What if people were paid for their data? - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/the-world-if/2018/07/07/what-if-people-were-paid-for-their-data <comment><USER2> The value of my data is not that it can train a statistical model about preferences of developers in their 30s - that's absolutely marginal. My personal data is useful in itself as a proxy for my own life, my preferences, my buying habits, it's a map on how to influence and predict my behavior, possibly against my will.

A company having exclusive access to all my personal data, emails, etc. can for example, infer that I have an urgent need to buy an airline ticket to visit my sick father, and extract my reserve price for that ticket, as opposed to an average price for all passengers. Or it can deduce the minimal paycheck I am willing to accept for a job.

So even in the unlikely case I can recover the full value of my data from the market, I haven't really earned anything. My information differential is a competitive advantage in the market, and selling it is self defeating, companies are _not_ selling or giving their data back to me. So the more data you sell or give, the larger the asymmetry grows until the only deals you can make are bad deals.

 _Edit: I can neither confirm nor deny I am developer and /or in my 30s_

<comment><USER3> In your example you're assuming that there is monopoly control over whatever product you're trying to buy. But that's usually not the case: there is more than one airline, for example.

If it were possible to market products exclusively to people who wanted that exact product, companies would no longer need to waste money on broadly targeted advertising and compete more directly on price and product features and not on marketing budget. You would get "paid" in cost savings.

Of course that's generally not really possible no matter how much of your data marketers could reasonably know about. A grab bag of "data" from an individual person barely predicts much of anything, which is the real reason there isn't much of a market for it.

<comment><USER2> Indeed - but markets are rarely perfectly competitive, to negate any advantage price discrimination can bring. For example, it's often the case a route/date combo is offered by a single airline.

I also agree that information can be beneficial for me, helping companies finding me easier without spending on advertising etc. But in that case, I would simply give that information away and share it as broadly as possible (for example, by searching multiple sites for the products I am interested in); so that side of the coin is not relevant for someone selling his information.

<comment><USER4> You can buy the ticket anonymously. There doesn't have to be any link between data about your grandfather and your identity you're using to buy the ticket. Why would you even give anyone data about your grandparents?

<comment><USER5> > You can buy the ticket anonymously. There doesn't have to be any link > between data about your grandfather and your identity you're using to buy > the ticket.

How do you propose buying an airplane ticket anonymously?

<comment><USER6> On some booking sites it might actually be a good idea to open them in incognito mode, and you can get a quote without them using data linked to you.

<comment><USER7> I've noticed tracking that can track across browsers and their incognito modes even with ublock origin enabled. It may have tracked me by ip, I don't know but I feel like we're getting to the point where the existing incognito modes are useless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've had this idea in the bucket of "crazy things I'll never do" which is similar to this, half art-piece, half serious:

\- Users sign up to an ad network and they insert all information about themselves, the more, the better.

\- They are periodically prompted to add or update their data (like facebook asking you if you're still living in the same city).

\- An adblock-like browser extension, replaces all ads they see with the own network's ads, which are highly targeted, and hence get much more money than regular ads for the ad network.

\- The ad network is setup as a non-profit foundation which pipes all the revenue into donations to institutions doing work related to privacy initiatives (EFF and similar).

\- Users are shown how much money their willingful lack of privacy has generated for privacy initiatives.

It's a play on using the argument of "I have nothing to hide" in order to advance actual privacy legislation and protections. If someone builds this, I'd sign up and use it.

<comment><USER9> > An adblock-like browser extension, replaces all ads they see with the own > network's ads, which are highly targeted, and hence get much more money than > regular ads for the ad network.

That's all fun and games, as long as you realize that all browser-extensions capture your keypresses, all data on all pages, and et cetera. All browser extensions see everything you do, and everything you type, and et cetera.

<comment><USER10> What a bunch of fear-mongering...

Browser extensions are subject to a permissions system, just like apps. Their code is also fully visible to you, and fully sandboxed.

The only real danger to extensions right now is that they can auto-update without a user review, and thus can "turn evil". It's happened to a handful of popular extensions (eg. Stylish).

Requiring the user to manually update extensions has its own share of problems though, so I'm not even sure if I disagree with browsers makers decision to auto-update.

But the claim that "all extensions are keyloggers" is just blatant nonsense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I remember reading one of Bill Gates' ideas to reduce spam. Charge a nominal fee for each e-mail sent, from memory, it was something like $0.000001 USD per e-mail.

It never took off, of course, but it's important for us as a society to come up with better solutions than "Trust Zuck" or let company lawyers win with their horribly user-antagonistic end-user licence agreements (EULA).

As an aside, I find it fascinating how lawyers aren't getting much of the blame in all of this debate around data. Who actually writes and/or approves most of these policies? The legal eagles, that's who.

Let's at least debate the alternatives to the current adtech dominance of the most popular online platforms (Facebook, Google search, Android OS, Apple's App Store ads, etc.).

edit: fixed spelling mistakes, added the 'as an aside' para.

<comment><USER12> "Funding a civilization through advertising is like trying to get nutrition by connecting a tube from one's anus to one's mouth."

― Jaron Lanier

<comment><USER11> Ha! Reminds me of the late, great, Bill Hick's seminal piece on marketers and advertisers: [https://youtu.be/tHEOGrkhDp0](https://youtu.be/tHEOGrkhDp0)

I oft wonder how much disdain Bill Hicks would have for the tech bros and the Orwellian apparatus many large tech companies have created.

<comment><USER13> But he's wrong though, isn't he?

I mean, marketers and advertisers simply recognize what already exists. Yes, there is an "anger market". Yes, there are certain things that work to attract people prone to "being angry".

Overall, I find Hicks to be a bit overvalued. At least the bits that get circulated the most. The bit about advertisers and the bit where he "destroys" a heckler, which is just him hurling basic abuse at someone. There's nothing really funny or particularly witty in it, just "Go kill yourself" over and over again. I think he plays to a certain demographic that wants to feel as if they've figured out the secret and that the secret is it's all going to shit.

I'd imagine he'd have a diatribe about "tech bros" that would pretty much consist of saying they should kill themselves in various ways.

<comment><USER11> Not sure if he is wrong, per se, as his arguments do have some merit.

Re: "marketers and advertisers simply recognize what already exists."

Yes, but they encourage consumption, purchasing and/or commercial activities. They are not doing it for the sake of a 'good cause' or because they believe in it (although they may), their incentive is to make money.

That's what I believe Bill Hicks was attacking in this segment. Their unrelenting ability to turn anything into a commercial endeavour - even when it is not present.

<comment><USER13> What in here ([https://genius.com/Bill-hicks-on-advertisers-and- marketing-a...](https://genius.com/Bill-hicks-on-advertisers-and-marketing- annotated)) is an actual critique on what marketers do? What's the argument?

It's all "kill yourself" some reductive thoughts about how they identify markets followed by a snide remark about marketing arsenic as a childhood sleep aid. Only that last jibe could be said to be anything approaching an actual critique. The rest is just plain abuse.

You think Hicks was doing it for the sake of a 'good cause' or because there was money in it? But that's part of the rub, isn't it? You can't really buy in without selling out. It's the same sort of dilemma that exists with a band like Rage Against the Machine. They advocate all of this stuff, all of this anti-commercialism, etc, but fully take part in it.

"Oh noes, they're encouraging me to buy things. The horror"

Fuck man, at least they're honest about what they're trying to do. Not everyone is.

<comment><USER11> Likely have to agree to disagree on this one. It's a comedy piece for one, and it's an opinion at that, but what is the critique Bill Hicks is making in the Youtube link I shared? I think it's best summed up with "you are filling the world with bile and garbage".

And honest about what they do? That seems wildly inaccurate. Like any profession, there are honest advertisers & marketers and there are dishonest ones, but the incentive of advertising is to influence purchasing decisions, and marketing to promote awareness, encourage consumption, and/or generate new revenue.

What would you have (had) Rage Against the Machine do? Stop making music that people enjoy and relate to? Or, should they do what the KLF did and (allegedly) burn a million dollars in cash one night and renounce all future songwriting and performance royalties? What would that achieve apart from an artistic statement?

Lastly, by your definition, aren't Rage Against the Machines just good at marketing? Or is licencing one's music to a large music label perhaps the most effective method of advertising their beliefs and opinions? Playing to larger audiences or making coin from their trade, doesn't necessarily mean they are hypocrites.

\--- edit: minor typo fixes, refined some sentences

<comment><USER13> Where's the humor? What's the joke? Explain how it's funny.

He doesn't explain how it's filling the world with bile and garbage, that's just a claim. And sure, it may qualify as criticism, but it's empty criticism. You could easily say that about most things. Bill Hicks is filling the world with bile and garbage. You'd want me to qualify that. Defend it, prove it. Something you're not asking of him.

Yes, advertisers want you to buy shit. Anyone who works in advertising will tell you that their job is to get you to buy shit. Advertising's job is to get you to buy shit. Maybe one brand of shit over another. Or shit you may not necessarily need, but all the same. You may disagree with the utility of what they're trying to sell you, but that's kind of irrelevant. The job itself is to make the product appealing enough to purchase.

You can bitch about advertisers who take on clients of products known to be harmful. That companies that do advertising for cigarettes are morally suspect. But the job in and of itself is no better or worse than a lot of others. Do you think Hicks blamed advertisers for making him a chain smoker? Then again, he was mostly a chain smoker to deal with his other addictions. But last time I checked most illegal narcotics don't have an advertising arm. Unless you count Bill Hicks, who advertised for them essentially for free.

Also, don't use acronyms unless you are going to explain what they mean. The only hit for KLM I got was the Royal Dutch Airline. It was only once I searched "KLM burning money" that I got the result that I think you were talking about, the KLF burns a million quid. And apparently, they went on a lecture circuit after that, Bill Drummond started writing, Jimmy Cauty continued as a music producer (which I don't know how that fits in with the whole "renouncing the industry" bit) and artist. So it's not like they fucked off and became bus drivers. They still leveraged that fame. And they regard that stunt as a mistake now.

As for Rage Against the Machine, I do see their predicament. They could go full Fugazi and reject most of the corporate structure, but then their reach becomes much less. Your message can't really reach.

And here's the thing, I'm not totally against what they're doing. I do think it's a bit ironic preaching anti-consumerism using the vehicle of consumerism to get your message. "Buy this thing that tells you that buying things is stupid". I think they're wrong in rejecting the entire notion of consumerism. Just like Hicks is wrong in rejecting the entire notion of advertising and marketing (which is a bit of an anti-consumerist screed). But the answer isn't to become a charge card wielding shopaholic either. No matter the extreme you go to, you've gone to the wrong one. Extreme isn't the answer, ever. There is value in a lot of things.

<comment><USER11> Well, I find the Bill Hicks skit funny :) If you don't, then all power to you.

Some people think the Smurfs is a nice, cute cartoon and others see a Marxist village led by a misogynistic Karl Marx figure. They're both just perspectives, a la, the Rashomon effect.

And the KLM to KLF thing was a typo. People make mistakes - myself included!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Companies will argue, either rightly or wrongly, that people are already getting paid... Just not in cash. Google Maps is free for me to use, so long as I relinquish location data necessary for it to function, which Google can then use as they please to analyze what businesses I frequent, where I live, what type of transportation I use, etc.

<comment><USER15> You don't have to give them that data. It's still free because they can serve ads based on where you're searching.

<comment><USER14> I disagree. The modern act of viewing a digital ad produces more data than people realize. How long you looked at an ad, whether you clicked it, whether you skipped it or tried to hide it, etc. All of those implicit actions create data that is then surrendered to the collector.

<comment><USER15> Yep, no argument about user metadata. My point was specifically about location data, which users do not have to give.

> Google Maps is free for me to use, so long as I relinquish location data > necessary for it to function

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I generally agree with Weyl and Posner's position here in that we need to completely change people's perspective on the value of their data and how easily they give it away. So I don't want to distract from that point. However, I do want to also point out that data itself functions more like capital than it does like labour (although the act of providing data may be more similar to labour).

Capital is always the source of financial asymmetry between the labourers and the wealthy capital-owners. So instead of "selling" our data to companies for a fixed price, allowing them to exploit it forever, maybe we should be only renting companies the temporary right to use our data -- keeping the wealth asymmetry from growing.

</comment><comment><USER17> In some ways we already are. For instance if I use my supermarket loyalty card, they let me save around 1-2% on my purchase in exchange for the better tracking they get.

<comment><USER18> I've seen the discount being more like 25%. Hell, pretty much any product at Safeway has a "Safeway price" that practically forces you to use the discount card.

<comment><USER17> There's no way one person's data is worth a 25% discount surely. That strategy must be something like, have the sales we were going to have anyway (to attract customers to the store), but make the card required to get them.

At the supermarket I'm thinking of, with the 1-2% discount, there'll still be normal sale items that don't require the card, and then extra discounts that only the card gives you. Actually I just remembered the card earns you reward points as well (albeit slowly), so the total amount you "save" is indeed a little more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> If someone were to figure out the exact mechanics of this, then this could become universal basic income.

I have thought a lot about what trapped intangible value all of us have, such that 'if' there was a market for it, we could get paid. Our personal data, with opt-in volunteering, is certainly at the top of the list. The other potential personal markets that have very similar characteristics (to personal data), but don't exist are:

1) Home equity: Americans have $6.2T in home equity that could be "sold"

2) Driving data: get paid for carrying free sensors so that one helps map the world, so we get to self driving sooner in more cities

3) Opinions: large scale polling for everything, from movie trailers to startup landing pages to new products/ads — everything

4) Fact checking: crowd sourced journalism; often Reddit crowds figure out the truth/source faster than pro journalists; there ought to be a market for "if I know something, Eg some insider info, I could improve on the state of public truth"

5) Goodwill: one of the most amazing things I stumbled upon was www.reddit.com/r/borrow; people ask for money and strangers give money; I would never have predicted this to exist. I believe goodwill and benevolence is one of the largest untapped markets.

There are probably several other (and better) examples: point is that royaltiess/annuities from such markets could be part of UBI in the future.

<comment><USER20> Not to take away from your point, but I like to imagine

 _> I believe goodwill and benevolence is one of the largest untapped markets._

being said in some board room somewhere...

<comment> J-dawg _"Oh, you know what Bill's doing? He's going for that anti-marketing dollar. That's a good market. He's very smart."_

[https://genius.com/Bill-hicks-on-advertisers-and- marketing-a...](https://genius.com/Bill-hicks-on-advertisers-and-marketing- annotated)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm already compensated for my data. I can use Facebook, read news websites, play games, and watch videos without taking out my credit card.

I have no other way to convert my data into dollars so this'll have to do.

</comment><comment><USER22> I had an evil idea once for a site where you got paid to supply information on other people. You create an account and narc on all your friends and family by telling the site what things they were interested in and what they have been talking about lately. The more money they make from targeted ads to that person, the more money you get paid :) Like I said, it is evil and no one should do it.

<comment><USER23> Uh, I have bad news. Zuck beat you to that one a while ago... (Except instead of getting paid you just get nagged if you don't narc.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> This article is thought-provoking, but the value of our data is far beyond training AI. Tech giants have been utilizing our data for ads targeting for such a long time. We, as data contributors, deserve to get our share of profits from the huge amount of money they made from using and selling our data.

I happen to find out this blockchain project, Measurable Data Token, which aims to create a decentralized data exchange ecosystem to reward users for sharing their data. Here is the link to their website ([https://www.mdt.co/](https://www.mdt.co/)) if you guys want to check it out.

</comment><comment> FLUX-YOU Without knowing how companies actually use my data, I can't put a price tag on it myself.

That means I can only rely on the price put out by the companies that collect it, and if they collude to keep prices low, it doesn't matter if they're caught, because they already have the data.

I also don't know the entire network that my data transits with the amount of money that gets paid for data -- Google could sell to some small company which sells to an international company, which sells to a shell company and ends the trail for most of us.

I suspect that internet and real celebrities will be paid orders of magnitude more for their data anyway.

</comment><comment><USER25> There are a bunch of apps and websites that do this already. Google Play Rewards is probably the most reputable, but they're easy to find and advertise themselves aggressively.

<comment><USER26> Google Play Rewards is a good example of how little people realise the worth of their data though. (Google Play Rewards tends to pay rather little, and in currency only redeemable at the company store.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> What worries me is that we are always surprised how our data can be used. You may agree on something you think you understand and indirectly agreed to something else.

</comment><comment><USER28> The risk associated with my data being collected is likely not worth what anyone is willing to pay for it, and I assume this is true for nearly everyone.

<comment><USER29> When given the choice, that's what you'd expect most people would think.

But when not given the choice, it turns out people are quite happy to give over their data in return for no payment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Your data by itself is basically worthless. Your data combined with Google's algorithms to extract meaning is worth all the services they provide.

</comment><comment><USER31> Some companies are working on this sort of thing.

[https://www.killi.io/](https://www.killi.io/)

</comment><comment><USER32> They already are, essentially, in-kind—-with "free" software and services like gmail, fecebook, instaglam, etc etc

</comment><comment><USER33> I don't want money in exchange for my data. I just want genuine anonymity except where I say otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER34> Sell my data? That's ridiculous!

Leasing it for a defined period of time, that's plausible.

</comment><comment><USER35> this is a huge use case for blockchain. Just try Brave browser to see for yourself

</comment><comment><USER36> How much is it worth and who will pay and how will I collect it.

</comment><comment><USER37> people are paid for their data, they get to use social media.

<comment><USER38> Doesn't seem like a good deal.</comment></comment>


MirageOS Pioneer Projects - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/mirage/mirage-www/wiki/Pioneer-Projects <comment><USER2> If any of these prompt you to think of new potential projects that's cool too. Just email the list to discuss it.

Also, a few folks raised a question about what the difficulty levels actually mean [1]. If you're new to OCaml then the suggestion is that you pick an area you're already familiar/comfortable with (eg networking, Xen, etc) so that you have some grounding. Otherwise, you're having to learn two things at once.

[1] [http://openmirage.org/wiki/weekly-2015-02-25#PioneerProjects](http://openmirage.org/wiki/weekly-2015-02-25#PioneerProjects)

</comment><comment><USER3> MirageOS is already a thing, I wish they'd pick a new name.

[http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/139/13949.html](http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/139/13949.html)

<comment><USER4> Their website is still up: [http://www.detachedsolutions.com/mirageos/](http://www.detachedsolutions.com/mirageos/)

From the ticalc.org page, _" Ranked as 2 on our all-time top downloads list with 1003409 downloads."_

Over a million downloads over its lifetime, that's incredible. I never realized just how large the calculator homebrew scene was in its heyday.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's a pity all this effort is going into Ocaml which seems something of a dead end.

If the core language was Rust or Go then momentum would really pick up.

<comment><USER2> > _"... which seems something of a dead end."_

Based on _what_ , exactly? If anything 'all this effort' should indicate the _complete opposite_ of what you state.

<comment><USER5> Unikernels won't take off till they can be built with languages that aren't ocaml. Sorry if that's not a message you're comfortable with but its there.

<comment><USER2> It seems to me that you haven't looked into this space _at all_. See Table 2 in [1] for a list of other implementations.

I'm perfectly happy about how MirageOS is doing and I'm glad there are options that allow people to choose where they make their trade-offs.

[1] [http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2566628](http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2566628)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


FizzBuzz Enterprise Edition - <AUTHOR> http://www.fizzbuzz.enterprises/ <comment><USER2> I am surprised that the Enterprise edition is missing the option to export as an Excel file, eagerly waiting for future releases.

<comment><USER3> And LDAP authentication.

<comment><USER4> Surly a full x.500 implementation not this hippy open source nonsense :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> AI-is-the-new-Java edition: [http://joelgrus.com/2016/05/23/fizz-buzz-in- tensorflow/](http://joelgrus.com/2016/05/23/fizz-buzz-in-tensorflow/)

<comment><USER6> since we're at this, fizz buzz in css [https://jsfiddle.net/yf68emtn/](https://jsfiddle.net/yf68emtn/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The documentation is not Enterprise Ready™; it still contains a description of what the product actually does in an accessible location. For proper compliance, this description should be in a PDF whitepaper that will only be mailed to you after providing your e-mail address and phone number.

<comment><USER8> That pdf whitepaper won't actually explain how to use it. It will describe the synergy of the experience of using it, give three real world customer stories of how it is used (without actually explaining how), and then end with a link to a documentation site that redirects to a login screen that it will take two weeks to get past because your account rep can't get the right team on the line to approve your account for access.

<comment><USER9> And don't forget to fax a signed copy of the NDA!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Github issues list is the real gold mine: [https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...](https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition/issues)

<comment><USER11> >add blockchain

Because of course

<comment><USER12> I eagerly await the day all this blockchain stuff is considered legacy enterprise cruft.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Looking at the problem statement, this should be built in a Reactive style of programming and more event based. What if we need to scale this to infinite numbers for millions of clients ?

Event based programming in technology like stack is more appropriate for this kind of problem domain...

<comment><USER14> > What if we need to scale this to infinite numbers for millions of clients?

I worked for a company where an internal tool for, at the moment, a dozen users was designed to be more scalable than the actual product. The product was used, without major problems, by hundreds of millions of users. So we had a team of 14 people to build something that previously was done by one guy in an already maintainable way.

The server was also divided into several components to mimic a micro-service architecture. Even that no one else was using any of the services and it made deployment cumbersome.

To cut a long story short, the company has a-lot-of-money to throw at problems. So waste is not a big deal. I moved on, as it was boring to work that way.

Many backend developers feel proud of their complex architecture. Simplicity is seen as "not being professional".

For the client side of that app, there was just one guy. He was also acting as scrum master because he had spare time.

<comment><USER15> I've faced a similar situation, where a team I came to work on mid-project had designed a microservice architecture where a WordPress front-end talked to some "middleware" (a total misnomer since it was actually a REST API) which in turn talked to a bunch of other intermediate services which in turn talked to the CRM, an accounting system, and other third-party systems. Most of the "middleware endpoints" simply forwarded the calls to other services. Any feature that required a new endpoint usually meant deploying changes to three different systems.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm appalled that this piece of junk that has the audacity to call itself "enterprise grade" does not employ an industry standard dependency injection framework. 22 appearances of 'new' in the codebase - you gotta be kidding me! I cannot recommend to license this application for deployment at my company unless its code is thoroughly refactored to use Dagger or at the very least Google Guice.

<comment><USER17> I can't even tell if this is sarcasm or not

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Where/how does one learn to structure programs like this? Obviously I won't write fizzbuzz like this, but the point is it won't occur to me to structure a fizzbuzz solution like this. And if I can't produce such a structure for the dead simple case, then I can't trust myself to be able to architect an actual complex system where one _does_ need to apply all these abstractions.

Are these skills only attainable from years of real-world experience?

<comment><USER6> people loves enterprise architecture jokes but all starts with some questions: what if I need to use the client datasource for the input numbers? what if a client ask to send the output to a network endpoint? to a printer?

so you start decoupling things. this here is played for fun, but if you need to build something that lasts 10 years across a multitude of clients instead of just as an one off project those question starts to be legitimate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I love this project (having worked in a Java shop for a few years), but it does sadden me that it fails to compile. That would complete the joke.

</comment><comment><USER20> This is clearly a hoax - there are no UML diagrams there (not up to date with the code - to be clear about this).

</comment><comment><USER21> Big fan of fizz buzz. Edited / wrote / collected a (free open source) book titled "FizzBuzz (1, 2, Fizz, 4, Buzz,...) by Example - There's More Than One Way To Do It" [1] in the Yuki & Moto Press incl. functional, object-oriented, code-golf, and many more styles / versions. Happy fizz buzzing.

[1] [https://yukimotopress.github.io/fizzbuzz](https://yukimotopress.github.io/fizzbuzz)

<comment><USER22> If you want another I did it purely with Lambdas in C# [1].

[1] [https://github.com/tonyedgecombe/functionalfizzbuzz/blob/mas...](https://github.com/tonyedgecombe/functionalfizzbuzz/blob/master/FunctionalFizzBuzz/FunctionalFizzBuzz.cs)

<comment><USER23> My python teacher asked us an implementation of the factorial function.

I did almost the same as you, bootstrapping almost every constructs in python lambdas, and then, before handing it to him, I put it all on one line.

But I'm a good person, in a comment above that line, I copy pasted the same line with 'lambda' replaced by 'λ'.

(I did not use church numerals and there were no strings involved)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> On a more serious note.

What is the alternative to the OOP IOC SOLID multiple layers of abstraction way of doing things? Is this really the go to architecture for _enterpire_ \- or more appropriately, large projects? Why is it the go to architecture -- what are the alterntives? Suppose we're discussing a project in a non-typical OOP language (not Java/C#/C++), what is the architure of choice there?

Asking this as a junior developer

<comment><USER25> > Is this really the go to architecture for enterpire - or more appropriately, > large projects?

You have to understand that the _context_ in which this kind of architecture is needed is high-turnovers environments. Basically, in the 90's, managers at big corps - IBM, ATOS, etc... asked the question : "how can we fire a whole team, hire a whole another team and put them in front of the fired team's code and have them be productive in a few days ?".

The answer to this is to heavily compartimentalize everything. Your manager tells you that you must implement a very particular behaviour in a very particular class ; you aren't meant to know what's happenning in other parts of the system.

<comment><USER26> I'd like to reframe this a bit:

> "how can we fire a whole team, hire a whole another team and put them in > front of the fired team's code and have them be productive in a few days ?".

What's really happening here is "how can we fire a whole team, hire a whole another team and have the new team be as productive as the old team was?"

You might think documentation, clean architecture, avoid feature creep etc... but what's really happening is that the old team is not productive by any absolute measurement.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> No "Chain of possibilities" pattern?

Also, far too few classes with the word "Context" in the name.

</comment><comment><USER28> [https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...](https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition/issues/340)

Eh... this guy is right, ant is better.

</comment><comment><USER29> Is there any technical paper on this somewhere on arxiv? I was trying to implement one of my own without all the enterprise abstractions and now I am stuck.

</comment><comment><USER15> To me the best part of this is the Issues. "Change in business requirements" is probably my favorite

</comment><comment><USER30> The Code of Conduct is a nice touch.

<comment> pure-awesome I don't think that part is a joke.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> not over engineered by the least bit.

</comment><comment><USER32> Too real...

</comment><comment><USER33> And this is why I will never work in Enterprise again.

<comment><USER34> While Enterprise is always the go to for things like this, I think any time non technical people get involved in technical decisions the fun time begins. Just today I was told that I wasn't allowed to implement something in python just because it's "a scripting language"

<comment><USER35> If theoretically a developer chose to develop something in Python in my company that would be an automatic no. There are multiple reasons:

You would add an another language to support from the development to the operational support like monthly security updates. And that's a major risk and most companies won't take it.

If you leave the company then the company may have potentially unsupported app with noone capable of supporting it.

And seriously why would you pick python? Why not perl? Why not ruby?

<comment><USER36> The operational support you note is definitely something that should be evaluated, but if there is a "hard no" policy in place that is a negative indicator about the engineering organization to me.

Generally having a small number of implementation languages in use shouldn't be an issue. In fact, languages are tools and some are better suited than others to certain uses. If an organization supports products of even modest complexity odds are multiple languages and other technologies are _required_ in order to make it work properly.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How Does Universal Basic Income (UBI) Work? - <AUTHOR> I am looking for arguments on both sides of this debate. How would we roll this out in US and how would we work out the economics behind this? Will this really solve any problem? Are we creating a new problem? Will this create a class that can survive but not do much beyond that. <comment><USER2> The high level idea is that it's a redistribution mechanism, and then reclaimed via. taxation. For example, say everyone gets a check for $1000 each month. This is just like getting money from anywhere else - you have to pay taxes on it. If you're making $3000/month from your other jobs, your income is now $4000/month, and you pay taxes accordingly. People with higher incomes would ultimately subsidize people with lower incomes. So a basic income could be implemented without changing taxes, or even with lowering taxes.

Some benefits of basic incomes:

\- Social programs are massively inefficient and politicized, whereas just sending everyone a check each month would be much simpler.

\- If automation rapidly reduces the demand for workers, you could end up with a large group of unemployed people who just experienced a big change in standard of living. This is how revolutions happen.

\- You raise the floor of where a person can fall. That is, you ensure that everyone can afford basic food and medicine. This in turn I suspect would mean less crime, due to a less desperate population.

Potential downsides:

\- There are people who can't take care of themselves, and we'll still need social programs for them.

\- If basic income is too high, people who would otherwise work will stop working, and if it's too low, it's not effective. One risk is that we see changing lifestyles - for example, if you wanted to spend your days biking around the country, you could easily do that on $1000/month. I know some people who would be happy with a laptop hacking on OSS all day - maybe good for society, but perhaps not for the GDP.

\- It could be used just to inflate down peoples standard of living slow enough that there's not a revolution.

</comment><comment><USER3> IMHO it's a little uncreative at best and maybe even a little misanthropic. Most advocates I've talked to reveal that "oh, of course _I_ still have something to contri bute. UBI is for the proles". I think we should try to figure out more creative ways that everyone can contribute instead.

<comment><AUTHOR> But where would the money come from to fund this program?

<comment><USER4> Taxes is the short answer. But there is also the expectation that huge savings to the government would be possible, by abandoning all the current financial aid & support systems.

(I'm actually not familiar with the USA setup, but in the UK things were complex - to the extent that often councils AND claimants don't know of all the benefits to which they're entitled.)

So rather than a complex system where some users get zero support, some get $100 a week, and some get $200, all the paperwork processing, etc, the system becomes:

* Are you a legal resident?

* If so here's $250 for the month.

The system also has an implied goal of helping people work. Right now if you're receiving benefits in the UK, as an unemployed person, they cease when you get a job. So if you can only find a part-time job bringing in £600/month, but your benefits total £800/month accepting it is a net loss. If you receive UBI instead you'd end up getting your "free" money as well as the £600 - leaving you better off, and reducing unemployment.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Spacing Effect, Taking things to Long term memory - <AUTHOR> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bigfootsoftwares.note

<comment><USER2> This looks cool and I will try it out.

I'm curious: have you tried out Anki and Memrise? Both of these have free Android apps, sync progress to a central server and, more importantly, have pre-made and/or user-submitted 'decks' for common languages and texts.

Did you build this because you wanted something simpler, or were they missing an essential feature?

EDIT: I see from the last of the screenshots shown in Google Play, that you have a neat feature: show me a notification about a word that I'm ready to practice (or about to forget). Anki and Memrise don't do this, although Memrise will occasionally remind you to come back.</comment>


The Toronto Declaration: Protecting Rights to Non-Discrimination in AI - <AUTHOR> https://www.accessnow.org/the-toronto-declaration-protecting-the-rights-to-equality-and-non-discrimination-in-machine-learning-systems/ <comment><AUTHOR> The other day out of curiosity I was searching for basic words on ImageNet: cat, dog, man, woman.

Here is the page for "woman" [http://image- net.org/search?q=woman](http://image-net.org/search?q=woman)

I was surprised to notice a couple of things:

\- There are categorizations for "mistress", "slut", and "adultress". The closest analogs for "man" appear to be "playboy", "stud", and "pimp". There is also a "foolish woman" and doesn't appear to be an analog for man.

\- Look at the pictures for "mistress". Many if not most of them are just women in their bathing suits or doing other normal things, like laying in a bed with a man. The same is true for "slut". Does this mean AIs using ImageNet could look at a woman on a beach and categorize her as a "slut"?

\- There is a category for "honest woman", which appears to be three pictures of a woman standing next to a man.

I'm not saying anybody is at fault or that the people who put ImageNet together did this intentionally. After all, it does reflect the (unfortunate) reality of how our society often perceives images of women.

But before I poked through that dataset, it wouldn't have occurred to me how important it is that we focus on equality and non-discrimination when it comes to AI. This declaration seems like an interesting step.

<comment><USER2> It has a similar horrific page for "Bad person": [http://image- net.org/synset?wnid=n09831962](http://image-net.org/synset?wnid=n09831962)</comment></comment>


Status.aws.amazon.com unreachable - <AUTHOR> http://status.aws.amazon.com <comment><USER2> Looking from Helsinki Finland, half the internet seems to be down (slack, aws status pages, ...). Could people post where they are and what they see. I'm wondering if this is a routing problem around Finland or something else.

<comment><USER3> Down from Moscow too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Looks reachable from most of my EU datacenters:

[https://wheresitup.com/demo/results/5767e8f88c3dcf6812b331bc](https://wheresitup.com/demo/results/5767e8f88c3dcf6812b331bc)

</comment><comment><USER5> Some bad shit seems to be going down with Cloudflare, possibly related to Telia, but they blame a "network operator" for the problem on theirs tatus page

</comment><comment><USER6> Works for me as well, but didn't just a while ago. Seems to be some local network issues related to AWS in some parts of Europe, Slack and Reddit down for me.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> In Stockholm, sweden it depends on your network. I can access stuff on my phone but not my broadband.

</comment><comment><USER2> Situation seems to be over. Most likely it was a routing / connectivity problem.

</comment><comment><USER7> AWS console works, but the status doesn't

</comment><comment><USER8> Works here....

</comment><comment><USER9> same

edit: working, not down</comment>


Kickstarter vs. Indiegogo – A Creator's Perspective - <AUTHOR> https://adamleeb.com/kickstarter-vs-indiegogo-a-creators-perspective/ <comment><USER2> From the other side -- Indiegogo is notorious for a number of policies which are friendly to scammers, including:

• Allowing project creators to use 3D renders and concept art to advertise their project, rather than requiring photographs of actual products.

• Making it difficult for users to report projects which are likely to be scams, and failing to respond to these reports.

• Allowing project creators to use "flexible funding" to receive any money donated by backers, even if it did not reach their funding threshold.

As a backer, I treat a project creator's choice to launch on Indiegogo with deep suspicion. While not all Kickstarter projects are legitimate either, the odds are certainly better there.

<comment><AUTHOR> From a backers perspective, I agree. They need to do a lot of work to repair some of the damage done from letting just about any campaign go on there site. It was a shortsighted move that was probably done out of desperation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I know this article is explicitly from a creator's perspective, but as most people reading it will be backers, I wanted to chime in.

Specifically, it seemed to me that many of the features that made IGG appealing to the author are things that are undesirable to backers. Pervasive, cross-site ad tracking? Hidden product tiers and partitioning of backers? It seems to me that IGG is trying to merge crowdfunding with ecommerce, where such tactics are obviously de rigueur.

From my perspective, however, the original point of crowdfunding platforms was to provide a place that good ideas without funding could have a second chance to see the light. In my mind, this makes crowdfunding perfect for things that target niche markets, or are very "out there", or want to explore ideas that generally would be difficult to pitch to the mass market. Instead, what it seems to be evolving into, and what it should _not_ be (in my opinion), is a place for companies to soft-launch their latest DNVB idea.

In that sense, the choices that Kickstarter is making is to maintain the platform in a similar form to its original incarnation, which at least gives projects the _chance_ to stand out for their ideas rather than their marketing. Marketing wins practically everywhere else already! For projects which are outstanding in their area, but truly too niche to gain sufficient traction to meet their funding goals... I'm not sure what the solution is there.

Another, different approach is that taken by Massdrop, which seems to have embraced the niche appeal of crowdfunding rather than trying to move the needle back to web sales. Of course, it _does_ provide a sales channel, but not in a way that encourages the peddling of schlock through one-and-done, ad- driven campaigns. I'd be interested to read a similar write-up on their backend support for creators, to get a better insight into their thought process and business model.

Finally, I sincerely appreciate the author taking the time to write up their experiences and share them. Even if their goals and my (naïve) preferences are not perfectly aligned, we wouldn't be able to talk about it without this article to spur discussion.

</comment><comment><USER4> For reference, I successfully ran 2 Kickstarter campaigns in the past and both times I did it, I had basically no audience or any idea what I was doing.

I don't think you can blame KS for your campaign flopping. That would be like opening up a store on your own, and then getting mad at the person who rented you the building because you're not selling anything. All they did was provide you the location to sell goods, it's on you to bring people in and convert sales.

Kickstarter is basically accepting money as a service with some unique twists. They never claim to be a marketing agency that will promote your campaign for you.

Sure, if your campaign gets popular you'll probably trend for that category on their listings page, but if you're depending on random people browsing KS to back your campaign then you're just setting yourself up for failure.

The long story short is, running a KS campaign is like running a sales campaign. You really need to plan a ton ahead of time, and ideally have an audience before you start the campaign, and if you don't have an audience, you need to find outlets to find people who are likely well aligned with what you're trying to raise funds for.

In other words, there's no shortcuts or guarantees when it comes to sales.

<comment><USER5> Then why don't build your own website and cut costs?

<comment><USER4> Kickstarter takes 5% of your campaign. There's an extra 3% on top for payment processing but you would be paying about that (2.9%) if you accepted payments on your own.

So you're giving up 5% to have a completely ready to go platform optimized for setting up a description page, create rewards, handle payments and everything you see on the KS front end. Then on the backend you have a bunch of tools to help contact your backers and post ongoing updates.

Back when I used KS, they took 10% not 5% and it was still a no brainer to use them instead of rolling my own platform.

Let's just say your campaign raises $20,000. That means KS will take $1,000. Even an MVP of KS would likely still take 3 months of legit full time development. Would you trade 3 months of your time for $1,000?

I wouldn't, and it's not just about the money too. I want to be in the business of doing freelance dev work and making video courses, not creating a crowd funding platform that I only used once or twice.

Plus, there's the credibility factor of KS. That holds a lot of ground on its own.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed, at 5% plus cc fees, both IGG and KS are well worth the costs. I actually think they are very under priced considering that just about every other marketplace takes 15% or more. (I hope KS and IGG aren't reading this!)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> As a backer, I feel that IndieGoGo does _absolutely nothing_ for you. On the other hand, _they actively enable scammers to continue scamming!_

I backed a product that seemed to be ready, from everything the creators had posted. But months went by and the product wasn't shipping. As people started complaining, IGG's website actually allowed the creators to shadow-ban complainers! I manually verified this by using a private window: my comments, which were visible to me, were not visible when using the private window! My comments were not abusive in any shape or form: I had just pointed out that even though these guys are claiming it's not ready yet, they are already advertising the product in a trade show.

All of my complaints to IGG were either ignored, or answered with a generic "not all campaigns are successful". They refused to take action when it was pointed out to them that the creator is actively deceiving the backers!

And the creators, after ripping off 1009s of users, went on to run new campaigns, which also ripped off people!

I will never back an IGG campaign again. Actually, I had half a mind to take them to small claims court, but dropped the idea.

IndieGoGo are a bunch of scammer-enablers.

Edit: case in point, this camera: [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/alpha- the-world-s-smalles...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/alpha-the-world-s- smallest-4k-action-camera#/comments) (read the comments! and see the dates)

The campaigners went on to make this campaign: [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/snap-the-smallest- afforda...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/snap-the-smallest- affordable-4k-action-camera#/comments) (read the comments here too!)

<comment><USER7> From the article "Kickstarter is virtually genericized at this point"

> IndieGoGo are a bunch of scammer-enablers.

Agree, IndieGoGo has developed the opposite reputation. I would say that IGG is "genericized" in it's own way. As a backer, IGG just feels sleazier. No one has mentioned their Flexible Funding[0] which is a core tool for scammers and something IGG uses as a strong selling point.

IGG could fix this but they make money on Flexible Funding. As they state in the link below: " _With flexible funding, you keep all funds, even if you do not meet your goal!_ " (note the exclamation point at the end). Scammer- enablers might be too kind of a word. Collusion might be accurate.

[0] [https://support.indiegogo.com/hc/en- us/articles/205138007-Ch...](https://support.indiegogo.com/hc/en- us/articles/205138007-Choose-Your-Funding-Type-Can-I-Keep-My-Money-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've backed like 5 projects on kickstarter and one on indiegogo. As a consumer, I very much look at a project on indiegogo and wonder why it is there and not kickstarter. I don't do the opposite.

Reading the article I'm reminded of the old Avis campaign: We're number 2. We try harder. Indiegogo does more for creators because they have to and Kickstarter doesn't. So I guess the takeaway from this is that Indiegogo is putting up the good fight to stick around. Hopefully it works out for them and the consumers.

</comment><comment><USER9> This seems to me like a recap of the age-old saying: "Second-best always tries harder".

<comment><USER10> That's not a saying. It's an advertising slogan made by David Oglivy for Avis car rentals.

<comment><USER9> Let's make it one then, starting now. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I completely agree with the thoughts here. I deeply regret going with Kickstarter a few years ago for an eSports related-project ([http://www.gameref.io/](http://www.gameref.io/)). I had a lot of media coverage and the community seemed to be excited, even with a few manufacturing deals on the horizon. I was too cocky, thinking "of course I'd get funded on KS" and flopped.

I went with KS in spite of IGG reaching out, saying that they love the project and they would work hard to reach my funding goals. Oh well, c'est la vie. Live and learn :)

</comment><comment><USER12> This is interesting to read, because from the perspective of a backer, Indiegogo is much less concerned about its users being scammed, allowing for creators to pitch products with the barest of evidence that they're acting in good faith. They also have lower standards for what can be sold, and basically allows manufacturers to treat it as another distribution channel -- e.g. a storefront for things you can already find on Alibaba [0].

KS obviously has its own problematic campaigns -- if you aren't doing anything overtly scammy, they aren't going to try their hardest to look for reasons to stop you and lose their percentage cut of the campaign funs. But they do have standards when the bullshit is outright. Too many examples to list, but one of the most prominent and hilarious examples is the SKARP laser razor. It raised $4M on Kickstarter before KS was finally pressured to act on the obvious fake engineering and faked prototype [1]. SKARP immediately found a new home at Indiegogo [2], where it raised $500,000 and, 3 years later, has produced nothing while its creators have gone completely dark.

Indiegogo straight up has fewer guarantees about accountability, allowing creators to not only opt for "flexible funding" (they keep whatever money they get even if the campaign fails), but to continue collecting pre-orders after the end-date, and to change up the campaign rewards so that anyone looking at the page a year later won't know what was actually promised when the campaign first raised the bulk of its money. Waterseer, which was one of a batch of bullshit "water from thin air" products, had pitched a $130 violation-of-the- law-of-physics [3] when it raised $330K+ last year. Its homepage now pretends to sell a completely different product, with the creator pretending like the previous fake product never existed, and Indiegogo has apparently agreed to join in the coverup, allowing the creator to completely change the page and content with no mention to current or past readers that anything has changed. Here's the old page, and here's the current page [4], here's a copy from Internet Archive [5]. Indiegogo seems to have no qualms with creators wiping out the past -- KS at the very least forbids changes to the campaign page after the fundraising ends.

[0] [https://entrepreneur.indiegogo.com/how-it-works/indiegogo- ch...](https://entrepreneur.indiegogo.com/how-it-works/indiegogo-china/)

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/13/kickstart...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/13/kickstarter- removes-laser-razor-no-working-prototype)

[2] [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-skarp-laser- razor-21s...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-skarp-laser-razor-21st- century-shaving#/)

[3] [https://www.popsci.com/this-device-may-pull-water-out- thin-a...](https://www.popsci.com/this-device-may-pull-water-out-thin-air-but- not-as-well-as-we-hoped)

[4] [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/waterseer](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/waterseer)

[5] [https://web.archive.org/web/20170328234943/https://www.indie...](https://web.archive.org/web/20170328234943/https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/waterseer- water-women)

</comment><comment><USER13> He doesn't mention how much more he spent on advertising (lots of mention of a FB pixel for retargeting) and how much he spent on the marketing firm, to just achieve $180k more than his first campaign. Especially given they now have a reputation, existing customers etc, I don't think the calculus works out...

<comment><AUTHOR> I am planning to write another article after the campaign is over with more data. Maybe we would have raised more money on KS and spend less on advertising but there is no way to prove that at this point regardless of what data I share.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> A friend of mine built [https://backit.com](https://backit.com) to help drive exposure to top projects

<comment><USER15> It seems like a useful site.

One suggestion: The result box on mobile is rather narrow, the arrow overlays the start if the title. Not a full title is displayed at once which made it tedious for me to browse through it. Maybe make it a full width box and don't let the arrows overlay the project titles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> :wave: happy to see my fb pixels hackweek project is such a boon for creators :rocket:

</comment><comment><USER17> Hey everyone,

Feel free to reach out to me if you want any significant data on how to set up a crowdfunding project. My startup specializes in this kind of data.

Just some quick data for your interest.

As of today, within the last 24 hours.

Kickstarter has 305 projects end, with 148 of them being funded.

IndieGoGo had 205 end with 18 being funded

Ulule.com (mainly for Europe) has 27 end with 19 fund.

These numbers are pretty typical of what we see every day. The exposure on KS is much better. If you want any help reaching backers who would already be predisposed to backing a project like yours, that is what Backit.com does. Again, feel free to drop me an email, and I don't mind helping answer any data-driven questions you may have about setting up a project.

firstname.lastname@example.com</comment>


At 18 Stories, Mjøsa Tower Is World's Tallest Wooden Building - <AUTHOR> http://news.cision.com/metsa-wood/r/metsa-wood--at-18-storeys--mjosa-tower-in-brumunddal-to-take-title-of-world-s-tallest-wooden-buildin,c2325089 <comment><USER2> There is also the HoHo building ("Holzhochhaus", lit. wood high house) in Vienna, which is a wooden high-rise with 24 stories and 84 m [0]. They just added an antenna to the Mjøsa Tower to break the record. (Boys and their towers…)

[0] [https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HoHo_Wien](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HoHo_Wien)

<comment><USER3> A thousand words of German, including a section on its impact on the skyline, but the only image is the HoHo logo? I know I could edit it myself, but this just seems strange for any notable building.

<comment><USER4> This is very common for German Wikipedia.

Once I had the idea for a project (never completed) to analyze the differences in pictures accompanying articles across Wikipedia's languages. The results were about what you might expect. For their respective articles on "Food", you'll find:

\- English: a photograph of vegetables, meat, bread, beans, and milk

\- Japanese: a room full of tuna at a large fish market, white rice, and water

\- Russian: potatoes, onions, spices

\- Italian: a 17th century painting of some food

\- Esperanto: the cover of an Esperanto book about food

\- German: bar charts tracking food prices (and no pictures of any actual food)

It's interesting how Wikipedia makes it easy to jump between languages, yet each language's maintains its own identity and conventions. I've heard people propose to just start copying photographs from English Wikipedia into others (which tend to have far fewer pictures), and editors for those languages asking people to please stop.

<comment><USER5> The same applies to Wiktionaries - compared to English, the French Wiktionary is elegantly and spaciously structured, the German version telegraphic and dense on information.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This Swiss company makes all-wood houses: meaning no insulation, they just make the solid wood walls thick enough to pass insulation codes without requiring foam or fiberglass. Also no metal fasteners.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j_UjIshzMc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j_UjIshzMc)

</comment><comment><USER7> > _" In fact, wood is a fireproof material despite the commonly held belief > that it isn't."_

What? I hold this belief that isn't. I understood the point about keeping its structure well while burning, but it doesn't make it "fireproof"!

<comment><USER8> This is what a forest looks like after a fire: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Forest_fire_aftermat...](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Forest_fire_aftermath.jpg) .

Note that the trees are all still there. Wood is surprisingly difficult to burn, and if it does, it will do so very predictably, slowly, with relatively low temperatures, while maintaining structural integrity.

This video makes the difference very clear: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-J86Ka9MkQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-J86Ka9MkQ) . It's not that wood can't burn, it's that it won't burn significantly.

<comment><USER9> How do the wooden buildings fare in towns consumed by forest fires? What about the steel, concrete and masonry buildings?

I wager that if we built forest like structures out of steel and concrete they'd be far more fire resistant than natural, wooden, forests even if the amount of fuel at ground and canopy level was kept constant.

This whole wooden building thing is great for a variety of reasons. That doesn't mean it's not inferior to steel/concrete when it comes to resisting a major fire. Just because it's inferior doesn't mean it can't still be "good enough". Trying to claim that a wooden structure has superior fire resistance to a steel/concrete/masonry structure is an exercise in mental gymnastics.

<comment><USER10> Well, the typical wooden buildings you're probably thinking about (ie, suburban housing) would be terrible and burn completely. If you take a look at their construction, they use relatively thin pieces of wood both for structure and walls.

CLT or Mass Timber buildings are very different, there's basically a crapload of wood and it is very dense, so dense it can't burn well because oxygen can't get to it very well.

It is essentially the difference between trying to burn kindling vs a single large log.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It doesn't make mention but I wonder if to reach 18 storeys this is chemically, heat and compression treated wood? Also, no mention on how they'd keep insects at bay, given the structural criticality of this wood.

Never the less, very exciting to see wood so prevalent in new construction.

There was this[1] recent discussion on new wood frame midrises being very prevalent.

[1][https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19152986](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19152986)

<comment><USER12> It's all engineered lumber. "This high-rise is being built using glulam, CLT, and Metsä Wood's Kerto® LVL (laminated veneer lumber)"

glulam = glued laminated timber AKA pieces of regular timber stacked & glued together CLT = cross-laminated timber AKA glulam but instead of stacking the lumber, you lay it out in perpendicular layers and glue it together LVL = laminated veneer lumber is like the above, but made like plywood out of wood bits instead of solid lumber, with a hardwood veneer on the outside

The wood is also treated to be fire, moisture, and insect resistant

<comment><USER13> Given one of the things that wooden buildings inspire is a "Hey, we CAN build big buildings in a green manner", how do all the things you mention impact that?

It sounds like gluing, treating etc. etc. would really impact the "greenness" of this building

<comment><USER12> I think the green-ness relates more to the fact that growing timber captures carbon dioxide, while producing steel and concrete emit carbon dioxide. The production of the glue, and the processes to glue the timber together certainly emit CO2, but nothing near the emissions of a steel foundry.

<comment><USER14> Cement production emits 5% all man made CO2 emissions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> So many people have seemingly given up on wood for strength and durability. As an engine mechanic by trade, some of the strongest equipment in my shop is wooden.

\- My diagnostics table can support a load of 2000lbs. You could park a golf cart on it.

\- my Stronghold work bench will handle up to 8000lbs of load. You could park an F250 on it.

both of these are maple top/butcher block.

</comment><comment><USER16> There's a reason brick doesn't get taller than 20 stories - the walls at the base get thicker, the taller it gets. At 20 stories you're basically building a pedestal on the bottom, to hold up the top. At that point you just get a larger pedestal on the bottom, and no more usable space going taller.

I wonder what the limit is for wood?

<comment><USER17> If you're ever in Chicago, check out the Monadnock Building. It's the tallest load bearing brick skyscraper (16 stories) and the foundation goes underneath the sidewalk.

<comment><USER16> Brick on the outside; braced on the inside. From the Wikipedia article:

"the masonry walls were braced with an interior frame of cast and wrought iron"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm excited for more wooden buildings, but the claim that "Compared to cast- in-situ concrete, wood makes it possible for construction time to be slashed by half" seems very optimistic.

There's a building boom going on around my office. The steel and concrete office tower next door is by far "sprouting" the fast. On the other side is a residential tower where half of the building is a 20+ floor concrete tower, and the other half is a 5-floor wood frame structure.

The concrete tower is going up faster, despite this being the same construction project. Perhaps what I'm missing is that a CLT build is more similar to steel construction than a wood frame building. Perhaps a real civil engineer can weigh in...

<comment><USER19> Seattle is just now allowing wood construction in high rise buildings. Previously they were an early adopter in mid-rise buildings which is why you see a lot of apartment buildings with exactly 6 stories around (1 concrete ground, 5 wood as allowed by the building code).

[https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/washington-state- to...](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/washington-state-to-allow-mid- and-high-rise-mass-timber-buildings-300760329.html)

<comment><USER20> In South lake Union Seattle also has a lot of midrise because of height restrictions around the space Needle. The needle is not actually that tall, the city is afraid that rampant real estate developers could completely hide it in the skyline.

<comment><USER21> Actually I think it's because of the seaplane flight path [https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OPCD/OngoingIn...](https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OPCD/OngoingInitiatives/SouthLakeUnion/SouthLakeUnionEISAppendixFAdditionalFlightPathAnalysis.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> That article is from August 2017. The latest one I can find on the tower is from September 2018 but it appears to be nearly complete (target completion data is March 2019).

[1] [https://archinect.com/news/article/150084833/the-world-s- tal...](https://archinect.com/news/article/150084833/the-world-s-tallest- timber-tower-structurally-tops-out-in-norway)

</comment><comment> d--b In my opinion, it looks really dull and plain. It's kind of sad that they would demo such a technology with a so bad-looking tower.

<comment><USER23> The picture in the article is a computer generated rendering, the real building looks better.

Although if you don't like the "Scandinavian" school of design. You are probably not going to like it anyway.

<comment><USER24> Here is a page with some photographs and more details: [https://www.artwave.it/ecowave/ecoarchitecture/eco- tecnologi...](https://www.artwave.it/ecowave/ecoarchitecture/eco-tecnologia- ecco-ledificio-in-legno-da-record/).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> After seeing what this winter's repeated freeze/thaw cycles have been doing to my city, I'm rethinking the idea that wood is less durable, too.

Winters are always tough, but climate change seems to be exacerbating it. Where, once upon a time, it used to get cold and stay cold, now the temperature bounces back and forth across the freezing point, and, from what I can tell, it's taking a serious toll. The streets are increasingly a giant mess of potholes and spalling, the sidewalks are a mess, and even the buildings are starting to fall apart. Yesterday I heard about a person in my neighborhood being hit in the head by a falling chunk of masonry.

</comment><comment><USER26> How does it do with acoustic isolation? Do you hear every footstep above you?

<comment><USER27> Exactly. I used to live in a low rise apartment building which used modern wood construction. Not only did I hear everything above me, but the shock waves (from foot strikes) would also travel thru the structure, so you could feel everything as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> The Sheffield Winter Garden is a marvel of large scale wood based structural engineering, ironically enough in the heart of the UKs steel city:

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

</comment><comment><USER29> This article is from 2017, and according to it, the building should be just about completed today.

Any news on how it is going?

<comment><USER30> Drove past it two weeks ago, looks like it's closed to finished. It felt so out of place. Anyone that knows Brumunddal knows that there's not a lot of tall buildings around. I guess the people on top will get an amazing view though.

There aren't even many 18 stories tall buildings in Oslo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This is really impressive, but what's the real lifetime is going to be?

<comment><USER32> Gol Stave Church is an ~800 years old wooden structure [1]. Most of the exterior paneling have been replaced, but the interior structure is original. And there are plenty of wooden exteriors in Norwegian houses that are 100-200+ years despite the climate.

I grew up in one that was about 100 years old and where the exterior was all timber covered with plank. Originally there was sawdust added as insulation, but that was replaced at some point in the 1980's due to the fire hazard.

Of course this building is all specially treated wood, and the structure is under a lot more strain, so it's not guaranteed that it translates well, but wood that's treated properly can last a long time.

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

<comment><USER31> Sorry, but you can't compare a multistory building where people live with an old church.

<comment><USER8> How about a 500-year old multistory building still used as a house? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begijnhof,_Amsterdam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begijnhof,_Amsterdam) .

Granted, it's only 6 stories, but I think we can forgive that, given that it's 500 years old.

<comment><USER31> That is really impressive. However, this is an exception, not the rule and I've seen a number of old wooden houses in really, really bad shape when I lived in Sacramento. Even after 50 or so years. Of course, they have termite problem in California, that doesn't happen in other parts of the world as much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> when i see that pressed/glued bamboo kitchenware, i wonder when the bamboo is going to take over the world. Being basically just a crazy fast growing weed grass and thus cheap and abundant, bamboo tensile strength is higher than that of steel, it is harder than oak yet lighter, bamboo cables only increase strength when getting wet :

[https://makawear.com/blog/things-you-didnt-know-about- bamboo...](https://makawear.com/blog/things-you-didnt-know-about-bamboo- strength/)

<comment><USER34> >bamboo tensile strength is higher than that of steel

What? Tensile strength of steel is like 400-1200MPa, Bamboo is < 100 MPa.

<comment><USER33> strictly speaking you're right. My statement is more along those lines:

[http://www.ijstr.org/final-print/nov2015/Comparative- Analysi...](http://www.ijstr.org/final-print/nov2015/Comparative-Analysis-Of- The-Tensile-Strength-Of-Bamboo-And-Reinforcement-Steel-Bars-As-Structural- Member-In-Building-Construction.pdf)

"Although, the tensile strength of steel is 2.5-3.0 times higher than bamboo and the specific gravity 6-8 times that of bamboo; but by counting their tensile strength/unit weight (bamboo vs steel), the tensile strength of bamboo is 3-4 times that of steel."

<comment><USER34> As yes, wood has some pretty impressive properties if you normalise by density. But that also means you need bulk to match other materials.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Years again I was on a tour of the Johnson space center in Houston, home of the astronaut training facility.

As we were looking at a return capsule I noticed that the interior surfaces were finished with some kind of wood, which struck me as odd, and I asked if it was for aesthetics.

The astronaut standing near me explained that wood had the best trade-off of many criteria including weight and durability, and the goal was not to look like an 80s station wagon dashboard.

</comment><comment><USER35> But why build 18 stories building at all, in a pretty small town (it looks like)?

<comment><USER32> Partly because they can; it's very much partly a demonstration of the technology. Partly because it means not having to let the town spread out and take over surrounding farmland and wilderness when you can build up.

<comment><USER36> Also plentiful access to raw materials. Lots of timber production around Brumunddal.

<comment><USER24> Is the timber that is used local?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> > When you have a building made of steel and concrete, the steel melts and the > building collapses," says Erik Tveit, Project Manager at HENT AS, the > general contractor for the site.

Really.

</comment><comment><USER38> If I want to build a robust wooden house, where should I go ? What kind of resources should I look for ? Any recommendation ?

<comment><USER39> If you're building a house no more than 3 stories high then regular wood construction with 2x4s spaced every 16 inches is plenty robust, unless you expect to be hit by floods or hurricanes. And if you do expect hurricanes then wood isn't a good option regardless of construction.

<comment><USER40> Haven't the building code changes in Florida since (I think) Hurricane Andrew advanced the limits of what stick-build, platform-framed structures can survive?

I know metal roof tiedowns ("hurricane clips") were created to solve the issue of roofs being peeled off wholesale by high winds catching them under the eaves and lifting.

<comment><USER9> The codes in question are more about requiring builders to do a better job fastening the wood to the other pieces of wood than they are about the strength of the roof itself.

Building codes in hurricane prone areas basically require you use all manner of various stamped steel plates and hangers to hold things together to compensate for the fact that nails tend to rip out of things if you pull in the right direction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Wood is terrible for multi-tenant buildings. Ever hear your neighbor walking around in a concrete/steel building?

</comment><comment><USER42> It's also really ugly.

<comment><USER43> Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

<comment><USER44> If that was true then it wouldn't matter what buildings look like at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> _" Using wood means greater fire safety"_

Edit: Outside of how ridiculous this statement is, how does one bring a charred wooden high-rise back up to code?!

<comment><USER46> There was an article some time back about fire ladders and how wooden ones will still be structurally sound after getting quite burnt, while metal ones can lose their integrity well below temperatures where the metal would actually melt.

I think it was in relation to the San Francisco fire department.

<comment><USER20> The SF fire department uses wood ladders because they are non conductive, vs aluminum. They operate in an area with a lot of aerial AC power lines.

<comment><USER47> And worse, 600 VDC trolley lines, which are closer to the ground than uninsulated distribution feeders. Unlike power lines, trolley wire covers a sizable fraction of street area.[1] Trying to raise even a 20 foot metal ladder is dangerous.

[1] [https://www.munidiaries.com/wp- content/uploads/2015/11/wires...](https://www.munidiaries.com/wp- content/uploads/2015/11/wires_defeat.jpg)

<comment><USER20> Vancouver has a lot of electric trolley buses, makes me wonder what the fire department has standardized on...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Same old ugly Bauhaus architecture. Showcasing a beautiful building would do a lot more to promote innovative construction methods.

</comment><comment><USER49> I don't understand how this is described as "green"? Maybe someone can explain this simply, without emotional bias.

<comment><USER49> Ok so below were some comments.

TL;DR: carbon sink, pulp wood rather than old growth, trees get replanted.

I think that is all fine and dandy, but I personally would prefer an article simply describing the building. I don't think it's necessary to go the "this is green" or "better than concrete" route. For me good is good, that's it. Don't need to play towards a debate.

<comment><USER50> In most of the world, people consider climate change scientifically proven. There isn't a debate. In Norway, the building is featured as "green" because that is desirable in a world where we want to limit CO2 emissions and other environmental harm

<comment><USER49> You missed what I was saying. Using wood is highly dependent on region.

In other places, the greenest building is the one that is already standing. Even if it may be made from concrete.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> "In fact, wood is a fireproof material despite the commonly held belief that it isn't."

I stopped reading at that sentence. They went too far.

</comment><comment><USER52> I can believe that wooden construction techniques have improved over the past however so thousands of years. But I can't bring myself to believe that it is environmentally sustainable.

<comment><USER53> In countries like Norway, the timber companies replant trees. In addition, the growing trees suck up more carbon in comparison to the older trees. You think that mining is preferable to this practically infinite renewable resource?

<comment><USER54> It is renewable, but trees take time to grow, and there's only so much space available that's useful for growing those trees. I'm not saying you shouldn't build things out of wood, but the question is how much supply is really reasonably available?</comment></comment></comment>


Shadershop: interactive interface for programming GPU shaders - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/cdglabs/Shadershop <comment><USER2> It's a really nice user interface. The 2d view has a few limitations though.

It could do with the ability to swap the control points on the 2d view at a click of a button.

Similarly the preview of functions could do with showing either a 2d view or a line at a slice along any line. Currently you can see only a slice across which means a sine wave going down looks like a straight line on 1d view. Letting you pick a slice line would let you see the wave preview more closely to what it actually is. For example a sine wave at a 45 degree angle could be represented as such in the preview.

In the 2d view there is even a space available for showing the wave at an arbitrary cross-section.

The layout is

        [  X  __ ]
        [ 2D   Y ]

In the __ area you could have a cross section line dragger.

</comment><comment><USER3> It would be cool to hook this up to various input devices like midi controller or some kind of range finder.

It would be nice if there was an easy to use frontend that did kind of what puredata and gnu radio does but could also make shaders. Why stop at images?

<comment><USER4> You basically just described Touch Designer.

<comment><USER3> That does indeed look like what I was thinking of. Shame it appears to be proprietary and windows only.

Have you used this for anything?

<comment><USER4> I have and many other people have as well. You can find a lot of examples of live projection if you search for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I couldn't help but notice that every time this thing popped up, not many people had much to say about it, always had a high amount of upvotes, never many comments....

<comment><USER6> I think it's easy to recognize as very cool. But, shader programming is not something many people have experience with. So, they don't have much to say...

<comment><USER5> Unfortunately, the program lacks even for shader programming.

There's currently no way of exporting the shader you've created whatsoever.. I've tried.

I have used this program during my dsp classes to model certain signals however, having a direct manipulation interface for sine-waves proved very helpful. I wish someone took the time to study these research samples and build reliable next-generation software around the concepts cdglabs and friends put out. There's so much potential here!

Heck, if no-one does it, I might when I'm done with my study.

<comment><USER7> Yeah I think that's the real reason why no one discusses it. There's no explanation of why being able to fiddle with noise generation from within a shader is Really Cool(tm) and why you'd want to be able to do it live. The frustrating thing about this demo is that they could so easily hook it into an example scene with dynamic textures by using three.js :)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Sam Sethi wins case against Michael Arrington - <AUTHOR> http://paulfwalsh.com/sam-sethi-wins-case-against-michael-arrington/

<comment><AUTHOR> for anyone that didnt read the article, I used the headline straight from the article, he didnt really "win" as techcrunch didnt "participate" it was a default ruling.

<http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howlett/?p=1134>

[http://www.crunchnotes.com/2009/08/03/update-on-sam-sethi- we...](http://www.crunchnotes.com/2009/08/03/update-on-sam-sethi-we-decline- to-participate/)

<comment><USER3> I was logging in to make that same comment. A default judgment is when the defendant doesn't show up in court. The judge didn't look at the merits of the case and find in favor of Sethi. A default judgment just says that the plaintiff wins because the defendant didn't show up.

Here's the key part from the second link (emphasis added):

> The purpose of this letter is to inform you that _TechCrunch and Mr. > Arrington will not, as is their right, submit to the jurisdiction of the > English courts in this matter_. As we have previously informed you in our > letters of March 18 and May 17, 2009, _TechCrunch is not susceptible to the > jurisdiction of the English courts and the proper forum for your client's > claims would be the State of California_ , which is the location where the > words were both written and published in accordance with the prevailing > local laws and standards. As a result, any vindication that your client > seeks should properly be sought in the courts of the appropriate California > jurisdiction. Accordingly, defendants will not file an Acknowledgment of > Service in the High Court of Justice. As we have previously informed you, > _any judgment that your client may obtain in this matter will be > unenforceable in the United States_.

I've heard of this happening, but I don't know how it actually plays out. Would the UK detain an American citizen with a default judgment against him? I guess every country's laws on how to handle civil claims against foreign nationals visiting the country differ... interesting stuff, never really thought about it before. Would be curious to have a solicitor or lawyer with knowledge of the law weigh in.

Edit: I looked at the zdnet link - it's got some information, but looks a bit off to me. Arrington and Techcrunch not defending in England when they didn't do anything in England isn't running from the law. The reason jurisdictions exist is so your company doesn't get sued in a foreign country where you have no staff, no offices, took no actions, and didn't do any business. The article goes on to say:

> By default, the judgment recognizes that Arringon/Interserve are in a > position of power where what they say carries weight to a large audience and > can be considered damaging.

Pretty sure that's incorrect: The court stamped a piece of paper saying that the defendants weren't there, they didn't make a ruling about positions of power in international media in the internet age. I'd still be curious to hear someone with knowledge of the law weigh in - I can understand not wanting to defend a suit in a foreign country that you don't have operations in, and I don't think the English jurisdiction would apply. But does that mean Arrington could get arrested in England? Interesting to think about this case.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was wondering as well, arrington already cancelled his fowa talk and mentioned he wont be visiting here for some time.

I imagine as long as the damages arent a crazy amount techcrunch will just quietly pay them.

<comment><USER3> I'm curious now, so I've been doing some Googling around, it's not really resolved yet. This is interesting:

"Belgium Fines Yahoo For Protecting User Privacy On Its US Servers"

<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090716/0405415571.shtml>

> For many years, we've discussed the many challenges faced by countries in > trying to recognize that "jurisdiction" on the internet isn't what they > probably think it is. Many countries want to interpret internet jurisdiction > as "if it's accessible here via the internet, it's covered by our laws." But > it doesn't take much scenario planning to recognizing what a disaster would > result from such an interpretation. Effectively that means that the most > restrictive legislation anywhere in the world (think: China, Iran, Saudi > Arabia, etc.) would apply everywhere else.

Similar articles talking about the different rulings, merits, jurisdictions in technology:

<http://www.techdirt.com/blog.php?tag=jurisdiction>

Wikipedia on jurisdiction as a general overview for curious people:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction>

The American/Californian law is pretty clear that American officials, courts, law enforcement, etc. won't enforce the English default judgment. How it'd be handled in England, in the UK, and maybe even the EU is another story. What does England do with its own citizens that don't pay? If there's assets, I assume they can be frozen/seized with a court order. No assets? Arresting a person for a civil judgment when they don't have assets seems a bit barbaric. Foreign national from a friendly country? My initial hunch is that Arrington could go to England without a problem, but maybe not.

The more I think about it, the more it seems international civil law regarding technology and the internet is going to be a rapidly growing field the next 5-20 years. Curious as to how this plays out in theory and in real life.

<comment><USER4> [http://www.hmcourts- service.gov.uk/infoabout/enforcement/ind...](http://www.hmcourts- service.gov.uk/infoabout/enforcement/index.htm) is a good source for England in general. Enforcing elsewhere within the UK is even difficult, never mind the EU at large, although it can be done. The normal approach against an individual is an attachment of earnings order, where the employer withholds money from salary to pay off the judgment (or if unemployed, the same thing happens from the person's benefits), but if the person has no income or assets (or, at least, no assets within the jurisdiction), there's really not very much anyone can do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _So, if it wasn't for the TechCrunch post, all of Blognation's staff would have been paid and the network might still be in existence today - <USER2> with TechCrunch._

It is very very sad, if the above statement is true. Whoever is wrong here, Arrington or Sethi, destroying a competitor in this manner is a little too much. It is irresponsible use of power, and the whole thing has gone too far.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm not sure, but I think he could expand the legal rulling to other european countries as well. So Arrignton won't be allowed to visit those other countries as well.

<comment><USER4> AIUI a judgment in one EU state can be enforced in any other, but issuing an EU-wide arrest warrant for non-payment of a civil judgment by someone neither domiciled nor resident in any member state is, IMO, rather unlikely. Even if one were issued, it would be solely for the purpose of bringing the person before the courts (generally in the form of an enforcement officer) to answer questions relating to their assets, in order to assess if/how enforcement of the judgment might happen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> >Mike has been taking shots at Sam with numerous character >assassinations - he even published Sam's legal proceedings >against him on TechCrunch.

I know nothing at all of this matter, but since when has it been considered a "character assassination" to publish a document that is public record? Particularly those that make claims AGAINST the publisher!

</comment><comment><USER8> Wonder why Sethi didn't file suit in California as well.

<comment><USER9> English libel claims are far easier to win.

<comment><USER8> Winning isn't everything tho (as everyone here seems to agree). _Collecting_ is the issue.

<comment><USER10> You don't get to collect if you don't win.

<comment><USER8> And a win doesn't matter if you don't collect. Yeah, I get how the semantic circle of logic works.

The point is that to get to the money, you have to start with filing a suit. If he filed a suit in the UK, why not throw one up here as well?

<comment><USER11> By not filing a suit in the USA, Sethi can say that he's won all his lawsuits, or, more meaningfully, Arrington has lost. Sethi might consider it a good trade to not get any money from the lawsuit in return for tarnishing Arrington's name.

<comment><USER10> Does Arrington need help tarnishing his name?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Fast, free online meetings - use code "hackernews" to play - <AUTHOR> http://www.meetingburner.com/

<comment><USER2> I'm just going to hit the bad parts, so forgive the apparent pessimism. :)

The signup process is miserable. There's no reason to have it broken into so many steps. And damnit, after that many steps, why do I have to confirm my account via email _and_ click a "Oh, gee, thanks. Now continue to your real account." No confirmation at all. Take me straight to my account.

Do you really need my phone number for registration ? Not a real question. Answer: NO.

Password length restriction ? Seriously ? My password isn't even _that_ secure and I had to trim it for your guys' site. That's absurd and there's no valid excuse, no matter how plausible.

Six steps to schedule a meeting ? Not to mention the processes of each individual step -- the time selector is severely irritating; why do I have to make three conscious decisions per hour I want to select ? (First, what I click. Second, the hour. [and there's a moment of wait, is this AM/PM where maybe I cancel the click, change the AM/PM, then back] And finally, choosing AM/PM if I haven't already done so.) Just make it one nice big long list. Maybe if you want, select the hour and minutes separately.

Basically what I feel is that the UI is trying to present ALL of the features you provide without a clear understanding of how they're broken down. In your video, you present the tremendously arrogant tone of "everything else sucks, and damnit, we kick their ass" -- which is awesome!- but then I get into the product and it _feels_ boring, bloated. Feels like a some old strung-out dude wearing ripped skinnies and a deep v-neck.

Ok, actually, it's nothing like that. That was a lie -- just that last part I mean. Skinnies rock. You should all wear skinnies.

I'll keep an eye on the product because I'm interested. Just try to embrace consistently the attitude you put forward in the video. Make sure the product truly fits that because then you've got something pretty cool. :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Folks read the terms. Repeat read the terms. You are granting them the right in perpetuity to anything you broadcast. They can resell it without compensating you. You are waving any privacy for anything you do in a meeting.

Thanks, but no thanks.

<comment><USER4> Please specify which term you think means this. I just scanned through and didn't see anything.

<comment><USER5> He's probably referring to 4(d) of the ToS.

"You automatically grant the Site and its affiliates, contractors, and partners, a world-wide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable license to use, modify, publicly display, reproduce and distribute the content in order for the Site to provide You the Service. If you object to any content on the Site, Your sole remedy is to cease using the Site."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The narration on the video is pretty funny. It didn't come across as exactly "professional" and at some point ought to be less trash talk, more demo. Nonetheless, amusing.

<comment><USER4> Just used it. Very smooth process for signing up, though I didn't really like giving my phone number. What are you thinking the pricing will be?

<comment><USER6> Isn't the whole preach that it's free?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Maybe your competitor will be join.me. Do you know how it compares to them?

I created an account. It's a very neat interface. I'll try to use it in a meeting soon.

</comment><comment><USER8> Chat! Please? I've done a few gotomeetings with people who were in a noisy environment and could only do text chats.

<comment><AUTHOR> Going on the list - that was one of the top requests from beta release today - expect that in the next couple of weeks and thanks for trying it out!

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Based on the URL/name, I am disappointed this isn't some new way to goof of during boring webinars.

I was expecting some kind of racing game in canvas or destroying elements in the DOM, something like that...

</comment><comment><USER10> You crushed it with your video. The voice over is killer. Hilarious. One of the best videos on a startup I've seen so far. You made me signed up because of humor and the product.

</comment><comment><USER11> Why do you require that passwords only contain letters and numbers? This never makes sense to me.

<comment><USER12> And can't be longer than 12 characters? Seriously?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not a bug, it's a feature :)

When I pinged our CTO his tounge in cheek response: "we are software engineers. we like to irritate people."

This is the kind of fun stuff we get to learn in beta - will see about getting that fixed!

<comment><USER5> While searching for a recent HN-featured story on the strength of passwords with spaces, I ran across a relevant comment from about a year ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1419231>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> We've been working on MeetingBurner for just over 9 months - fully capable online meeting / webinar platform built in the cloud (EC2 & Joyent backup) so we could offer a truly free product (with a freemium vers of course!).

Expect to see more on the build process, the tech, how we made it into LAUNCH at the last minute, etc in the future here - appreciate all the HN support and please send any and all feedback here or through the feedback list once you log in.

<comment><USER13> I just signed up to MeetingBurner, it looks promising. As someone that used WebEx and is a currently a paying subscriber of GoToMeeting, this can potentially make our lives a bit easier, especially with Linux users.

Personally, I didn't like the video all too much, I felt the comparison was somewhat deceptive. As a GoToMeeting subscriber I can usually start a meeting in less than 5 seconds, since I already have the client installed. Clearly, if I don't have the client, then it's a longer process with website -> download -> run/install, as such the video, for me, takes something away from your product. While the speed comparison is nice, and something that should be emphasized, I believe the other aspects of MeetingBurner stand on their own.

I feel that the one-touch recording, the no-client download, online access to your recordings, shareable links, and clear reporting to your past meetings already goes beyond what your competitors offer.

I really like GoToMeeting as it's clean, robust, has recording and numerous other niceties, however, it is lacking in certain areas and having a full web solution like MeetingBurner would be ideal.

I will definitely try it out in GoToMeeting's place over the next couple of days and provide whatever additional feedback I can.

[edit: grammar]

<comment><AUTHOR> Well said and good points.

We struggled with what to highlight, and in a future blog post we'll address why we focused on that screen record.

Looking forward to your additional comments - submit via the MB helpdesk (feel free to repost here too) to make sure we see everything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I like this alot. Is it just me, or is the recording missing audio?

</comment><comment><USER15> How about a Google Translate plug-in?

</comment><comment><USER16> Useless password requirements</comment>


After 15 years of downtime, Metafilter's Gopher server is back online - <AUTHOR> http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw?gopher://gopher.metafilter.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> source: [https://twitter.com/waxpancake/status/702578926707544065](https://twitter.com/waxpancake/status/702578926707544065)</comment>