm an engineer and I'm interested in the study of engineering failures. So, I have been following this. Initially I was thinking the blame was being unfairly placed on the MCAS system. However, now I understand more, I suspect it is a serious safety problem.

The reason is as you say, MCAS runaway (e.g. due to a failed AoA sensor) does not behave like a normal runaway trim (e.g. continuous trim movement). That is key. Watching Youtube videos was helpful in understanding what the pilot experiences. I initially thought the pilot should easily notice the trim moving because of the large trim wheel beside them. However, in normal takeoff, the trim is being adjusted automatically and so pilots learn to ignore it changing. Second, I think with the 737 MAX, the sound made by the trim wheel has been changed (removed)?

Using the stab trim cutout switches is a drastic measure (occurs as nearly last item on memory checklist) and, as I understand it, the only way to stop a misbehaving MCAS from doing its bad work. If the pilots are even a little slow in figuring out what's happening, I can easily imagine that leading to disaster. Also, if they to realize the problem and flick the switches off, manually cranking the trim wheel the other way takes time and it takes some serious physical strength to do it. I can imagine that if the MCAS moves the trim fully the wrong way, the pilots might not be able to fix it quickly enough.

<comment><USER4> > The reason is as you say, MCAS runaway (e.g. due to a failed AoA sensor) > does not behave like a normal runaway trim (e.g. continuous trim movement). > That is key. Watching Youtube videos was helpful in understanding what the > pilot experiences. I initially thought the pilot should easily notice the > trim moving because of the large trim wheel beside them. However, in normal > takeoff, the trim is being adjusted automatically and so pilots learn to > ignore it changing.

Yeah, that's the 737's Speed Trim system. Even before the MCAS, automatic trim adjustments to adjust for the '37s behaviour at different speeds were a constant thing in the cockpit. It seems like one possibility here is that pilots may be mistaking or unable to distinguish (since there's no real differentiation) the MCAS' trim adjustments from normal Speed Trim adjustments -- and keep in mind a speed warning is going off the entire time they're fighting the MCAS, due to the malfunctioning AOA, so they may be primed to think "Speed Warning + Automated Trim periodically occurring == Speed Trim" and over-focus on the stall & speed warnings and ignore the trim component.

> Also, if they to realize the problem and flick the switches off, manually > cranking the trim wheel the other way takes time and it takes some serious > physical strength to do it. I can imagine that if the MCAS moves the trim > fully the wrong way, the pilots might not be able to fix it quickly enough.

It's actually worse than that. If the AOA sensor is misbehaving, then it will never show a recovery after the MCAS applies an automatic trim adjustment, leading to the MCAS continuing to apply trim adjustments until the trim is at maximum.

At this point, the aircraft is basically in a nose dive, and if they hit the trim cutout, it _can be physically impossible to manually trim the aircraft_

An Avionics engineer discusses the issue here: [https://www.satcom.guru/2019/03/aoa-vane-must-have-failed- bo...](https://www.satcom.guru/2019/03/aoa-vane-must-have-failed-boeing- fix.html)

> The standard response to just hit the stabilizer cutout switches and > manually trim is actually flawed. If the nose has been pushed down by > significant mistrim (nose down stabilizer, nose up elevator), and as > airspeed increases, it may not be possible to trim the stabilizer manually > nose up without letting the elevator go to a neutral position. The reality, > under the MCAS runaway scenario, trimming nose up immediately stops MCAS as > well as trims the stabilizer back towards an in-trim position. At that > point, you would be best off to cutout the stabilizer.

> Many flight crews may not know that you have to relax the elevator to > manually trim the stabilizer if the loads is too high.

It also mentions that the techniques needed to relieve the forces enough to make trimming manually possible are not necessarily covered in Boeing's current manuals -- because they completely ignored the possibility of the MCAS trimming to max downwards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> In terms of project management, aviation software is one industry where the "three-legged stool" should always, always favor quality, so I'm more than happy to see Boeing take the extra time to get this right. Though the nose- pusher system's entire existence is due to the aerodynamic design of the entire MAX...which seems to be driven by the other 2 legs of the stool (i.e. budget and time).

<comment><USER7> Airplanes are not gliders. There is no reason to not correct aerodynamics via powered systems since that is how virtually any airplane even flies, with the caveat being - as long as it is done well. In other words, I have no problem with the principle of their design choice, just its execution which lacked typical redundancy, and transparency to the industry.

<comment><USER8> Is there another unstable airliner in operation? Even if it's OK, at the very least flying one (with or without software controls) would seem to me to require a certification by the pilots, which, as I understand, is precisely what Boeing tried to avoid.

<comment><USER9> All high performance aircraft are, by definition, unstable. An airframe optimized for one flight regime will not be as suitable in another. An airliner like the 737 is optimized for cruise flight (30k feet, almost supersonic) and so isn't ideal during takeoff/landing. Making it good at both isn't an option. So we have systems to modify and adapt the cruise airframe for low-level flying such as this antistall system.

The only really stable commercial aircraft are, perhaps, the bushplanes. They are not fast and not fuel efficient over any real distance.

<comment><USER10> > All high performance aircraft are, by definition, unstable.

This doesn't follow. Not even fighter jets were inherently unstable before modern control electronics. Using the electronics to make the flight characteristics better is not the same as the airframe being inherently unstable.

<comment><USER9> There were stable at altitude, but at low speeds those "fighter jets" became very twitchy. Delta or swept wings are a problem when low and slow. Their landing speeds were sometimes extreme and/or their angle of attack so high that visibility was an issue.

Fighter jets are also, in comparison to airliners, not very aerodynamically efficient. They can be fast but burn lots of fuel while doing so. They are like a motorcycle compared to a bus.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Does anyone here know how updates like this are delivered? Sadly the article doesn't answer this question. I suppose it's not as simple as downloading it over 4G or something like that.

<comment><USER12> A few years ago, we had to wait one and a half hour before takeoff in a 787. After that time they said "Sorry, the we needed a bit more time for the software update on the plane" over the speaker ...

<comment><USER13> I wonder if it was the uploading of mapping/route information and not an actual update to the systems running the plane.

<comment><USER12> I think not just mapping information, the 787 had some really really bad bugs when he was new, like shutdown the whole plane (even in the middle of a flight) if you didn't reboot for a month and such.

<comment><USER14> Usually the safety requirement will mention a mandatory reboot period that will be somehow related to a power of 2... Damn integer counters...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Software can't fix a broken air-frame.

<comment><USER16> I don't think the air-frame for the 737 MAX is broken, though.

I definitely agree that the MCAS system should have required two AOA sensors, and been automatically disabled when there was a disagree. I agree that Boeing should have briefed airlines and pilots about the MCAS system, the AOA disagree indicator, and potentially required new training.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Anyone know what the text is on the controls? [https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp- content/uploads/2019/04/The_7...](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp- content/uploads/2019/04/The_737-800_Flight_Deck_3852492599-800x600.jpg)

I find it interesting how airplanes jam as much information as possible in wherever they can.

<comment><USER18> [http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/9/2/1495299....](http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/9/2/1495299.jpg?v=v40)

Google search for "737 yoke checklist" reveals a variety.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Computer controlled instability in a military aircraft is one thing, but instability in a civilian aircraft another thing entirely. Someone here said built-in instability was an accepted design feature in modern civilian aircraft. I do not remember being asked. I wonder why? John, PPL(IR), passenger.

</comment><comment><USER20> As a passenger do I have choice for not riding a particular aircraft model?

<comment><USER21> If you can choose the airline you know what fleet the plane comes from. If you search on the flight number on e.g Flightradar24 you can see what model they used on the flight for several recent flights.

But in the end I suppose the reality is that even an un-fixed MAX-8 is orders of magnitude safer than your car ride to the airport. So before picking aircraft models, ensure you ride the train to the airport and not a taxi...

<comment><USER22> > an un-fixed MAX-8 is orders of magnitude safer than your car ride to the > airport.

Of the 346 people that died in the last two plane crashes, not a single one of them died in a car on the way to the airport.

<comment><USER23> Impeccable logic

<comment><USER22> Just as logical as the statement I was poking fun at.

<comment><USER21> I was assuming the person was trying to avoid dying, not trying to avoid plane crashes in particular. Someone who wants to avoid a plane crash but would ride a motorcycle without a helmet to the airport obviously needs to use a different strategy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> village-idiot Of all the software to not deliver in a hurry, this has to be in the top 3.

</comment><comment><USER24> No luck moving those engines back with software yet huh?

</comment><comment><USER25> Will we get to see the changeset?

<comment><USER26> Do we (as in, arbitrary member of the public, or American, or passenger) ever get to see the code that goes on an FAA-approved passenger aircraft?

<comment><USER27> No, why would you? It's typically highly, highly proprietary.

<comment><USER26> That's what prompted my response to someone thinking we'd see the before or the after.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hunting the Craigslist Killer - <AUTHOR> http://thephoenix.com/Boston/news/136636-hunting-the-craigslist-killer/

<comment><USER2> I read this earlier from some other story that was on HN, it was a little corny how they played it up for the tech crowd all things considered but it was a great read.</comment>


Tim Berners-Lee calls for free Internet worldwide - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11309902

<comment><USER2> ...And I call for a free,long lasting solution for world hunger,world peace, and education.

There is no such thing as a free lunch,however well you dress it up.</comment>


HP Makes $1 Billion Bet on Open Cloud - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/07/h-p-makes-1-billion-bet-on-open-cloud <comment><USER2> Here's a fun test I like to do with people who want me to get started with OpenStack, the system that HP is backing:

Starting from the home page ([http://openstack.org](http://openstack.org)), try to download something that will let you run a test stack on your local machine, and run it. Time how long this takes.

For me, it took over 50 clicks, searches, etc. and two hours of time before I figured out how to get the stack up and running. It was one of the most frustrating technology experiences I've had in recent memory. The website is a labyrinthine, confusing morass of marketing gobbledygook that I found difficult to get important details from, at least for developers as an audience.

I think OpenStack has a long way to go in terms of technical usability before I'd consider trying it out again. That was months ago (August 2013), so maybe things have improved, but I haven't worked up the courage to try again just yet.

P.S. OpenStack devs: I'd be happy to have a conversation about it! I would love to be told that my experience was anomalous and get a reason to give it another shot.

<comment><USER3> > so maybe things have improved

4 Clicks takes you to [http://devstack.org/](http://devstack.org/) and installs with 2 commands... git clone [https://github.com/openstack- dev/devstack.git](https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack.git) then cd devstack && ./stack.sh

<comment><USER4> As someone who spent 18 months of his life deploying Openstack at scale, I'm confident in pointing out that devstack is, like most of Openstack, half- broken.

<comment><USER5> Would love to hear more about this. Do you have any blogs or details on your experience?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> OpenStack 2014 somehow reminds me a lot of OMG/CORBA 1993. It's interesting to watch the industry repeat itself.

Checklist:

\- Anybody but "x" club, where X is the market leader. Openstack has vascillated between VMware and AWS here, CORBA had Microsoft.

\- Large investments advertised as a penis swinging contest between HP, IBM, and others

\- Chasing aging technology architecture as a panacea instead of building the next generation.

CORBA was chasing distributed objects, but the Web and REST was what really was going to matter. Today the big guys are chasing the IaaS model when we have a new generation of platform and application clouds (Mesos, YARN, CoreOS, Docker, CF, Asgard) growing out there.

The vendors will of course try to recoup their investment through reference architectures and "best practices" that tell customers they should have a multi-layer SaaS or PaaS running on an IaaS, even though lightweight alternatives like CoreOS will chug along doing nothing of the sort.

This is similar to how CORBA's IIOP was promoted to be the way to do "real work" with C++ or Enterprise JavaBeans in your middle tier, but this "Web" HTTP thing can be relegated to the front tier. I know fixed income systems around 1999 that literally wouldn't use HTTP for their blotter updates, with the lead devs insisting such events needed to be pushed over IIOP even though the front end was an IE control in a VBX. (this was shortly before TIBCO had effectively seized the market data industry)

\- persistent flame wars about governance and architecture of said standard on the social media of the day

\- Vendor adoption drastically outpacing customer adoption , developing a "buying customers" effect

This is not to say OpenStack is bad. There is value, potentially a lot of value, as there was with CORBA. That's all case-by-case. Just saying that vendor love fests rarely indicate a true revolution and most often are just an orchestrated marketing game by the current losers.

<comment><USER7> I'm a cloud architect (a person who assembles cloud computing systems from components). I haven't used OpenStack; I've looked at it and while the concept is fine, the implementation is pretty underwhelming. Corps just want it because if widely adopted, it will reduce their cost and increase their profit margins.

Don't forget the SOAP era; it also resembles CORBA. There was a whole region of time (~2002-2005) where Microsoft and IBM jumped on SOAP. They promoted the hell out of their stacks, and then, after everybody realized SOAP was a turd, put the projects in deprecated mode.

[http://www.ianfoster.org/wordpress/wp- content/uploads/2014/0...](http://www.ianfoster.org/wordpress/wp- content/uploads/2014/01/History-of-the-Grid-numbered.pdf) (page 23).

The next step in evolution was JSON payloads over HTTP, with methods defined using REST. This model has more or less survived for 10 years now, and is a community-created (rather than top-down-imposed by a corporation) system that has lots of experience under its belt. I expect only marginal changes at this point: move towards a more compact encoding (like BSON) and a bit more standardization on where the RPC method is defined. I expect REST itself, being so hard to understand, will only be used by people who really insist on getting their API surfaces really RESTy.

<comment><USER8> "concept is fine, the implementation is pretty underwhelming", care to expand?

I find it odd that a self-declared cloud architect hasn't used what is _easily_ the largest growing IAAS project, free or commercial.

<comment><USER7> I have access to other clouds which provide the openstack functionality, without me having to adopt openstack.

I don't think we have accurate visibiliy into EC2 to compare its rate of growth compared to OpenStack.

OpenStack isn't IaaS. It's a PaaS middleware that abstracts the underlying IaaS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> [http://www.theonion.com/video/hp-on-that-cloud-thing-that- ev...](http://www.theonion.com/video/hp-on-that-cloud-thing-that-everyone- else-is-talki,28789/)

<comment><USER10> Was just going to post this :)

<comment><USER11> I enjoyed that. Almost as terrifyingly accurate as this: [http://www.theonion.com/video/sony-releases-new-stupid- piece...](http://www.theonion.com/video/sony-releases-new-stupid-piece-of- shit-that-doesnt,14309/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> So I recently saw a keynote by someone on OpenStack at LOPSA-East and as a System Administrator it kind of scares me. I'm finally starting to understand the meaning, reasoning behind & the fervor behind DevOps & why some organizations have such a need for better DevOps in their organization.

At the same time I also see Dev taking more care of Ops & cutting us (Sysadmins) out entirely. How do I take advantage of this or get ahead of this curve? I know there will always be a niche for small time System Administrators who administer small offices, primarily use Windows, etc. but after that ... we're done for.

<comment><USER13> Upskilling into some lightweight dev or source management (e.g. release management) is always an option - DevOps can come down on the Dev or Ops side, depending on your lineage, ultimately it's a more holistic view of the application lifecycle.

Getting your head around how AWS, GAE and Docker deployments work and combining that with traditional sysadmin knowledge should do you in good stead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> So HP will spend $1bn over two years on cloud while Google is spending twice that a quarter and Amazon and Microsoft spend that a quarter on capex mainly on cloud. It is not clear they are a serious player. Rack space has spent more than that already.

<comment><USER15> Keep in mind they (rax, Amazon) are already running multiple deployments across continents. It's quite easy to spend a lot of money just to keep that service going.

<comment><USER16> Capex measures expansion, so even though they're starting from a small base, HP is still growing their cloud slower than Amazon or Google.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> A private cloud seems like a good choice for larger organizations. They still have some admin and/or devops overhead that they would not have using AWS, Compute Cloud, Azure, etc. But, they might save a lot of money by providing developers with Heroku-like platform services but running on their own more cost effective hardware.

For startups with a few people, private clouds might not be a good ideas. Any supporting cases that show the opposite?

I would be interested to see co-ops where individuals and small companies join together to build and operate private clouds for the benefit of their co-op members.

</comment><comment><USER18> I think this article misunderstands HP's definition of service provider. From what I understand HP considers service providers to be SAAS, IAAS, Hosting, and Managed Service Providers, not only telecommunications and ISP. I'm working for a VAR that has made this definition of service provider into a vertical and we have seen massive growth in this space. A lot of companies are making this distinction now, after seeing their existing hardware sales to SMB drying up as services shift to the cloud.

</comment><comment><USER19> Attention companies going public in the near future: this is how you raise your stock price

And why do you do this? Because you're paid in stock and actual internal projects are not going to "wow" analysts. When in doubt spend money on what's popular.

</comment><comment><USER20> This news has killed Rackspace stock, RAX is down tremendously for the last week (although up today). Quarterly earnings come out next quarter, and those have been bad every first quarter so far if memory serves me. So probably not going to trend up. I don't own any rackspace stock and I'm not making predictions anyone should bet on. I'm just complaining because Rackspace has really good products and it's getting pummeled. Down more than 60ish% since its height a year or so ago.

In related news, rax being cheaper make it a bargain for an acquisition, P/E is around 40 now.

</comment><comment><USER21> Anyone else here from HN at the open stack summit in Atlanta?

<comment><USER4> I went to the three before HK.

Don't trust anything you hear from on stage, especially the enterprise "success stories." These are largely coming from an alternate universe.

The engineering planning sessions are excellent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Folks, I'm from Pakistan and even our local news reported on this three days before hacker news. What gives?</comment>


Duo, a new browser for responsive development - <AUTHOR> http://helloduo.com/

<comment><USER2> This looks pretty awesome, I use the responsive design features in Firefox all the time where you can view a single site in a variety of different resolutions. But seeing them side by side like this could make for a nice development process.</comment>


The Magazine Experience on the Web - <AUTHOR> http://ejfox.com/magazine_experience/

<comment><USER2> As I said over on DN, great job!</comment>


Elasticsearch 5.0.0 released - <AUTHOR> https://www.elastic.co/blog/elasticsearch-5-0-0-released#rest <comment><AUTHOR> Related, Lucene (and thus Elasticsearch) moved to BM25, which can be understood relative to the traditional TF*IDF here: [http://opensourceconnections.com/blog/2015/10/16/bm25-the- ne...](http://opensourceconnections.com/blog/2015/10/16/bm25-the-next- generation-of-lucene-relevation/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm particularly excited about the inclusion of Lucene 6's KD trees, allowing for up to 8-dimensional geometric search. Normally you'd use that for geolocation stuff, which is fine, but I'm excited about the possible applications for using it to index document embeddings!</comment>


Linode Data Corruption and Issues - <AUTHOR> Here's the email I received from Linode today:
Hello,
I'm very sorry to inform you that there was an issue on the host that your Linode resides on which resulted in the loss of your Linode's data. Our administrators have attempted to recover your Linode's data, but have not been successful.
Due to the severity of the issue, the Linode is unrecoverable and we are unable to migrate it to a new host. Please accept our deepest apologies. We do have measures in place to prevent this kind of data loss but unfortunately, those features could not prevent today's failure.
While we understand that no amount of money can make up for lost data, we have gone ahead and credited your account for 3 months worth of service for the Linode that was impacted. This credit will be automatically applied towards future invoices.
We recommend redeploying your Linode from any external backups if they are available. While unlikely, you may be able to recover some data by rebooting your server into rescue mode and performing a file system check. I've provided the link to our documentation for assistance:
Booting Into Rescue Mode
Performing A File System Check
This is certainly not the experience that we want you to have while on our platform, nor is it the level of reliability we want you to expect from us. We can assure you that we will be performing a further investigation of this to better prevent further similar incidents. Please let us know if you have any questions for us.
Kind Regards, Mark Linode Support Team
---
It happened that our server hosting exitmist.com service lost all our data and leads that we've collected.
How would you react to the situation?
What is your experience with Linode? <comment><USER2> These things happen to computers. You should have been taking backups. Any data loss is on you. Seems like Linode responded reasonably, in my opinion.

I would react by rebuilding my server(s) and restoring the backed up data.

<comment><USER3> Long-time Linode user here. Stuff happens. Agree Linode responded appropriately. I use their automated daily backup service but also maintain off-server redundant copies of critical data.

Learn from the experience, review your backup and management policies, restore from last available backups.

<comment><AUTHOR> The problem is that its not the first time we're having issues with Linode. And yes, thinks happen, but the question is how often and on what extent. In my opinion, Linode is not a reliable company with exceptional service, and we will be migrating all our servers away from them.

<comment><USER2> I've run stuff there for years and never had an issue. I have been transitioning stuff to Digital Ocean, but really only because I like that they have an actual firewall that I can control. Also been moving more stuff to AWS. But, back to Linode, never had any major issues.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you deal with your internet addiction? - <AUTHOR> How do you balance browsing the internet for work and having the tendency to mindlessly browse? <comment><USER2> Unpopular opinion, but I'm not sure there is such thing as "mindlessly browsing. I think that no matter what I'm reading on the internet, I am gaining knowledge and that knowledge is valuable even if it doesn't enhance my professional career directly. For example, reading about the latest entertainment gossip helps me talk about that with friends. Or, leading about the latest news, whether local, national,or global, helps me debate with people I know. The list goes on and on, but I think every piece of knowledge can be important for some part of your life.

As far as "addiction" goes, I wouldn't call it that unless it gets in the way of other parts of your life. Is you browsing the internet making you not spend time with loved ones? Is it making you LESS productive than you already were before it started? Is it making you less physically active? If that's true, then yes, it is an addiction. In that case, I would recommend setting up constant, but annoying, reminders for you to do anything that you feel like you're missing out on. You can even write software that locks down your browser for sometime.</comment>


Mixpanel (YC S09) - Merry Christmas, Internet - <AUTHOR> http://blog.mixpanel.com/merry-christmas-internet

<comment><USER2> Seems a strange idea to increase load when current users see "Data processing is delayed while we fix an issue related to our servers." when logging in.

Nice deal though, I got in during the appsumo deal so now I have 600,000 for a criminally low price :-)

<comment><USER3> When I looked at my account it only shows 100,000 data points now. It was 500,000 prior to this "upgrade".

 __update, my mistake, I was looking at the wrong account. I also have 600k now.

<comment><USER4> Nyx, email me firstname.lastname@example.com and I'll get this sorted out.

<comment><USER3> Wow - that was a _fast_ response. I updated my comment, I looked at the wrong account. Sorry for the confusion, and I appreciate the rapid response.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> That seems a good explanation of the lifetime offer on appsumo a couple weeks ago...

Beside that thank you Mixpanel :) !!

<comment><USER6> Edit: don't jump to conclusions (original post was about being unhappy for paying $17 for the appsumo deal)

<comment><USER7> you guys weren't forgotten--you'll get another 100K as well in addition.

we remembered =)

<comment><USER6> Awesome, thanks. I'm sorry for not having all my facts straight before posting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> That's cool. I was looking at using MixPanel for some personal projects. This makes it that much easier.

</comment><comment><USER9> Great service as always from the Mixpanel guys. Thanks!</comment>


The N.S.A. and Your Buddies - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/10/the-nsa-and-your-buddies.html

<comment><USER2> Metadata is data. There is no difference (obviously, because they deem it worthy of collection), and no excuse.</comment>


Debian 10.0 "Buster" Released - <AUTHOR> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/ <comment><AUTHOR> The press release is currently missing, but you can still dive in to the release notes while you wait on `dist-upgrade` or your new image to download.

<comment><USER2> Press release is up: [https://www.debian.org/News/2019/20190706](https://www.debian.org/News/2019/20190706)

HN: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20372855](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20372855)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: I'm an IT consultant doing something wrong, I think, ... What is it? - <AUTHOR>

I am an IT consultants and I am actively looking for better ways to solicit new clients. My company provides web design, application development, voip and other general IT networking services. Any suggestions on what I should do differently on our website, http://ana.im/, or what we should try in general? <comment><USER2> The website isn't the problem.

Focus is the problem.

You do a wide variety of stuff. How can you be an amazing expert in all of them? You can't.

Do one thing. Be amazing at that one thing.

/Phil.

</comment><comment><USER3> Your web presence is really very splattered and doesn't tell me in 15 seconds that you understand the pain I'm going through and how you will go about doing that.

Websites don't work really well for niche services. Your best approach is to identify companies that need your services and then plan a campaign to get into said customer via cold calling, targeted networking and possibly even advertising.

Instead of talking about technology, talk about solutions and your personal approach to solving problems. Sell us on you first, then present a list of things you've accomplished. You want to communicate in broad enough strokes to encompass your capabilities, talents and experience generally and make a strong impression on the visitor.

If you're an individual, make your site about that - do not pretend to be a firm unless you have access to capital, partners and sources of qualified people and a reliable hiring channel.

If you have previous customers, tap them to make introductions and stay in touch with them. Most of my customers started as brief 2 and 3 week engagements that usually spanned 18 months of billable work over several years. Learn to negotiate or at least setup your next deal with a customer while delivering the first.

Another element I shouldn't neglect: if you have a repeatable practice or service, find something of high value to the customer and offer it for free or at your cost. "Assessment", "Risk Analysis", something that leverages your expertise and provides you with an opening to the customer at low risk for them and potentially high gain for everyone.

I used this for years with very high success to get started with customers; presenting a comprehensive report as an a la carte menu of solutions and opportunities.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your reply, this is providing me with a great foundation for contemplation on what and how I should change my direction. The problem is that I can do a lot of things well and I don't want to limit myself by only showcasing one or two.

But I do know that too many options is usually bad (or atleast not optimal).

<comment><USER3> Can you work on an elevator pitch; 100 to 150 words max? Can you identify three intangible benefits you offer a customer? Can you list a few customers, or provide referring comments from past customers? Give it some thought and post here. You may find yourself able to break your web presence down into two offering specific sites.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Your network is probably the most valuable thing to have as a consultant. Work on that at all times. Go where potential clients and partners go, and go there often. Spend the money on it if you have to, it is worth it. See it as another form of marketing.

It seems like you're taking a shotgun approach on the site regarding services. Don't spread yourself thin. Focus on a small number of services and providing things like quality and value for money in order to attract clients initially - then seek out other opportunities.

Lastly, mention any good previous clients on your site.

</comment><comment><USER5> Clickable: <http://ana.im/>

On your 'services' page, the 2nd headline reads:

What Were Really Made Of

Shouldn't it be: What We're Really Made Of ?

HTH

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, it wasn't a typo but a limitation of the custom font I am using, I have made the necessary adjustments.

<comment><USER6> Whatever font is being used/requested for the headings looks awful on Chrome under Windows 7 on my box. Looks like all anti-aliasing is missing.

The general layout of the site looks good, if a little busy, but the font issue really detracts from it.</comment></comment></comment>


Sweden: higher Covid-19 death rate while failing to collect on economic gains - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/sweden-economy-coronavirus.html <comment><USER2> You have to look at the excess deaths figures. That is, how many usually dies from January to June in a normal year and compare that to how many extra that died in 2020. For Sweden the excess deaths almost exactly matches the number of Covid deaths, give or take 10%.

That is not the case for many other countries. For example, the UK had almost twice the number of excess deaths as Covid deaths in a few weeks in April. That indicates that Covid deaths were under reported in the UK. There are also some indications that Covid deaths have been under reported in other countries.

In other words, comparing countries by their Covid deaths/capita rates is meaningless. The statistics are likely completely wrong because different countries use different definitions of "Covid deaths" and different reporting procedures.

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng- interactive/2020/may/29...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng- interactive/2020/may/29/excess-deaths-uk-has-one-highest-levels-europe)

<comment><USER3> Taiwan has 7 COVID-19 deaths[1]. It seems far-fetched to suppose that they would be somehow covering up the 12000 additional deaths that would be required to reach Sweden's per-capita numbers.

South Korea would have had to neglect to report 99% of COVID-19 deaths.

[1] [https://www.cdc.gov.tw/En](https://www.cdc.gov.tw/En)

<comment><USER4> Vietnam is zero deaths and <400 total (most of those were imported), with no new infections in 80+ days.

At first, I thought it was the govt covering something up, but after so many months, along with closely monitoring things, I trust their numbers.

It is literally a source of national pride for them to have done so well, it would be very hard for them to hide things.

Quarantine, masks, isolation, cleaning, testing, contact tracing. ALL WORKED.

<comment><USER5> What if next year a more virulent strand of Covid comes along that kills almost everyone in the world who didn't get exposed to Covid-19. Will you still consider their measures as ALL WORKING? We have no idea how the future is going to unfold. Everyone is faking it while demanding that everyone do as they say.

<comment><USER6> What if next year aliens arrive and eat us all?

There's no plausible argument from counterfactuals here.

But let's pretend anyway - do you not think that even if a more virulent strain of Covid did arrive, country with proven measures in place has a better chance of dealing with the problem than a country whose current response is a chaotic shambles?

<comment><USER5> What i'm saying is there is a problem with monocultures. They are more susceptible to being wiped out in a single stroke. I'd say that following a scientific approach, we might want to consider not advocating for everyone to take the exact same course of action. Also, that we have to be careful to not judge success or failure too soon, that assessments can change after a bit more time has passed.

<comment><USER4> If the course of action has the effect of saving lives, what is wrong with that?

The measure of success is all past and current. If Vietnam loses control over covid, then we can definitely blame them for that. Why? Because they effectively controlled it in the first place.

If they continue their direction, they will be one of the only countries on the planet, not totally infected. Pretty amazing really. If they start experimenting and doing things differently, at least they've setup the protocols for managing things correctly.

Here in the US, we go through these bullshit 'phases' where we go from phase 2 to phase 3 and then back to phase 2. Well, anyone with half a brain could have figured out that wasn't going to work. At least Vietnam is taking this seriously.

They shut their borders entirely... we (the US), can't even do that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The jury is still out on "economic failure." The evidence cited on the economy is thin at best.

The main piece of evidence is that "Sweden's central bank expects its economy to contract by 4.5 percent this year, a revision from a previously expected gain of 1.3 percent." Economic forecasts are _ridiculously_ unreliable. In the US, economists forecast (on average) that 8 million jobs would be lost in May. Instead there was a 2.5 million gain in jobs. Not a single economist surveyed by Bloomberg though there would be any gain at all ([https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-06/may- jo...](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-06/may-jobs-report- forecast-miss-could-have-policy-ramifications)). The hard data we have on GDP so far: Sweden's GDP grew by 0.1% in Q1 2020 (0.4% annualized), Germany and the UK's GDP fell.

The other evidence is that unemployment has risen in Sweden and spending in Denmark has only fallen 4 percentage points more than Sweden. But Denmark has propped up employment by "covering 75 to 90 percent of all worker salaries over the next three months, provided that companies refrain from layoffs."([https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/business/nordic-way- econo...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/business/nordic-way-economic- rescue-virus.html)). And from the numbers in the article, Denmark's unemployment rate has still risen proportionally more. Granted, Sweden has very generous unemployment benefits, but I'm not aware of a similar layoff prevention program.

<comment><USER8> The NYT has fallen into the bad habit of writing to a narrative, conscious or unconscious, rather than investigating more honestly.

In this case they want to paint the alternative path as wrongheaded and foolhardy. I'm glad someone tried something different in light of a lack of hard evidence. Time will tell if one or the other was better, but at least we'll have baselines to compare against.

<comment><USER9> Looking at the John Hopkins graph a significant amount of countries are still peaking (including the global trendline):

[https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.h...](https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6)

Just because a few countries in Europe and the early big ones in China/SK have slowed down they act like it's over. Yet there's still plenty of very major outbreaks in South America, Middle East, India, Russia, south east Asia, some African. They all have upward hockey stick growth still. Not to mention the delayed US south/west wave.

It's far too early to pick winners/losers of COVID in the midst of the global peak, assuming this is actually near the peak. Let alone measuring the economic consequences.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> One thing missing from this report is that a large proportion of the deaths were in care homes, and ministers have publicly stated that not entirely locking down care homes from the outset was a big mistake. If they had done this, the figures may well not look nearly as bad.

Also, what will count is not the first few months but the entire lifetime of this pandemic. I'll be interested to see where countries are a year or two from now.

This isn't to say I support the Swedish government's strategy - I don't feel like I know enough to say what the best strategy is, although I do think that that the worst strategy is to have no strategy, seemingly like the USA and UK.

<comment><USER11> This. It's pretty obvious at this point that a general lockdown is worthless as a replacement for locking down care homes specifically - Spain had one of the strictest lockdowns in Europe but massively screwed up their handling of their care homes, and ended up with an even worse per-capital death toll than Sweden. Unfortunately, mainstream media publications have been spinning this instead as evidence that herd immunity wouldn't work by taking the incredibly high infection fatality rate from Spain, scaling it up, and claiming this is the best measure of how many people would die to achieve herd immunity.

<comment><USER12> > It's pretty obvious at this point that a general lockdown is worthless as a > replacement for locking down care homes specifically

New Zealander here, our general lockdown went very well and enabled us to isolate clusters of transmission and prevent it becoming community transmission. While two of our clusters were rest homes, several others were not - a school, a St Patrick's Day celebration at a pub, and a wedding, are significant "not rest home" examples.

So yeah, I think your focus on rest homes is too specific.

<comment><USER13> New Zealand is a special case where it may be feasible to isolate yourself from the rest of the world and reach zero cases. With that said, it remains to be seen that it is possible to maintain zero community spread over the long term, and whether the economic impact of isolating yourself from the rest of the world is worth it.

<comment><USER14> We aren't _economically_ isolated from the rest of the world. We're still exporting and importing. Exports in some industries are higher than ever. We're still bringing in workers in certain key roles. NZers can leave (though they'll probably need to pay for quarantine when they get back). The main things that are suspended are international student and tourist arrivals, and when the flood of NZers returning home abates, we'll probably be bringing them in through the quarantine system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Deaths per 1M population are significantly higher in Italy(577), Spain(607) and the UK(654) than they are in Sweden(539). And Sweden have been a lot more honest in counting than most countries.

There seems to be a drive to discredit the _inalienable human rights_ approach, in this case by implying it was a financial decision; but i have to say i am impressed by the way they have handled this situation, the only response on earth that involved treating their citizens like adults.

<comment><USER16> South Korea never had lockdowns, outside of shutting down bars when they traced some superspreading events back to them. The idea that they're somehow less committed to human rights when they've preserved freedom of movement, while avoiding mass deaths, is laughable on its face.

<comment><USER17> SK traced people in a bar by cellular location data and payment data without permit. I think it's not good for human rights.

<comment><USER16> The entire digital advertising industry is in greater violation of human rights, by this measure.

<comment><USER17> Tracing real individuals rather than "anonymized" statistics is significantly worse.

[https://theconversation.com/tracing-homophobia-in-south- kore...](https://theconversation.com/tracing-homophobia-in-south-koreas- coronavirus-surveillance-program-139428)

<comment><USER16> Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Apologies for minimizing it before.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Any coherent explanation of this pandemic is going to need to explain why some countries that didn't do very much (e.g. Japan) ended up with far fewer deaths per capita than countries that locked down (e.g. EU countries and the United States).

Sweden is somewhere in the middle -- they are being criticized, yet other countries in Europe which locked down have ended up with a higher per capita death rate.

Why is it that Cambodia and other nations in southeast Asia have negligible deaths despite doing very little to combat the virus, while countries in the EU which locked down have way more deaths per capita?

Somehow the models about the spread and death rate of this virus seem to differ on a geographical basis, and that needs to be explained.

At this point, any analysis of the pandemic that does not attempt to tackle this problem is selectively ignorant.

<comment><USER19> It's not about comparing policy from the top down but rather comparing public opinion of the virus from the bottom up.

Asian cultures have take the virus much more seriously than European cultures and regardless of government policy that is going to be a major determinant of how much the virus spreads.

Put in another way, two countries can apply the exact same policy against the virus but have diverging outcomes because of public opinion of the government, of the virus, and of their fellow citizens.

<comment><USER20> My partner (American w/ Chinese parents) strongly believes a major difference is the sense of collective responsibility in Asia. A kind of deferral of individuality to benefit society.

<comment><USER18> Fine, but how does that explain disparities in outcome between European countries?

<comment><USER21> A German college truly believes that this virus was created by Adolf Gates to enrich themselves with the pandemic while helping China destroy the German economy.

<comment><USER22> The scene around conspiracy theorists Heiko Schrang and Attila Hildmann sure is fascinating. Wearing masks is the ultimate evil to them, for some reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> To me this is moving the goalpost.

The stated objective of the lockdown was not to overwhelm the ICUs. As far as I know the ICUs in Sweden have not been overwhelmed. So how is that a failure?

As for the economic impact, given the amount of life support injections into the economy, I think the real economic impact of the shock is yet to be seen. Defaults are only starting to rise.

<comment><USER24> I have been willing to be frustrated with moving the goal post, but there is new information that mayors and governors know that the general public doesn't have a good way to know:

The low mortality rate and managed ICU capacity isn't the whole story. there is a large population of recovering and recovered that have serious complications, that seem random and are unproductive to our society. Blood clots resulting in amputations. 90 day recovery time periods. Other unknown and randomly targeted blood oxygen issues.

The mayors and governors and public health ministers are reacting to that in their own municipalities and countries. The outcomes are not equal, the variables have many different names between jurisdictions, and therefore the stats are not easily collectable. But for people on the front line and getting briefed by those on the front line, they see something horrible that they need to move the goal post to "cases" instead of just deaths and ICU capacity.

<comment><USER25> 99% of the cases that last for months, like Nick Cordero, are from the early days of the pandemic where doctors mistakenly put people who didn't need mechanical respiration on ventilators, damaging healthy lungs and causing breathing dependence that doctors found difficult/impossible to wean from and all sorts of other complications, such as deep vein thrombosis (again, see Cordero's case).

The mean time between symptoms and death is two weeks ([https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning- scena...](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning- scenarios.html)). Anyone with symptoms is in two weeks, three at the most, either going to be at home wondering what the fuss is about—the vast, vast, vast majority of cases—or dead.

<comment><USER24> that's reassuring, and also validates the general idea of trying to avoid exposure until more was/is known.

for some reason the term 'early adopter' comes into my mind

<comment><USER25> >for some reason the term 'early adopter' comes into my mind

As one who foolishly bought not one, not two, but _three_ first-generation Apple notebooks, you are not wrong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I find this article a little disingenuous and here is why: Sweden-5420 deaths out of a population of 10 million while no lock down. Michigan-6005 deaths out of a population of 10 million and we have been locked down since mid March.

To be clear, I was in favor of the lockdown at first and I still am in favor of keeping things like bars and casinos closed but it's become clear that the virus doesn't have much affect on younger populations and that the death rate has been dropping. Here in Michigan, while our daily new cases is still creeping up, our 7 day moving average of deaths has continued to plummet.

<comment><USER27> Well Sweden closed its borders, where Michigan can't close its borders to other states, so Michigan's is naturally higher.

<comment><USER28> Sweden did not close its borders, although it followed EU guidelines to close its borders beyond the EU. The US closed its borders to certain areas of the world, which is what this is comparable to.

<comment><USER27> Well all other countries in the EU closed their borders to them, so it's effectively the same thing.

<comment><USER29> No they didn't. Danish, Finnish and Norwegian tourists are still coming to Sweden. It is just that Swedes can't go to them.

<comment><USER30> And that is a textbook example of insanity. To be fair, I do think that they are supposed to self-quarantine when returning home?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Edit: I'm letting my original comment stand as it shows how I was subtly misinformed regarding the situation of Sweden. I don't think I'd be the only one.

Wait, with all due respect, 5420 deaths on 10 million people? On a country left completely unchecked? That doesn't sound like the impending doom I thought the virus would bring.

I thought the novel corona virus had a death rate of about 1% to 2% and a bigger spreading rate that was bigger than 1, if no measures were taken. So, I'd expect between 100,000 to 200,000 to have died. I'm really happy that didn't happen. It also makes me curious as to why. Is it because of Sweden's demographics (people living alone)? Or is it because the virus isn't as deadly as we think it is?

How come 0.05% died and not 1% to 2%? Isn't this evidence that the coronavirus isn't as big as a threat as we thought? I mean 0.05% deaths is 40 times smaller than 2% deaths.

It's awful what happened, but the highest flu season in The Netherlands, for example, killed an estimated 9444 people [1] on 17,280,000 people, which is slightly higher than what the Swedes had to go through now (also rounded to 0.05%). I know that the novel coronavirus is not a flu, but if this is it, then well, I've seen worse, apparently.

I know the virus isn't done, but it had months to roam free in Sweden. One would expect it would double up every 5 days in terms of how many people would be infected.

Edit: they did need to maintain social distance apparently. I wouldn't call that "doing nothing". Sure a lot more can be done, but I feel the media are framing the Swedes a bit inaccurately. Belgium seems to be way worse (9774 on 11,460,000 people, ~0.1% is getting truly uncomfortable)

[1] In Dutch, unfortunately: [https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers- nederland](https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland)

<comment><USER32> >How come 0.05% died and not 1% to 2%? Isn't this evidence that the coronavirus isn't as big as a threat as we thought? I mean 0.05% deaths is 40 times smaller than 2% deaths.

Because the 1% death rate is a reference to people catching the disease, not the size of the population. Sweden as of now appears to have about 73k officially confirmed cases.

Swedes still voluntarily distanced and closed down, hence the economic damage mentioned in the article. Given that there is no widespread immunity still with total infections in the single digits, those deaths will eventually go up.

I'm not sure if the American attitude of indifference is taking hold here now, but 5000 deaths when 4000 of them could have been avoided is no matter to brush aside, it's in fact a straight up disaster. This is an unprecedent amount of needless death in modern Swedish history.

<comment><USER31> I'm not American, I'm Dutch. And there's a huge difference between WOII levels (which is what 2% deathrate in The Netherlands would be), versus an extra amount of death people comparable to the worst flu season.

In The Netherlands, the worst flu seasons still have a higher death toll than corona. I hope it stays that way for everyone.

<comment><USER33> > the worst flu seasons still have a higher death toll than corona.

Do you have a link to the statistics please? I think you're comparing two different methods of counting death. I think for covid-19 you're counting people who died after testing positive, or people where covid-19 is listed as the cause on the death certificate. But for flu I think you're counting excess mortality.

<comment><USER34> Not a scientific article, but this blog post gives some numbers for Sweden: [https://emanuelkarlsten.se/more-swedes-died-in-one- month-199...](https://emanuelkarlsten.se/more-swedes-died-in-one- month-1993-and-2000-compared-to-april-2020-why/).

One big question would be why they chose April 2020 as the comparison point rather than May or June -- did the number of deaths per month in Sweden actually drop?

(I haven't read the article closely, and don't have a horse in this race --- I just thought it was apropos. Feel free to tear it to shreds if appropriate.)

<comment><USER33> I'm not going to tear it to shreds!

When people say "covid is like flu" sometimes they mean "flu is a big deal, and a bad flu year kills lots of people". (I agree with that).

But sometimes they mean "flu isn't so bad, it's a bit like a cold, doesn't kill so many people".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I feel that so many of these articles on Sweden fail to mention the reason for Sweden's strategy and often say it due to another reason. The reason that the Swedish government has given for the strategy is that they think that people can follow the restrictions long term. It's not to save the economy or to create heard immunity (which I have heard from many people.) I think it's too early to judge Sweden's strategy as presumably the intent is that things will be better down the line.

On a more personal note, I live in Sweden and I am not a Swedish citizen and I can say that things aren't "Business as usual here" and plenty is being done to stop the spread of the COVID 19. I can't say I 100% agree with the policy but I also don't think it's the huge mistake people make it out to be.

I have linked below an explanation for the strategy by one of Sweden's top epidemiologist and the one that's often credited as the architect of Sweden's strategy.

[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-28/sweden-s-...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-28/sweden- s-covid-expert-says-the-world-still-doesn-t-understand)

[https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and- risks/disaster...](https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and- risks/disasters-and-incidents/2020/official-information-on-the-new- coronavirus)

<comment><USER36> One thing I don't see discussed and it's an unbacked intuition is that all the different government strategies seem to revolve around differences in 'group' trust levels.

Both the Swedish 'no-lockdown' and the Dutch 'intelligent' lockdown are government policies that actually work locally because the government trusts that the population will follow the guidelines given (which they do for the majority).

Equally when I discussed with Dutch and Swedish people (anecdata) they all believed their national strategy was correct because they trusted their governaments competence and the science advisors that were being consulted.

I think many of these strategies cannot be translated to other countries were there isn't a shared trust level, i.e. population trusting the government's competence, and equally the government trusting civil society (biggest example being the US).

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This is meaningless. There were no economic gains expected, just avoiding a greater disaster. Given that Swedish economy is fairly integrated with its lockdown neighbours, it would be surprising if there were any economic gains; instead, it is probable its neighbours benefitted from Sweden having avoided lockdown.

Also, the higher death rate is normal and acceptable, in a tradeoff against deaths caused by confinement and the unnecessary prolongation of the epidemic. Herd immunity will arrive earlier, and lockdown-caused deaths will perhaps make Swedes survive more and better.

Now vote me down.

</comment><comment><USER38> I think it's misleading to phrase things, as the article does, as just "more deaths" vs "the economy". The drawbacks of a large-scale mandatory lockdown (as opposed to asking people to do their own social distancing) also include other things like psychological effects on the population, political consequences (setting a precedent of severely restricting personal freedoms), and, well, enjoyment: making 10 million people more happy for a few months doesn't seem entirely negligible from a utilitarian perspective.

This isn't to take position for or against Sweden's policy here, but there are far more variables than simply excess deaths (or DALYs) and economic impact.

</comment><comment><USER39> It's my first comment on HN. I am not a native english speaking person so I am sorry for some wrong wording in my answer.

I am from Portugal. In first 2 months we were considered an example on how to deal with an pandemic.

Today, our best business partners, I list UK in this scenario, does not give Portugal a safe destiny badge.

People tend to overcome rules. UK people are flying to Spain an then get a bus to Portugal.

Today's news was about 2000 students from Netherlands partying in Portugal, Algarve.

I am a young and healthy person AFAIK, but my mother is not. Neither my father in law or some of my closest friends.

Any death caused by irresponsible behaviour should be treated as an law infringement.

I really don't care if I get Corona. Pretty much I do, or in this case, I don't do, is thinking about people that does not have the chance of saying: fuck it.

It's the world we have, but I am sure it's not the world I wanted.

Bare with me: any death that could be avoided they should be avoided. And we could avoid alot of deaths if we think about others, an not that much about ourselves.

60 years ago you didn't have internet, lot's didn't even have light or bathroom in house.

Divorces are up with confinement. Are those people really meant to be together?

Don't look to much to your belly, and look around. Learn how to respect others without expecting the retribution.

You will feel great when you give up something you think it's aquired by right to something you think it's just right.

Best

</comment><comment><USER40> Sweden is much hated because it demonstrates how the scientific epidemiological models, the studies on mask effectiveness, lockdown estimations etc are all junk science. None of their models would have predicted the trajectory for Sweden, not even close.

And that is because none are based on sound science but are guesstimates at best yet are paraded around as the product of the best minds in the world.

Much is made about the growing anti-science sentiment in the world, the rushed pseudo scientific justification will only strengthen that.

Give it a year and most of the justification will be walked back, it will turn out that wearing a mask is actually detrimental to public health. It boggles the mind that people assume there must be no ill effects to breathing through a mucus-laden cotton sheet filled with microorganisms captured from the air, ...

<comment><USER4> > I don't understand how people assume it is healthy to breathe through a > mucus-laden cotton sheet filled with microorganisms captured from the air, > ...

Tell that to the millions of people who go skiing every year, or the people who work in hospitals all day long, every day.

I wash my mask every time I use it and I rotate through several of them. Nobody is asking you to wear a dirty mask.

<comment><USER40> none of that mask wearing is done at the scale and in the manner forced upon the population

nurses change their masks all the time, nobody skis every day for eight hours, (FWIW the vast majority of people skiing don't wear masks over their mouths)

> I wash my mask every time I use it and I rotate through several of them

Like every hour? If not good luck with that, it is a pit of infection, a wet and warm substrate for bacteria and fungi.

<comment><USER4> > nurses change their masks all the time,

Do they? Are you a nurse?

> nobody skis every day for eight hours, (FWIW the vast majority of people > skiing don't wear masks over their mouths)

Show me the statistics on that.

> Like every hour? If not good luck with that, it is a pit of infection, a wet > and warm substrate for bacteria and fungi.

This is the most inane argument ever. You're basically saying those same exact bacteria and fungi magically don't go into our airways without a mask?

Masks magically breed this within a day? Also... who says they are bad? Hate to break it to you, we are FULL of bacteria.

Seriously, take a step back and think hard about your logic. Something in your brain isn't firing correctly.

<comment><USER40> do yourself a service and read a real scientific paper on masks (pre-covid when people dared studying the negative effects) and read what happens on the inner side of a mask

in a nutshell stuff that would leave your body when you exhale will now be trapped on the _inner_ side of your mask where it gets more and more concentrated, far more concentrated that what normally enters your lungs, the new stuff gets deposited on top the old, building it up to form a biofilm unlike any other part of the body

The microorganisms in the warm and wet environment breed, bacterial growth happens fast, doubling times can be 15 minutes. Within an hour you got yourself a bacterial colony right there in front of your mouth, every breath you take is filtered through that mucus laden bacterial colony

<comment><USER4> Would you like to quote a 'real scientific paper' for me to read? Or just have a snarky response.

People have been wearing face coverings since the dawn of time.

Can you tell me the number of deaths attributed to wearing a mask? I can't even google it since all the things that come up now are recommendations to wear a mask.

> in a nutshell stuff that would leave your body when you exhale will now be > trapped on the inner side of your mask

If you want to take the 'it is just a flu argument'... I'm more worried about catching covid than I am about the microorganisms coming out of my own breath. They are already in me, in a very concentrated form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> This highly cited April 11th study projected that Sweden would have 96,000 deaths by July 1st if it didn't institute a lockdown:

[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v1.full.pdf)

The actual death toll was 5,400, and now the deaths are declining precipitiously. Of course every death is a tragedy, but the harm done from a national lockdown, which includes youth missing out on a year of school, and thousands of small businesses being destroyed, would have been more of one.

Like Michael Levitt, who's the 2013 Chemistry Nobel Laureate for research in complex systems, says, society has forgotten that people die.

10,000 people per million die every year in Sweden. That rate increasing by 500 is not that abnormal - it happens in bad influenza seasons. If every one was forced to stop working and shelter at home for months every time an infectious disease temporarily rose the death rate by 10%, it would lead to disaster over the long run.

90% of deaths in Sweden have been of those over the age of 70. If the statistics are anything like those in Italy, almost all of these victims had pre-existing conditions.

This is not to lessen the tragedy of their death. This is to point out that most of this tragedy predated their coronavirus infection - their life expectancy was already very limited due to other factors.

</comment><comment><USER42> One interesting thing about Sweden is the high percentage of people who live alone. It's a big deal because in China most deaths came from an infected person spreading it to their family. Makes you think that if Sweden's numbers are as bad as they are without large-scale family spread, it would be absolutely horrific elsewhere.

</comment><comment><USER43> Sweden are a model of pragmatism, taking a sensible choice to not have an authoritarian lockdown. Freedom of choice, freedom of movement and freedom of commerce are sacred.

<comment><USER44> Disagree, it was incredibly reckless. We still don't fully understand the virus' transmission vectors, R-values, etc. It very easily could have had a higher fatality rate or transmission rate potentially killing many more people. Claiming it's a model of pragmatism is a post-hoc rationalization of poor policy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> What went wrong in Sweden? I genuinely don't understand that.

The news keeps showing Swedes walking in parks and down streets, but that's not how people catch the novel coronavirus. Meanwhile, people were working from home and mass gatherings were banned; the public were trusted to figure out the details, but they're not idiots. It could have worked.

What was everyone doing in Sweden that people weren't doing in Finland and Australia? Or were there less visible differences, in surveillance and contact tracing maybe, that haven't been so widely reported?

</comment><comment><USER46> I don't believe the article has addressed Sweden's main argument for not shutting down: that herd immunity should be the prime driver. Essentially, that everyone is going to eventually have roughly the same death rate, so might as well get it over with.

That remains to be seen; if Sweden's peers can prevent flare-ups, it looks like Sweden was wrong.

<comment><USER47> Well it's not only that, if you overwhelm your healthcare system you're going to end up with excess deaths even if the same number of people get the virus in the end. Also, we've learned _some_ mitigation techniques over the last few months (like steroids in late stage treatment) which means that the idea that 'everyone will get it eventually' just isn't relevant - its likely that our survival rate will go up over time even without a proper vaccine.

<comment><USER48> Ironically, medical researchers wouldn't have learned those mitigation techniques (like Dexamethasone) without a large population of patients to use as experimental subjects. In other words, if we succeed in slowing down the spread (which would be a good thing) then medical research into treatments and vaccines will also slow down.

<comment><USER49> Would work on a vaccine really slow down? There are many thousands of patients and how many does a vaccine study require in practice?

<comment><USER50> [https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-disappearing-so- fast-...](https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-disappearing-so-fast-oxford- vaccine-has-only-50-chance-of-working-11993739)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Statistics is just statistics. Many compare Swedens death/capita to other countries figures and conclude it is bad. But this is in fact not a god measure at all because this figure dont account for how far the spread is over the population, Sweden is very different here. Because Sweden have been more open they are also far ahead of other countries and much more people have been exposed and got antibodies. Sweden cant simply be compared to others that are more in the beginning in the pandemic. Sadly media forget this.

The virus cant be stopped so sooner or later other couties must open up and then they going to get more death. Just look at Spain that open up now had to lock down a reginon now with 200.000. Saying Swedens way is bad right now is far to early to conclude, when the pandemic is far from over. We have to wait at least a year or two.

</comment><comment><USER52> Sweden is right to be concerned about their economy. Its not just about skipping a few haircuts -- a shattered economy kills people as sure as coronavirus does. Every shuttered manufacturing plant has a body count associated with it and its own case mortality rate.

I don't know how many people died as a direct result of the Great Depression but based on what I've been told by relatives the suffering was considerable with deaths due to lack of food, homelessness and despair. I _do_ know that the Nazi party would never have come to power in Germany without the world economic collapse. They were a minor party on the wane in the late 20s only to get their second wind in the elections following the crash. It's also possible the Japanese militarist would never have come to power without the Great Depression for more complex reasons. WWII was the result at the cost of 45-70 million lives. Economic catastrophes are not just about money -- they have life and death consequences. I wish more people would have taken this into consideration before they carpet bombed the US economy to combat the pandemic. I guess they figured that no matter what, the US was safe from the kind of civil unrest that gripped the Weimar republic. A strong man taking control of the US? Fascist and antifascist battling in the street? That could never happen here.

</comment><comment><USER53> Sweden recorded its first week of no excess mortality over a month ago: [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus- sweden...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden- mortality/sweden-records-first-week-with-no-excess-mortality-since-pandemic- struck-idUSKBN23F1WK)

The economic gains part of it is not really relevant. Today each country is exposed to the global economy. If everyone else has economies that are broken then that will trickle over to Sweden inevitably. But that doesn't mean that it is not worth pushing for Sweden's strategy. If more countries did so, perhaps Sweden would collect economic gains.

</comment><comment><USER54> As a Swede that did not agree with the strategy at the time (it was hugely risky), given what we know now, I'm starting to think it was the right decisions (for the wrong reasons). The reason the economy is in trouble has more to do with that the rest of the word shut down, it being a highly export dependent economy. Sweden did not shut down, practically nobody wears a mask (still), social distancing is minimal (crammed subways, buses and beaches), schools have remained open, yet there has not been a single death in the worst hit area of Stockholm for the past 5 days. Again, I think given the uncertainty and lack of evidence in March, not shutting down was an extremely stupid risk, and Tegnell and crew have shown to been wrong at practically every turn, but at this point you have to look at the evidence and reassess. It would seem Stockholm has reached the point of significant herd immunity, which is probably true for other hard hit areas like NYC. Less hit areas will probably have second waves, and unless a vaccine is here soon, my guess is most of the world will go through the same thing eventually.

<comment><USER55> > I'm starting to think it was the right decision

Sweden is #6 by deaths/population according to this page: [https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/)

This would indicate that the swedish response is among the worst. Several countries with comparable health systems have a death rate which is many times lower, for example Germany. This saved many thousands of lives.

What am I missing?

<comment><USER56> If the pandemic is expected to continue for many months, isn't it a bit premature to talk about current death rates as a metric for success? Given Sweden's 'herd immunity' plan, higher death rates _at the beginning_ would seem to be a given. They didn't flatten their curve. But as they approach something like herd immunity, the number of possible carriers should plummet permanently (assuming immunity is a thing with COVID), and infections and deaths would permanently decline.

Nations which have held down infection numbers with shutdowns have, of course, flattened their curves. But they may well suffer from second/third waves which will hike up their total numbers.

<comment><USER57> Herd immunity cannot be considered the plan given that herd immunity has not been proven to be possible

<comment><USER58> Herd immunity is certainly possible--we could hold a parade, and spray it with cultured virus. Obviously no one is doing that, because no one actually wants natural herd immunity. Sweden just thinks the cost to control the epidemic to the point that it doesn't end in that way is unacceptably high. If a treatment is discovered next month that cuts the IFR by a factor of ten, then Sweden was wrong. If no safe and effective vaccine is ever developed and treatment never improves, then Sweden was right. Reality will fall somewhere between those two unlikely extremes, and we don't know where.

Fewer infected is always good news[1], in Sweden or anywhere else--it means fewer dead now, more infections pushed until later when treatment will probably be better, etc. It's weird to see low infection rates twisted around as if they were bad, "evidence that herd immunity may not be possible". This is particularly true when the prevalence is compared to herd immunity from a model assuming a well-mixed, homogeneous population, which we know overestimates the herd immunity threshold (though not by how much, since estimates of the heterogeneity of the coronavirus are even more uncertain than those of R0).

Finally, herd immunity is a gradual process. Even in a crude homogeneous SIR model, you may approach it asymptotically but never get there. This is good-- the only case where a disease "burns itself out" abruptly is when there's big overshoot, which implies many avoidable deaths. Perhaps that kind of overshoot could be desirable in a population of young people, if the small excess mortality in the young people were more than offset by their decreased ability to spread it later; but that's a narrow needle to thread.

For the avoidance of doubt, I believe Sweden did a bad job protecting elder care facilities (though many places that locked down did too), and I disagree with their position on masks. Their response otherwise seems reasonable to me, not obviously better than stricter approaches but also not obviously worse.

1\. Unless you know the death count and you're looking for the denominator for your IFR, since more infected then means lower IFR. That was true early in the epidemic, before the first high-quality serosurveys, but not anymore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> Swedish officials has said over and over again that neither herd immunity nor economics is the basis for the strategy chosen. They tried to strike a balance between the impact of containment measures (isolation, mental health, lack of education etc) and minimizing the spread of the virus. Of course the first point is extremely hard to quantify, and thus the hard numbers are horrifying.

Most people in Sweden are taking plenty precautions and isolate on a voluntary level, highly encouraged by all institutions. However, if you are stuck inside with abusive parents or are getting depressed by the isolation, you have the choice to go out.

As others have mentioned, the true failure has been in elder care. How the virus was allowed to ravage care centers is completely unacceptable.

</comment><comment><USER60> I think one aspect missing from the discussion of whether or not Sweden has done the right thing is just how much power a government has over its citizens.

In many cases I think the consensus in Sweden is that the government doesn't have the right to keep people at home or force people to wear masks. The current government had to push to get legislation passed that allowed them to shut down primary schools and preschools, if needed.

When this is all said and done a lot of countries are going to have evaluate what all of this has meant for their democracies.

</comment><comment><USER61> Economics aside, there may be mental health wins for keeping a different mix as they have. Or losses, too — it's really too early to say one way or another imho.

</comment><comment><USER62> The idea of prioritising the economy is a falsehood. You can't have a strong economy with a virus like covid ripping its way through the population. Some people might go on as normal, but a huge portion of the population will be afraid of going outside.

The only feasible path to economic recovery is:

1\. Keep the borders closed. Mandatory & monitored quarantine for anyone entering.

2\. Lock down, test & contact-trace until the virus is basically eradicated. Mandating mask use outside of abodes or any other measure will help speed this along, too.

3\. Open up, but keep borders closed except to places applying a similar approach.

The swifter the action, the easier it all is.

</comment><comment><USER63> this was supposed to be about economy? I thought they just wanted to preserve their way of life without draconian measures of countries which took those measures and got Fd anyway in matter of deaths or economy

it was pretty clear from beginning it won't have big impact on their economy either way

</comment><comment><USER64> Hard to say already since many small businesses will close but haven't done so officially yet.

</comment><comment><USER65> Nice to see all the Swedish commenters on the NYT pointing out how biased the article is.

</comment><comment><USER66> Little bit too early to proclaim this kind of conclusions, isn't it?

</comment><comment><USER67> The opening paragraph of the article shows to me that the journalist in question has done a poor job researching exactly what happened in Sweden.

> Sweden has captured international attention by conducting an unorthodox, > open-air experiment.

Almost every interview available with Anders Tegnell (swedish equivalent of Anthony Fauci) mention that the international community prior to covid had agreed that following a strategy similar to the one sweden are following now is the best choice. Somehow this translates to an "unorthodox" strategy. Never mind that during previous epidemics, like SARS, the current Swedish response was "the normal response".

> It has allowed the world to examine what happens in a pandemic when a > government allows life to carry on largely unhindered.

I am really disturbed by this sentence. While it is technically correct that no lockdown has been _imposed_ on the swedish people by the government, saying that life has "carried on largely unhindered" is straight up dishonest.

Ever since February or March there have been regular press conferences with the FHM ("swedish CDC") broadcast over public radio (and obviously you can listen to it on internet and in their app, with push notifications). The hospital system has almost completely shifted to handling covid, nationwide. Most companies have tried to shift their work to peoples homes as much as possible, just like FHM has suggested. Buying groceries online has increased by a large margin. Even the cars at my local supermarket are now practicing social distancing! Swedes, overall, have really taken the gravity of the situation to heart and made changes in their life to protect their community.

> but Sweden's economy has fared little better.

This misses the most important points about the swedish strategy and shows a lack of knowledge about swedish economy and EU economy. The goal of the swedish strategy has been to preserve peoples health as good as possible. Locking everyone in their homes for several months is not a strategy that is resillient. It increases cases of domestic violence, people losing their jobs cause negative effects as well. The number of deaths related to covid have to be compared to overall deaths, but most importanlty the overall health. The goal was never to gamble peoples life away for the economy!

The article jumps straight into saying that Sweden did not gain anything, economically, from having no lockdown. Well of course not. How could a country with focus on exports and services thrive economically in a pandemic? If the inner market of the EU is as good as closed, who would make the bet that an export focused country would be thriving? Sweden is dependent on other nations, especially in the EU and Scandinavia, so of course the economy wouldn't fare well.

> Sweden put stock in the sensibility of its people as it largely avoided > imposing government prohibitions.

This is factually wrong. From the 27th of March it became a criminal offence to organize events of 50 or more people, down from the 500 that was decided on the 12th of March [https://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2020/03/forbud-mot- allman...](https://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2020/03/forbud-mot-allmanna- sammankomster-eller-offentliga-tillstallningar-med-fler-an-50-deltagare/)

This article is an example of poor journalism. It misrepresents the situation in Sweden, while containing crucial factual mistakes bordering on misinformation while also trying to steer american policy making in a specific direction.

</comment><comment><USER68> Disclaimer. I am Swedish.

The amount of deaths in Sweden from Covid19 have been very high and many of the deaths has been completely unnecessary. This is nothing else than a cruel state sponsored murder on parts of the elderly population. Its also likely that the actual death toll is significantly higher than reported since many of the elderly dying at institutions was never tested for Covid19 In-fact at many regions of Sweden autopsies has been suspended during parts of the spring. The recommended treatment for these elderly has been injection of morphine (yes to elders with breathing difficulties).

There are stories of staff sometimes opening the windows while elderly confined to their rooms grasping for air. Family was not allowed to visit but staff was moving without protection gear between the rooms of sick and healthy ( because in Sweden the government early decided that masks are ineffective ways of protection ). Its still the official stance of Sweden that masks does not help against Covid19. But apparently sneasing in your armpit and washing your hands helps. In the beginning this was applied also at the institutions for the elderly. Some heroes objected and bought gear and significantly lowered the death rate early on. Others followed the advice from the "experts" as a good swede does. And the result sometimes was 50-75% dead in the total population of residents at the care facilities.

The Architect behind these state sponsored acts of murder is a man called Anders Tegnell. And you will be surprised to learn that this is the second time this very dangerous narcissist has been causing suffering and deaths in Sweden. Back in 2009 during H1N1 influenza (swine-flue) he was the person responsible for the purchasing and injecting the unsafe Pandemrix vaccine in the Swedish population as head of the vaccine department. Today it has amounted to a total of 600 then children and youths developing narcolepsy. He spent the following years defending the government against the victims who was seeking economic indemnity from the Swedish state medical insurance. When the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet later acquired emails of this mater he was caught on record emailing that the goverment agency he was working for at the time "was at a point of no return politically".

He was then recruited as the State Epidemiologist of the Public Health Agency of Sweden in 2013 as a thank you for his service. Now in 2020 he is directly responsible for the deaths of about 5500 swedes. You could argue that he is also responsible for some of the deaths in neighboring countries where there have been imported cases from Sweden.

This person already before the beginning of 2020 had caused 600 direct cases of mistreatment can now add 5500 deaths to his CV. And likely 1000s of people with lung-damages, muscle damaged and other severe trauma damage from intensive care. There are also reports of increased diabetes onset among Covid19 survivors and the ME/CFS that will likely be the result for many who got the disease.

If you are interested of the numbers and statistics you can check [https://c19.se/](https://c19.se/) it has deaths and infected on a regional level. It can be helpful to understand that the city of Stockholm has had 2344 officially dead and 21490 official cases among its population of 975904. Tests results of antibodies have been reported in ranges from about 10% - 17%. But since testing was not allowed for most people until very recently the numbers can be either spot on or very off.

</comment><comment><USER69> It seems obviously wasteful to keep such businesses open where most the paying customers won't be showing up during a pandemic anyways. Why even pay to have the lights on? You need to mothball the operation ASAP and lobby for government assistance for the duration.

I was just poking at rough figures last night out of curiosity regarding when the other end of this arrives in terms of 60% herd immunity for the US. Just pulling numbers out of my ass, like 200,000,000 for 60% and an avg infection rate of 100,000/day. With those figures it's 5.5yrs before 60% gets infected. We're at more like 50,000/day last I checked, but who knows how accurate that is.

Either way, it looks like this is going to be a life of masks and social distancing for a long time. Hopefully a vaccine arrives in volume before 5+ years go by.

<comment><USER50> > _It seems obviously wasteful to keep such businesses open where most the > paying customers won 't be showing up during a pandemic anyways_

In Sweden people still seem happy to go out to bars and restaurants, even in the middle of a pandemic. It's non-stop work for the government to shut down venues that are crowded beyond the allowed covid19 congestion regulation.

This whole "even if restaurants and bars were open, nobody would go to them" narrative just doesn't bear out in reality.

We're seeing the same thing in the UK now as well.

<comment><USER69> Your comment is in direct contradiction with TFA, did you read it?

<comment><USER50> I did read it (and insinuating I didn't is against the rules).

Nowhere does it have any proof of restaurants losing all their customers. It says that economists predict a contraction (that hasn't happened yet), that consumer spending at one point was down 25%, and that the manufacturing sector had to shut down due to supply chain issues.

I never said that restaurants have lost customers, just that there is still a very significant amount of people willing to go out anyway.

The Google Mobility report shows that retail & recreation (which includes restaurants) for Sweden is currently down only 1%!!! (workplaces -40%, transit -25%)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> This is a very misleading article. Compare Japan (no lockdown) with Norway, Finland, and Denmark. Or we can compare some areas of Sweden with Norway. Sweden has high death rate for the same reason that many of the lockdown countries have hight death rate: Elderly care centers in some areas where not properly protected! 20 years of policies for cost reduction of care homes is the reason for the failure).</comment>


An Introduction to C and GUI Programming - <AUTHOR> https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/an-introduction-to-c-gui-programming-the-new-book-from-raspberry-pi-press/ <comment><USER2> Immediate mode gui frameworks make for a pleasant programming experience

[https://github.com/vurtun/nuklear](https://github.com/vurtun/nuklear)

<comment><USER3> Whats the benefit of immediate mode libs? I haven't had the opportunity to use one before. I'm hopeful for libui in the future, but maybe I should consider immediate mode libraries?

[https://github.com/andlabs/libui](https://github.com/andlabs/libui)

<comment><USER2> No callbacks, so no forced heap allocation nor lifetime management . "oh you want to use FooGUI? First let me tell you about the object hierarchy and object lifecycle". No mvc. No custom, required data structures.

The programmer just copies and pastes from the demos, makes small modifications, and it just works.

(No offense intended towards your framework, I've used gtk, qt, and swing and have never understood them like I understand nuklear and dearimgui)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> C for GUI programming? GTK2 for starting a new project today? I think new learners would be much better off with Python 3 and GTK3 (or Qt5)...

<comment><USER5> I disagree. There is always value in learning something simple and master it than learning something complex and barely scratching the surface.

It teaches you fundamentals, especially on an embedded system such as R-Pi.

The first language I learned was C on an ARM processor. Learning about registers, bit manipulation, seeing how compiler optimizes the code based on GCC flags, understanding pointers, memory management, the whole thing is difficult for a beginner but to me, it was immensely helpful. I also love Python/Julia/Java/JavaScript but man it makes you appreciate neat things higher languages offer.

One day I want to build my own 8-bit computer from discrete gates. I'm sure it won't be a waste of time.

<comment><USER6> The embedded environment is what makes this setup make sense. But in the general case, C is less than ideal for GUI programming compared to what's available in other languages, because of lack of first class closures and more complex data types (or at least classes). Otherwise you are basically in the 80s doing Win32 GUI programming all over again.

<comment><USER7> There's a school of thought which considers complex data types to be more a part of problem then a solution. You may disagree with it, but nevertheless one certainly doesn't need complex data types to write GUI (or anything) effectively.

Also, in this universe Win32 API was released in 90s, not 80s.

<comment><USER6> The complexity should be the same no matter what language you use, but how you structure and organize that complexity changes drastically. Hence in Ruby it takes only 2-3 lines of code to accomplish what in Java requires a few ItemFactories.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Download link: [https://www.raspberrypi.org/magpi- issues/C_GUI_Programming.p...](https://www.raspberrypi.org/magpi- issues/C_GUI_Programming.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER9> The author speaks highly of the book "C for Yourself". An electronic version of the book from the Microsoft Programmer's Library 1.3 CD-ROM has been posted [0] on the truly excellent PCjs Machines [1] website, where a lot of other older programming information can also be read [2].

[0] [https://www.pcjs.org/pubs/pc/reference/microsoft/mspl13/c/c4...](https://www.pcjs.org/pubs/pc/reference/microsoft/mspl13/c/c4yrself/)

[1] [https://www.pcjs.org/](https://www.pcjs.org/)

[2] [https://www.pcjs.org/pubs/](https://www.pcjs.org/pubs/)

</comment><comment><USER10> Whoa, this little book just arrived in my mailbox in my Bulgarian village apartment. Can't wait to crack it open.

</comment><comment><USER11> For a raspberry pi which is unlikely to be plugged into a monitor it seems like a better gui for most usecases would be a simple webserver.

<comment><USER12> Raspberry Pi was made from the beginning to be used as a cheap desktop computer that people can play around with and students can buy with their own money, pretty much like the BBC micros and ZX Spectrums in the 80s. From day one it came with a full Linux desktop system and was meant to be used by itself as a proper computer.</comment></comment>