Ask HN: What is the single decision that increase your life quality? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Drink water. Want a coke? Drink water. Want food? Drink water. Want water? Drink water. The hardest part of this has been when I want coffee.

<comment><USER3> I don't see the point of this, why limit yourself like this?

We are all going to die sooner or later...

<comment><USER4> There are degrees of suffering before you die and you can up the probability that you'll live healthier for longer with some decisions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Be thankful for what you have.

</comment><comment><USER6> Exercise and sleep better.

<comment><AUTHOR> Could you be more specific about exercising? What kind of program are you following?

<comment><USER7> Do something that makes you break a sweat for 15 minutes a day or 45 minutes twice a week

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Adopt a friendly cat.

</comment><comment><USER9> Only working the time you're paid for. Not a moment longer.

<comment><USER10> How do you see that playing out for a salaried job? You are more often paid to "get it done" than reportable hours.

<comment><USER9> You leave for a better job if your job requires more than 40 hours a week from you and you're salary (very easy in the current tight labor market).

Also, no on call work unless you're paid additional comp to be on call and per incident.

I find it bizarre how long people will stay in roles where they're consistently underpaid by working overtime week after week with no additional compensation, or working off hours for free. Short term? Totally understandable. You didn't know how bad it was when you arrived in the role, or you're in a financial bind and need to power through. But long term? No need to be a masochist.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> When going to bed immediately switching off lights and go to sleep. No more reading or watching. That has fixed my insomnia.

</comment><comment><USER12> Working on things you want - follow your heart

</comment><comment><USER13> Walking to work.

</comment><comment><USER14> Drop acid

<comment><AUTHOR> seriously?

<comment><USER15>
      impl Drop for Acid {
        fn drop(&mut self) {
            println!("It can be done");
        }
      }

<comment><USER16> nerd

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Work as much as you need to live.

</comment><comment><USER18> Eating healthy.

</comment><comment><USER3> Not using any proprietary software.

<comment><AUTHOR> two thumbs up!</comment></comment>


Cuba to cut one million public sector jobs - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11291267

<comment><USER2> State run barber shops? What were they thinking?</comment>


UK airport trials public autonomous transit - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20140910-hands-off-with-heathrows-pods <comment><USER2> For those of us in the UK who'd like to read an article about a UK airport written by a UK media organisation...

[http://web.archive.org/web/20140912134733/http://www.bbc.com...](http://web.archive.org/web/20140912134733/http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20140910-hands- off-with-heathrows-pods)

<comment><USER3> I'm pretty infuriated that I can't access this.

Wait until evading the license fee becomes a civil offense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee. It is run commercially by BBC Worldwide, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BBC, the profits made from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes."

I'm sure there are excellent legal reasons why UK residents can't access BBC Worldwide content but it is really, really annoying

<comment><USER5> It's because of the BBC's 'Fair Trading Guidelines' \- [http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/poli...](http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/policiesandguidelines/fairtrading.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The irony(?) for me is that I'm a UK ex-pat (who has paid the UK license fee in the UK this year) living in Singapore. But my Singaporean ISP "helpfully" provides VPN connections so that I'm a local in foreign countries (so that I can use Pandora, for instance 'in New York'). So... I'm overseas, but I share all the problems of the UK residents, who are, understandably, also miffed.

PS: Having looked at the video (via the wayback machine) - is it the Sleeper that I'm reminded of? I'm getting deja vu with some 70s SciFi spoof...

</comment><comment><USER7> PRT has a checkered image. Transit planners dislike PRT and its advocates for a number of reasons. The big one is that in principle, modality isn't key to providing mobility - you can get it from a car, a bus, or a rail system as long as each of those things reach destinations you're interested in with appropriate frequency and capacity; the sustainability of the system is a measure of how the system is planned, as much as it is the modalities it encompasses. If your city is such that everyone commutes in big morning and evening rush hours to known "downtown" destinations, you can already plan the capacity and routes around that with adjustments to bus and train schedules. In turn this intersects with other urban planning goals around how to develop the city as a whole - transit guides zoning and zoning guides transit, and those things aren't easily separated.

So when PRT boosters come in and proclaim a silver bullet by switching modality, skepticism is natural. I think the technology is worthy myself(and I was more strongly for it once upon a time) but it has to be a fit for the overall policy, and this explains why its foothold has been in airports, where a very easy case can be made for 24/7 on-demand capacity. A PRT-centric policy at the city level would imply that everyone wants to go to arbitrary destinations at any time of day, which is purely a win for any individual rider, and probably is ideal for cities in general, but rings false for a planner dealing with the here-and-now.

</comment><comment><USER8> This is one of these things where instead of an article with a bunch of pictures, someone should have just turned on his smartphone camera and done a video of using one.

You know, like this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7OxvLuK83g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7OxvLuK83g)

(The voice is eerily Half-Life..)

</comment><comment><USER9> If the efficiency claims are true, it's pretty awesome.

There is a lot of public transportation that fails to be more efficient than cars because it is high-latency, failure prone, and doesn't handle peak and off-peak demand well.

Imagine replacing Boston's Green Line with a system like this. Always a pod to take you to whichever branch you want to go, now.

<comment><USER10> What that statistic misses is the fact that the pods only cover the last mile between medium-term parking and the terminal. Users still have fro drive all the way to Heathrow to tai advantage of the cost savings (and drive past the terminal for anther mile to park and get the pod back again). Meanwhile the overpriced 'short stay' parking sits half empty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The article does not mention that similar setups are already in operation in Schipol airport and Abu Dhabi. [http://www.2getthere.eu/](http://www.2getthere.eu/)

</comment><comment><USER12> If they don't change course it seems unlikely it would have been less efficient to have a small tram like operation. Or am I missing something?

<comment><USER13> Maybe the upfront cost of this is a lot lower?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is there any public information on how these navigate around?</comment>


The Other Half - <AUTHOR> http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/5139 <comment><USER3> First job out of high school was working in a department store. One of the sales guys I worked with was Keith. He smoked, liked to drink and go to Disney World.

After returning from a Disney World trip, he told me how he spent most of it on the hotel room floor because he 'threw his back out' and had general chest pain. Nothing excruciating, just annoying enough that he wasn't up for hours of walking. His friends told him to go the doctor, but he blew it off and said he was feeling better.

The next day he died in the store, behind the register, before we opened, from a heart attack. He was 36.

Last year I went to an urgent care because of chest and back pain. They sent me on to the ER after an EKG showed an abnormal rhythm. Turns out I hit the rowing machine too hard the day before and had a massive case of indigestion from Mexican food at lunch.

I felt silly, but really everyone that I dealt with was cool about it. I'm lucky enough to have insurance that covered it all, and I'm happy that it wasn't a heart attack.

I don't know if there's a moral to this story, just that... shit, you never know when your day is coming, and I still have a lot to do before it happens.

<comment><USER4> Regarding insurance, I wonder if you would have gone in if you were Keith, who at 35 is working sales at a department store. He might not even have been insured.

<comment><USER5> Want to disrupt the heart attack market?

Make a small home machine that can take an EKG and tell you if everything is fine, or if you should go get checked.

Adjust it to give some false positives, but no false negatives.

Make it cost around $50, and make sure it's fully reusable (i.e. you can borrow one from a friend for a quick check).

If machine learning is not up to the task, then send the EKG to a doctor, I believe they can read them in just seconds (correct me if I'm wrong), so it should not be expensive per-person.

To simplify it, have it connect via bluetooth to a phone, so you don't need to worry about WiFi, or a display. For reliability have it store the last 10 readings, even if not connected, so it should have a start button and indicator lights.

<comment><USER6> Good luck with the lawsuits when your machine gives the wrong answer.

<comment><USER7> Only two answers possible:

* go see a doctor

* urgently go see a doctor!

<comment><USER6> Then you get sued to pay for unnecessary bills.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This part fascinated me :

"" I waited 5 anxious minutes, and then was bought into a room with two doctors, one of whom turned out to be Dr. Sonny Palmer.

Sonny said Georg thought I needed some help, and I'd be checked within a day. I asked if he'd seen the letter with his name on it. He hadn't. He went and got it.

He came back and said I was going to be operated on in an hour. "" You obviously don't want to be rude when talking with doctors, but you absolutely should be your own advocate. Any time you're dealing with medical choise ask questions, such as "did you notice X" or "did you see the information from other person Y" or "do I have other options here than the plan you outlines?" or "your advice sounds good, but what are complications / side effects in doing this?" In the United States it feels like our attitude is "I go to doctor to get fix for aliment. He prescribes X. Done", and it's never that simple.

<comment><USER9> Couldn't agree with this more. I'm from MN, we tend to be pretty polite and understated, assume that doctors (and other authorities) know what they're talking about. Had a friend who progressed to a heart attack in a waiting room because he didn't want to make a fuss.

Make a fuss.

<comment><USER10> This was in Australia. A senior cardiologist has no motivation other than saving your life, and the symptoms were very clear. Meanwhile a stent operation is relatively trivial - as was explained later in the piece. If he'd asked for a second opinion it could very well have added enough time to make things a lot worse.

<comment><USER11> Interestingly this article on HN last week addressed the finding that while stents are often prescribed for chest pain symptoms it is doubtful they have a more favorable outcome than other treatments [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13713563#13716162](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13713563#13716162)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Last August I go to bed one night and I feel extremely nauseous with a burden on my chest. After vomiting I feel relieved but the burden is still there. So I decide to visit the ER afraid that I might have a heart attack. They give me all the exams and it turns out it was a stomach problem, specifically GERD which turned out to be a bitch because it took 6 months to cure and a very strict diet.

While at the hospital the doctor informs me that quite a lot of people with stomach issues misinterpret them for heart attacks and vice versa, which is the really troubling thing because they think it's their stomach and they die since they neglect to see a doctor. So I ask him, how do you tell whether it's a stomach or a heart issue? You don't, he replies. If you feel anything funny related to your chest go to a hospital.

<comment><USER13> _the doctor informs me that quite a lot of people with stomach issues misinterpret them for heart attacks and vice versa_

Yeah, my dad died (11 years ago) of a heart attack while he was thinking he had stomach issues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This story and the comments make me curious as to how many hard charging project leaders have, or would, work through a heart attack.

These words stuck out to me:

> I was fucking annoyed – I felt like I was just super tired and needed some > energy, and energy drinks and caffeine weren't doing the trick.

He then went on to keynote a conference and live for what seems like at least two more days without seeking medical attention.

I'm a mid 30's man, my family history includes heart disease, my father is stubborn as am I. If some day I felt tired, and constricted, my first thought would not be that maybe my heart is failing, but it probably shouldn't be my last thought.

We cannot achieve our goals or lead projects if we are dead. This close call woke me up to paying attention to my body, and maybe we all can benefit from it.

<comment><USER15> I'm not completely sold on the relationship of stress and heart disease. I spend some time working in politics, and almost all principals worked 18h-days with less than 5h of sleep during the week. Yet life expectancy is higher than average.

There are obviously ots of competing factors at work: they have plenty of opportunities to eat healthy, and the discipline that makes them get up at 5am also makes them go for a run at 5:30. Then again two of my bosses had to retire after run-ins with the crystal meth law they themselves passed...

Considering the limits of willpower, I'd rank it Smoking/Exercise/Food/Sleep/Stress.

<comment><USER16> > bosses had to retire after run-ins with the crystal meth law they themselves > passed...

Wait, what?

<comment><USER17> Sounds like his bosses were politicians who helped get stricter drug laws passed, then were caught using those drugs.

<comment><USER18> (Presumably to sustain the will power to work 18h days on 5h of sleep)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> "I'd now had been experiencing a heart attack for about a week."

Holy cow. I didn't realize this was possible. This is a good lesson to all of us not to ignore weird, painful phenomena in our body.

<comment><USER20> It's very possible. In EMS I meet folks that have been in having a heart attack for quite some time, it's not always dropping down like a rag doll you see on TV (though many times it is).

My dad did the same thing, one day he had some chest pain that he thought was related to something he ate. Drove a semi truck around for about 6 hours, decided to come home early. He came back to the shop, parked his truck and called my mom and said he had indigestion like he'd never experienced, and they went to the doctor. Turned out to be a full-on heart attack he'd been feeling the last 8 hours.

I guess that's a long way of saying listen to your body. Generally, it's trying to tell you something, and if feels just a little off, get checked out. Could definitely save your life.

<comment><USER21> I'm assuming you mean people can be having an MI, or experiencing angina for quite some time, not actually in cardiac arrest

<comment><USER20> Yes, I edited it for clarity, because by definition cardiac arrest is the sudden stop of blood flow, where MI/AMI/Angina are more gradual. All are commonly called "heart attacks" but are quite different. Thanks for keeping me honest here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Interesting story. Having a skilled doctor is essential to making it out of those situations unscathed. I was lucky enough to have one of those too.

I had an ischemic stroke at the age of 21 while studying abroad in Prague. Rushed to ER and emergency cutting edge surgery, intra-arterial thrombolysis, ensued. This is a 'test' procedure in many parts of the western world. They went through my groin to get to the blot clot in my brain. Woke up that evening in the ER with pretty much no clue what had happened.

While the quality of the care was pretty good, with the surgeon being spectacular, the language barrier made things a bit difficult for my two weeks stay there after! Not to mention I was hands down to everyone's junior in that section of the hospital I was moved to after the ER ha.

Anyway that's the short version of a story I should probably write down somewhere similar to yours. I'm 24 now and completely healthy =). For all the 'making the world a better place (at a macro level)' that us devs are doing it is a nice reminder that making the world a better place on an individual level is probably still the most impact any of us can have. I don't even know what my doctor's name was! But thank you to all you MDs.

<comment><USER23> >For all the 'making the world a better place (at a macro level)' that us devs are doing

Speak for yourself... I'm just automating peoples jobs and subsequently making them unemployed, lol.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> In Ireland when you say "other half" you generally mean wife, husband, boyfriend, girlfriend or partner. And the No. 1 thing I thought reading this was that Rachel, whoever she is, must be a damn saint.

<comment><USER5> They say that in the US as well.

<comment><USER25> Everyone in Ireland and the US says Rachel is a damn saint.

<comment><USER26> Hi Jason. I am wishing you well (Rachel too) from Ireland.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I sleep with my Fitbit Charge 2 on my wrist, and I found that the Resting Heart Rate value is extremely sensitive to what happens with my body. Drank a little alcohol? See a change on my Resting Heart Rate value for that night. Got too much stress, or maybe spent a day at home without exercise? Yes, I see it on the graph. So my question is whether such an event as the one that is described would be clearly visible to the fitness tracker, maybe even clear enough to alert the wearer.

<comment><USER28> One reason I reduced my alcohol intake substantially is the effect that alcohol had on my resting heart rate. It would go up around 90bpm (or higher if I was dealing with a particularly bad hangover the next day). When I abstain it stays around 60.

<comment><USER29> Interesting. Did heart rate monitoring change any other behaviours?

<comment><USER28> Not that I can think of. Same schedule, diet, activity, sleep patterns, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I sat on a "weird pain" in my chest for a few days. Basically it was uncomfortable to sleep on my left side, and I felt a bit short of breath. Turns out I was suffering from a _double pulmonary embolism_ , and that the only reason I wasn't doubled over in pain is because by an odd fluke of nature, the interior of the lungs do not have nerve endings (only the exterior) and had I waited any longer _I could have died._ At that point, a third of both of my lungs was basically gone already. And so, I ended up having to stay for an entire week in the hospital while they dripped anticoagulants into me. If my girlfriend hadn't strongly encouraged me to call my doctor... Who knows.

Guys/gals... If there's any unusual pain in your chest cavity _at all,_ just drop whatever it is you're doing and get it checked out. It might not even seem that bad at the time... it didn't to me and it didn't to Jason Scott... just do it.

<comment><USER31> >Guys/gals... If there's any unusual pain in your chest cavity at all, just drop whatever it is you're doing and get it checked out. It might not even seem that bad at the time... it didn't to me and it didn't to Jason Scott... just do it.

Yeah, but where do you draw the line? I guess that will sound silly, but I'm always afraid that people think of me as a hypochondriac if I ran to the doctor for every little pain, most of them probably being some sprained muscle or indigestion.

<comment><USER4> [https://www.ghc.org/healthAndWellness/?item=%2Fcommon%2Fheal...](https://www.ghc.org/healthAndWellness/?item=%2Fcommon%2FhealthAndWellness%2Fconditions%2FheartDisease%2FchestPain.html)

TLDR: It's probably not a heart attack if you can pinpoint the pain, if the pain gets worse on a deep breath, the pain is related to movement of your shoulder or arm, or if it only lasts a few second.

You should _call_ a doctor if the pain is mild but consistent and is untreatable by pain killers, and remains regardless of if you're resting or not.

You should call 911 or get to a hospital immediately if your chest pain is "crushing" or "squeezing," and _especially_ if it is accompanied by ANY ONE of the following: sweating, shortness of breath, nausea/vomiting, pain that spreads from the chest to the neck, jaw, or one or both shoulders or arms, dizziness or lightheadedness, fast or irregular pulse, severe weakness, inability to walk.

So yea you don't go to the hospital for every pulled muscle, but do your best to memorize the above symptoms of escalating seriousness, and you should be ok.

<comment><USER32> What do you do if you've had symptoms for weeks/months? Until you've been diagnosed with a heart attack, the word "mild" does mean much. People over the age of 35-40 have many chronic mild pains

<comment><USER4> If you've had symptoms for a few hours that are untreatable by medication (like I said), then you call your doctor. Your doctor will tell you whether or not to come in. If it's chronic old-person pain, your doctor will find that out, and tell you next steps.

If you've had symptoms for weeks/months, well, I guess that's probably not a heart attack, good job? Still should have gone in within the first day.

<comment><USER21> You're spot on with your previous post, but just wanted to add a note to anyone reading that if you've been having intermittent chest pain or discomfort for weeks/months, it still could be a heart problem (or reflux or a host of other things) that needs to be checked out. You could have a partial blockage of a coronary blood vessels (the blood vessels that provide blood/oxygen to the heart muscle itself) that provide insufficient blood flow, either when you're active, or randomly.

(this is not medical advice!)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I wonder if a finger blood oxygen meter ($20 on Amazon [1]) is a good tool to diagnose that you might be having a heart attack. It's easy to carry one with you. I am not a doctor, and Googling for it isn't turning up much useful, but it'd seem logical that during a heart attack your blood oxygen would be abnormally low? Perhaps someone in the know can comment?

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Santamedical-Generation- SM-165-Finger...](https://www.amazon.com/Santamedical-Generation- SM-165-Fingertip-Saturation/dp/B00R59OTOC/)

<comment><USER34> A pulse oximiter measures the oxygen content of arterial blood in the peripheries. A heart attack is caused by a localised blockage of the arteries to the heart, causing reduced oxygen and nutrient delivery to an area of heart muscle. A heart attack alone would not affect peripheral oxygen content unless it was severe enough for a complication such as heart failure to develop, but by that stage it's much too late.

Indeed the vast majority of patients with an acute heart attack would have completely normal pulse oximetry findings, the only way to properly diagnose a heart attack is with an electrocardiogram (EKG) and/or blood tests to look for markers of heart muscle damage

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is why it is important that you monitor your stress level and eventually just say "stop." Yes you may miss due dates, plans, and even make some people angry, but at least you don't die. I realize this is not always possible, but the "can do (everything)" attitude is not always the right one.

Also, having a surgery while being awake? Not sure how to think about that. I mean just imagining that makes me feel weird.

<comment><USER36> For a stent, they only use conscious sedation, that's enough. It's not like they open up your chest; they go in through your wrist or your goin.

<comment><USER35> In the article he said he could see his heart on a monitor. Was he maybe referring to the camera they use when they are in your body?

<comment><USER36> There is imaging but not from a camera in the body (blood is not exactly transparent).

It's a form of x-ray video with a tracer in the blood, so they can observe both the guide and the blood irrigation.

 _The doctor will use live x-ray pictures to carefully guide the catheter up into your heart and arteries. Dye will be injected into your body to highlight blood flow through the arteries. This helps the doctor see any blockages in the blood vessels that lead to your heart._

 _A guide wire is moved into and across the blockage. A balloon catheter is pushed over the guide wire and into the blockage. The balloon on the end is blown up (inflated). This opens the blocked vessel and restores proper blood flow to the heart._

Source: [https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/007473.htm](https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/007473.htm)

<comment><USER25> Verified - this is what I saw and what was used on me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Three years ago Jason was speaking at the vintage computer festival in Atlanta. He gave a talk about emscipten and all the cool things they do with it. I talked with him for a bit. Super cool and knowledgeable guy. I wish him well.

<comment><USER38> I attended one of Jason's talks on taking control of your own data. Super inspiring. I went up to ask him a question after (and I _never_ do that!) and went away satisfied.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> * Regardless, I personally would have been fine on the accomplishment/legacy scale, if not on the first-person/relationships/plans scale.*

Jason, I think it's an understatement to say that you've done incredible things on the accomplishments/legacy/contributing-to-society front. Thanks for your incredible work.

I hope the next however-many-years allow you to do all you wish to on the person/relationships/plans front. Godspeed!

</comment><comment><USER40> A (35ish y/o) family friend died 2 months ago from a heart attack, suspected high cholesterol. He was seemingly healthy, active and not overweight.

Anyone else have experience with cholesterol in early 30's?

<comment><USER41> Last time I had my cholesterol checked about 6-7 years ago, it appeared normal, though my HDL was low. I'm 31 now and have been having a weird heart feeling. Not a pain though, but like beating issues. Depending on what I eat and which supplements I take, my heart starts beating weird and my blood pressure goes up.

The weird beating seems like my heart is either beating normally or weakly and then there's a "hiccup" every minute or so. When I lay down with my ear against the pillow when this happens, I can hear my blood flow, which seems weird, like my blood containing tubes/pump is wider than the amount of liquid in the chambers; like an echo-y water flow sound.

Part of me thinks this is the L-arginine I take (to get "swoll" as they say) combined with the amount of caffeine I take in? Another part of me thinks this is a valve issue from bacterial endocarditis, since I still have my wisdom teeth, though I brush 3+x/day, but I've had 2 splinter hemorrhages without trauma on my fingernails recently, though I like any signs of Osler nodes.

I'm 6'1", 184-ish, muscular build, so maybe it's all in my head and the above paragraphs are the result of hypochondria exacerbated by a lack of health insurance or the money to even pay for a routine doctor's visit. I mean, I eat all healthy homemade food; currently cooking black beans + garbonzo beans to make a hummus of sorts.

Hoping my anxiety stays tempered long enough for me to get back on my feet while finishing my current project.

EDIT: I forgot to mention a frequent shortness of breath, though like in Jason Scott's case, this doesn't seem to prevent me from physical activity, but it bothers me that I can't take deep breathes all the time.

<comment><USER42> I used to get these skipped heart beats all the time (I even went to the emergency room thinking I had a heart attack over it several years ago), along with tightness in the chest.

I also went to a cardiologist about it, and he pretty much just said "your EKG is normal and you're fat, work out 7 days a week, have a low fat diet, and lose weight".

It stopped being anywhere near as frequent, along with a drop in resting heart rate, lower blood pressure, less back pain (probably due to less inflammation) once I went on a low carb diet (notice the low fat diet the cardiologist suggested didn't help much) last year. I also lost 45 lbs in four months, mostly just the diet. I certainly didn't work out 7 days a week.

I have periodically cheated since, and each time I get a reminder I shouldn't because I get skipped heart beats, tightness in the chest, and an elevated heart rate and blood pressure.

I'm not sure the mechanism behind this (anyone? local doctors have been completely unhelpful), and I almost wish there was another cause, because every once in awhile I really, really want to have those carbs, but I feel a lot better overall when I don't.

Something to consider.

<comment><USER43> I am not a doctor. Here are some thoughts (addressed to both you and the GP):

I have a hietal hernia[0] that causes reflux and dyspepsia (trouble swallowing) and mimics these heart symptoms: shortness of breath, arrhythmia, chest pain, and tachycardia. A ketogenic diet helps, as does an OTC PPI[1] (e.g. Prilosec, Nexium). You might consider getting scoped to see if you have one as well (or just take a PPI for two weeks and see if it helps).

I've had arrhythmia since I was a teenager. Some of it is sinus (i.e. pressure on my vascular system caused by breathing) and some of it is not[2]. I've found that taking a daily multivitamin helps considerably, as does a diet rich in magnesium and potassium (occasionally supplemented), so I must have some deficiencies. I can't take too much pseudoephedrine (and try to avoid it completely after a particularly scary episode). Regular exercise helps as well. If I start to freak out about a particularly bad spell of arrhythmia and/or palpitations, I tell myself to eat an apple or a banana and go for a walk.

Alcohol and caffeine wreak havoc on all of the above, so I can't drink like I did in my 20s, and I try to limit myself to one pot of coffee per day. ;-)

 _> "your EKG is normal and you're fat"_

If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that...

If you have bacterial endocarditis[3], that could explain why a low-carb diet is helpful: lower blood sugar -> less fuel for bacteria -> reduced heart valve inflammation. Maybe.

I have something else going on right now that I don't understand: waking up at night with back pain under my right shoulder blade, anxiety, and arrhythmia. I went to the hospital after the third incident and the EKG, blood work, chest X-ray, CT scan, etc. didn't reveal anything. I suspect it's stress-related and either an ulcer or bacterial endocarditis, so I need to get those looked at by specialists. I also had a clot in my leg last year for which I needed six months of blood thinners, so I wonder if that's related...

Getting old sucks.

0\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiatus_hernia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiatus_hernia)

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton- pump_inhibitor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton-pump_inhibitor)

2\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premature_ventricular_contract...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premature_ventricular_contraction)

3\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infective_endocarditis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infective_endocarditis)

<comment><USER42> Thanks for that, I'll look into it. I wouldn't be surprised if I had something similar to that hernia. I thought I had pancreatitis for awhile, but that looks like it fits better.

I also just got an MRI and an ultrasound for a hard lump on my leg to make sure it wasn't a clot (they thought it was cellulitis but antibiotics didn't make it go away, now they think it was cellulitis and the remnants just might just stick around for awhile).

Honestly I'm just tired of getting all this checked out all the time. I max out my rather high deductible pretty quick these past couple of years, mostly to get tests taken that (so far) have been negative, so I don't really know what's actually wrong (although apparently the doctors don't ever think it's too serious, but I'm worried they make some assumptions because of my weight and something more serious might be hiding).

I agree, getting old sucks. And I'm still considered too 'young' for half the things they're testing on me, from what they keep telling me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Wow, this is timely, I'm going to stay with my Dad while he goes in for heart surgery on Monday. It's kind of terrifying since he's had no heart problems his entire life until very recently, and unless he was taking his pulse for another issue wouldn't have even known it as he's had no other symptoms or any sort of discomfort.

I also used to work with an older guy who had known heart problems and a defibrillator. He worked on a piece of equipment that required him to lean over a big moving dangerous piece of mechanical moving death trap. One day we noticed him leaning in in a weird way, jolting and then getting back into the correct position as if nothing had happened, it happened three times during a week. We talked to him and he just insisted he was tired. But the shift boss took him off the equipment and told him to go see his doctor. They checked his defibrillator and it had gone off something like a half-dozen times in that week. His heart had stopped and he would have died a couple different ways if he hadn't had that thing in his chest. He never even knew anything was happening except feeling lethargic. But he wasn't passing out, he was dying.

Jason Scott on the other hand had lots of discomfort, but didn't realize it was his heart at all. The signs of heart trouble are so many and this just reminds me of how unclear they can be. We're a lot better off with a Jason Scott than without, so I'm delighted to hear that they caught the trouble and sorted it out with what sounds to be a miracle of modern science.

</comment><comment><USER45> I wonder all the time why we don't have more widely available, "consumer grade" tech like handheld ECGs, etc., to help better detect stuff like this. (There are products like this, but not in U.S. markets to my understanding - at least not without a prescription)

If you're unfortunate enough to suffer from something like anxiety attacks and also have heart trouble in your family's medical history it is very difficult (and expensive) to ascertain if you're having a panic attack or an actual cardiac episode.

<comment><USER46> We are currently beta testing a device that can take your EKG and provide some level of analysis on your phone. If you are interested, we have currently have a private beta and have a few more openings! Of course we have much more planning in our production version. Please feel free to take a look: www.grektek.com. As the other reader mentions, cardiologists are the ultimate judges and even that can be difficult, but we have found helpful information can often be gleaned using our device and App.

<comment><USER21> Cool product -- especially like the idea of medication reminders in the watch. Is the silver thing on the face of the watch the second electrode for your EKG?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> If you read this... I'm very happy that you are ok. Thank you for sharing your story and I hope that it helps to save someone else's life. Prayers for healing. Rest easy.

<comment><USER25> I read it, and thank you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> All of the symptoms can also be caused by panic disorder. Advice like "IF YOU FEEL ANY DISCOMFORT AT ALL GO TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM ASAP" is bad advice for people with anxiety disorders.

Go to a doctor and get checked out to rule out any heart issues. If it's panic disorder, there are safe drugs that are great at making these symptoms go away.

</comment><comment> ryan-allen My dad dropped dead from an arrhythmia whilst at work. People nearby performed CPR on him immediately, the ambulance was there within 7 minutes and he was rushed to the Alfred hospital in Melbourne.

He was literally dead for 20 minutes, but they managed to revive him and a few weeks later, with a newly installed pacemaker, better than new.

He had a very, very, very high probability of dying, or requiring specialised care due to brain damage from brain hypoxia. Those that knew CPR, and did it properly for those excruciating 7 minutes gave him his life back.

The moral of the story is, if something feels awry, go and see a doctor (he wasn't taking it seriously), and learn CPR, you might just save someone's life.

Oh, and our hospitals and doctors/nurses are top notch. He was in intensive care for a few days and the final bill was a few hundred dollars. Hooray for universal healthcare!

<comment><USER28> I'm glad that your dad is OK. Was he experiencing symptoms prior to him falling unconscious at work?

<comment> ryan-allen He was having occasional shortness of breath at night. He wasn't particularly good at reporting symptoms, and our GP was a bit of a dingdong (he should have been rushed to a cardiac unit in retrospect after a recent round of testing, rather than be sent home).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> That's quite the story. I'm glad he made it-the loss of him would have been keenly felt.

</comment><comment><USER50> I had a spontaneous pneumothorax in my late teens. I was lying in bed and felt a sudden extreme pain in my chest. It was worsened with every breath. I had been drinking and decided to try and sleep it off. Over the next couple of weeks the pain got slightly better but persisted, and I noticed a shortness of breath. Eventually I went to the doctor and was sent straight to hospital where I discovered my left lung was 50% collapsed.

I've had several more subsequently and went straight to hospital each time. Thankfully I haven't had a recurrence in years now, but I learned the same lesson the author of this post did - you shouldn't ignore chest pain.

</comment><comment><USER25> Hi, I'm Jason Scott. I had a heart attack and I'm the one who wrote the essay this is linking to.

Since the entry was written last week, I went back to the Emergency Room twice. The first was because I was just feeling "a little weird", and they did a round of tests and verified that no, I'm healing fine, that's just how I feel now (I feel less weird every day). The second time was a few days later when I experienced a notable shortness of breath. This time, the cardiologist said it was likely a side effect of one of my drugs (it's known to do this) and we swapped the medication. Now I'm feeling pretty great.

I mention this because one of the themes of messages in here are "I don't want to be a bother/I don't know if this warrants a trip to the ER" and those two thoughts should NOT be calculated into your deciding to go. Believe me, they'd MUCH rather work on "guy feels funny" than "guy got shot by other guy in argument over the Playstation" or "Guy drank so much he crapped himself and fell onto a sprinkler and is bleeding profusely".

The doctors thought I should not fly for two weeks after the procedure, so we booked an AirBNB for the extra time. My hosts of the two events I spoke at (ACMI and MuseumNext) have essentially paid for this entire extra AirBNB time, which is generous and wonderful and I give a shout-out to them. Additionally, the hospital gave me a letter indicating I couldn't fly, and MuseumNext was able to move my international flight with no real added cost; that's also worth a shout-out. Melbourne is a very nice place to be resting.

The main annoying part is I was (mostly) doing the right things, health wise - I had dropped 30 pounds, and was walking like crazy - I'd upped my step goals on the fitbit after I kept smashing them. On a trip to Japan last year for three weeks, I'd walked over 160 miles. I'd done this because I'd seen so many contemporaries drop dead or get really sick in their 40s and 50s - <USER2> life is not a healthy life. The silent and unaddressed problem, on my side, was cholesterol - it was choking my arteries. Drugs will help that, but I've now radically shifted my diet to approach it naturally as well. I'm raring to go on long walks again, so I will definitely continue that. But please bear in mind - I might still die! Nothing is guaranteed!

I also see a lot of differing opinions on "see doctors" versus "not see doctors". I can't imagine how having a regular doctor checkup is in any way bad. It might not affect what you DIE OF, but it can't hurt quality of life - when I had bad kidney stones for years, it was certainly my doctor who gave me the drug that fixed that. And other small notes have made my life better as well.

Money/cost issues are worth a whole other post.

Finally: I see that 25% of the thread is an argument over linking to the title versus describing the essay's contents. I see people are VERY INTENTLY CONCERNED over the two sides in this discussion. As always, HN knows where to aim the energy.

<comment><USER51> I don't have anything to add other than to say thank you for sharing this with us, and I wish you a speedy and full recovery.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> A tablet of aspirin taken (even chewed if it's too bad) by the first symptoms of the chest pain can save your life.

<comment><USER53> Why? Because: (small amount works, chewed is better) [http://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/aspirin-for- heart...](http://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/aspirin-for-heart-attack- chew-or-swallow)

<comment><USER54> As an aside, I know this simply from experience with taking drugs recreationally. Chewed or otherwise ground up pills hit you faster, and I've found dissolving a ground up pill in hot water is the winner, as far as time to kick in.

Pharmaceutical pills have all sorts of additives intended to delay the release of the active chemical, recreational pills have an obviously less rigorously tested version of the same.

My mother, a (retired) cardiovascular pharmacologist, taught me that the quality/effectiveness of those additives is often what differentiates brand name drugs from generics (sometimes significantly, admittedly she's been retired for quite a while now, so that information might be out of date, but she actually did some professional research on the subject back in the day).

I'll never forget the time when I, at about the age of 11, was sent in to the store to buy a big bottle of Aleve that my mom was going to "smuggle" across the border to Canada for her sister (Naproxen was prescription only at the time in Canada, but available OTC in the US - amusingly, Tylenol w/codeine was the inverse). I bought a generic naproxen sodium instead (thinking I was so clever for saving about half the money I'd been given), and I got chewed out and sent back into the store to replace it. That was what she got for teaching me to actually read the active ingredients of drugs on the label ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Something that I learned in a recent first-aid class: the symptoms for a heart attack often differ between women and men and that women more often experience burning sensations that can be confused with heartburn or indigestion. This can contribute to more women not seeking medical care because the symptoms can be more nuanced.

Better safe than sorry, especially where the heart is concerned.

</comment><comment><USER56> I love Jason Scott. Just a real upstanding guy. Hoping for a speedy recovery!

</comment><comment><USER57> How is it THAT IN 2017 someone is still designing business critical systems with single points of failure?!

Seriously though I wish him a full recovery and we all need to remind ourselves that all too often we lose track of what's really, life stoppingly, important.

<comment><USER58> Fair's fair: the system flagged up an error condition, and faced with a quarter of the critical system failed degraded performance but kept going until it could be patched.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Two Christmases ago I had a 100% blockage of the LAD for about 45 minutes - the time it took to get me from my house to the cardiac unit. It's called the Widow Maker for a reason. I was extremely lucky in that the pain was acute enough we called 911 immediately, and both the firehouse and hospital were very close by. I was 41 and in excellent health. No drinking, smoking, drugs, etc.

If you're feeling chest pain, please don't mess around. Get checked immediately. Better to feel silly than miss a heart attack and die!

</comment><comment><USER60> My highest appreciation for Dr. Sonny Palmer. He went above and beyond his duties and I truly believe he is not the exception, but the norm.

</comment><comment><USER61> Man that's young.. What are the best ways of actually reversing blocked arteries/artherosclerosis? Excercise? Statins?

</comment><comment><USER62> As the article started out describing spending an exorbitant amount of money to achieve a bunch of non-essential goals (not counting being with his father, of course) I was expecting "the other half" to refer to a friend or acquaintance without "means" dying in an alley due to lack of funds for medical treatment.

<comment><USER25> I'll get it better next time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> Who is this about? I read a well-written and beautiful story, I just have no idea what the context is.

<comment><USER64> Jason Scott is a computer archiver, in that he works to preserve the history of all things computing. He works for the Internet Archive.

He's been featured around here a few times: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=textfiles.com&sort=byPopularit...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=textfiles.com&sort=byPopularity&prefix&dateRange=all)

One of the more memorable posts was the one where they worked frantically to preserve a warehouse full of old manuals: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10076974](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10076974)

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

(and even his cat has a wikipedia page: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockington](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockington))

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> I saw Jason perform at Internet Archive's anniversary party this year and was really captivated by his stage presence, showmanship, and ability to wrangle and move a show forward.

Glad he's doing OK. Good vibes, Jason!

</comment><comment><USER66> Quick readability fix: open DevTools and paste:

        document.body.style.fontSize = '14pt';
        document.body.style.fontFamily = 'Georgia,Cambria,Times,Times New Roman,serif'

<comment><USER67> Or click your browser's "reader" button.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Really glad he got in there and got it taken care of before it got really bad.

I cringed when I read he was chugging energy drinks to stay awake, given the context of the post.

</comment><comment><USER68> I hope Jason recovers in time for DefCon.

<comment><USER69> lol

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> Sending healing thoughts your way, Jason!

</comment><comment><USER71> Good ending now.

I wonder after reading, is Wikipedia the new "Who's who in America?"

>[His] Wikipedia page.

</comment><comment><USER72> I love that textiles.com exists

</comment><comment><USER73> Jason described HN once as "the ass-end of the tech elite" and I still use that quote to this day. Wonderful dude.

</comment><comment><USER74> Once again, the policy on headline titles for articles on HackerNews is a bit bizarre. The original title explained that the man almost died. This current title is "The Other Half" and does not explain anything at all.

As a practical matter, the policy seems to amount to "We use the title of the original article, unless it is strongly stated, in which case we regard it as clickbait and change it to something dull." That is not a good policy, since we should all hope for and promote strong writing, and the fact that a strong headline could be confused for clickbait is not a good reason to change it. Nor should the default be "use the article's original title" since a better default would be "Highlight what part of this article would be interesting to the Hacker News audience."

<comment><USER75> That doesn't work. The submitter of an HN story doesn't own the story; stories are community property. Submitting doesn't entitle you to choose for the whole site what is or isn't interesting about a story. If you want to do that, you write a comment, like everybody else.

This is one of the oldest meta-arguments on the site. Once or twice a month, perhaps, we get a story that isn't particularly well served by the guidelines, and people have to click one more time than they might have, or read a few more sentences than they might have. But pretty much every day, and probably more frequently than that, we see problems stemming from the guideline being broken.

Almost everybody reading these comments knows what this story is about now. It's a shame a pointless meta-complaint is bolted to the top of the thread, instead of something actually about the post itself.

<comment><USER74> tptacek, I never suggested that the person submitting the article should have monopoly control of the title. My comment is aimed at dang. I suggest the default question to be answered in the title should be "What part of this article is interesting to the Hacker News crowd?" It's fine if dang re-writes all the titles, but why re-write the title to make it something dull or confusing? We've all seen cases where the original title of a blog post was deemed too strong, and was thus re-written to make it something dull -- the kind of title that a college professor of writing would give a bad grade and suggest "You need a bolder title." We should generally want strong writing, because strong writing is good writing.

<comment><USER75> Ah, sorry. That's a more reasonable request. I shouldn't have responded so petulantly.

I still think it's not going to work out. There aren't many moderators, and fixing the titles on this site is a huge amount of work. For instance, it's also probably not reasonable to expect the mods to read every story on the site, or even just the stories with broken titles.

A thing you can do to help is, when an article has a title that doesn't follow the guidelines, _suggest a better title_. The mods often use those suggestions as the replacement title.

<comment><USER76> And rather than rely on the moderators having to sift through comments and hope they see a suggested better title, email them directly with the HN submission link/id and your suggested better title.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER77> Why the title change? "archive.org guy nearly died" was much more direct/informative. I wouldn't take a second glace at this thread under "the other half" assuming it to be marriage advice.

<comment><USER78> Because it's the author's own title. That's significant, especially for so intimate and personal a piece.

It's true that one can trade that off for immediate factual placeability, but on HN we prefer to make the opposite tradeoff. That's one of many reasons why the guidelines say "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." ([https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html))

<comment><USER79> I recently saw a suggestion that there should be two titles: one that's the author's own title and a second that's the HN submission title (which could be identical if the HN submitter prefers so). Any opinion on the suggestion?

<comment><USER78> In my opinion, too complicated, and people would use it to editorialize.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages | Dr Dobb's - <AUTHOR> http://www.drdobbs.com/jvm/the-comparative-productivity-of-programm/240005881 <comment><USER2> For those who read the comments before the content, ABORT ABORT! It's not even worth your time to read about why it's not worth your time.

<comment><USER3> Agreed.

Also -- ASP is not a language, unless they're talking about VBScript, which I would have thought would be lumped with VB.

<comment><USER2> That didn't bother me. I think there's a legit argument to be made for classic ASP as its own language. The lack of distinction between .NET and pre-.NET languages was the irksome bit for me. Edit: But far from the _only_ irksome bit, hence my warning to others. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Agree with Softbuilder. Treating all function points equally and trying to come up with a generic "programming hours per fp" is about as useful as asking "How heavy is a rock?"

</comment><comment><USER5> The list of languages covered made me look at the date on the article. I was almost certain it would be pre-y2k.

Sounds like a blinkered enterprise Java-centric worldview to me. To have ASP as the only scripting environment listed is just plain crazy in 2012. If you're going to include scripting at all, where are Ruby, Python, Perl, PHP, Javascript? If you want to talk about the productivity boost from high-level languages, you have to include these.

<comment><USER6> The last paragraph of the article is devoted to explaining why that is.

PHP was still a bit surprising, but the answer might be in the list there, too. Any list that ranks classic ASP, COBOL, _and_ C# has to be working with source data that represents a very particular and non-representative corner of the software industry. Of course with a chance to look at that data costing €5,200 we can probably only speculate. . .

<comment><USER5> As was softbuilder, I was motivated to ABORT before the last paragraph - thanks for persevering for the team!

Reminds me of the Monty Python killer joke sketch where the joke is translated by a team of people line by line.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Now I know not to use Cobol for my next project, with data to back that up. Progress.</comment>


F1 designer Gordon Murray pens light-weight city car - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11301831 <comment><USER2> Why don't they just add wheels to the sardine can and be done with it?</comment>


Is there a better browser than Firefox? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Well, as a Firefox user, I surely could sound very biased, but as for my main browser FF is still the best.

Surely there are great options, depending your needs, for example Ungoogled Chromium or Brave Browser, if you're looking for something that gives a Chrome-like experience, but without all the data gathering from Google (Ungoogled Chromium) or with some privacy-minded features already integrated (Brave).

There's also Waterfox, which is a Firefox fork (I can be wrong with this description! But that is how I understand it) that is still compatible with the old addons (XUL). There's also another project on GitLab named LibreWolf that it will be (or already is) a Firefox fork that (based on the Librefox project), in a similar fashion to Ungoogled Chromium), it has removed several mozilla-only features such as the integrated telemetry, and I think that also the "studies" feature. It also attempts to integrate some privacy-minded features in a similar way that Brave browser do. As the last time that I checked the project, they already have created some builds for Linux. I'm not quite sure if they have started to work on OSx/Windows builds.

I don't know which are your parameters to determine which browser could be better than Firefox, but it could help to take a look at those (and perhaps other) projects, use them for a while, and see which of them suits better for you.

Links:

Ungoogled Chromium: [https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled- chromium](https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium)

Brave Browser: [https://brave.com/](https://brave.com/)

Waterfox: [https://www.waterfox.net/](https://www.waterfox.net/)

LibreWolf: [https://gitlab.com/librewolf- community](https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community)

Kind regards.

</comment><comment><USER3> Yeah, Chrome/Chromium.

</comment><comment><USER4> Brave

</comment><comment><USER5> Lynx

</comment><comment><USER6> No.

</comment><comment><USER7> Try opera

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I use it for a long time. Maybe there is a better alternative</comment>


A fireside chat with Apple's Jonathan Ive - Apple 2.0 - <AUTHOR> http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/07/01/a-fireside-chat-with-apples-jonathan-ive/ <comment><USER2> This isn't a fireside chat; it's a report on a report of a talk he gave.

Here's the original: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/07/listening_to_m...](http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/07/listening_to_mr_iphone.html)

I'm surprised Ive mentioned Jobs, since Apple doesn't want to associate themselves too strongly with him these days.

<comment><USER3> _since Apple doesn't want to associate themselves too strongly with him these days_

Hunh?

<comment><USER2> To me, it seems like they are shying away from being focused on him. Their coverage of his time away and return was as minimal as possible. They probably don't want to look weak if Jobs has to leave due to further health problems.

<comment><USER4> Haven't they always behaved in an understated manner with respect to Jobs, though? The Steve-as-Savior meme is entirely an external creation by the media, happy investors, and fans. I don't recall, for example, any Apple press release that has ever focused on Jobs, except the one when they bought NeXT, and the other when he went on leave.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Besides "Show Hacker News", where do you promote your side projects? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Who is your target market? If for example it's students then you can post a job on websites like WayUp, look for interns to help you spread the word. There is a fee on such websites but you do get interns plus people who are interested in your product to try it in the process. If your target market is actors for example then you can do similar things in casting websites...get the idea?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, everyone, for the suggestions. I think the "niche" suggestions were the most helpful. I haven't had much feedback from Show HN. Just FYI, the project is a mathematical oriented drawing app for Android. It's here: [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.doodleback...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.doodleback.play)

</comment><comment><USER3> My side-projects are mostly mathematical, so I used to post announcements on usenet sci.math.research pointing to the page on my website. Now I don't announce at all, I figure that interested people will probably find them via search and spread the word if the code's any good, ignore it if it's rubbish. I get some of each :-)

<comment><USER4> unfortunately google is not supportive of newish content these days. if you re interested in some feedback , would be worth to simply post on reddit or some other forum, or to a twitter audience if you have the time

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I see a couple of posts mentioning IndieHackers.

I'd say IH is a great resource for "Side Hustles"

But I think of "Side Projects" as a different thing.

It doesn't look like the place where you post your OSS GitHub project hoping to find (non-paying) adopters and build a community.

</comment><comment> Pete-Codes Twitter is huge.

Indiehackers is great but they will know if you arent contributing as well.

Product Hunt is good for initial launch but don't let the vanity metrics go to your head.

</comment><comment><USER4> show hn > reddit > alternativeTo imho. indiehackers and other small communities are just too little traffic so i feel like i m spamming them. product hunt is either hit, or miss completely. reddit has /sideprojects and /imadethis , but you could also promote it to niche subreddits related to your project

</comment><comment><USER5> The channels I'm trying to use, in order of most success:

* Hacker News

* Dev.to

* Reddit

* Twitter

</comment><comment><USER6> Mostly niche groups. HN isn't really the right target market.

</comment><comment><USER7> * IndieHackers

* Niche Facebook groups</comment>


Zapping Their Brains at Home - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/zapping-their-brains-at-home.html?ribbon-ad-idx=19&rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=context&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article <comment><USER3> There are things worse than people experimenting on themselves. A world where there are such stringent controls that people are caught and/or punished for doing it, or where scientists are do not continue to study and publish for fear of what a few people will do is quite obviously worse.

I am glad that there is at least an attempt here to engage and warn people. (If I were interested in doing this, I would definitely heed the warning myself!)

Having said that, we ultimately have to remember and respect the right to individual self-determination, as well as the incredible value of openness in scientific research.

While I'm not willing to do this to myself, what if these people are onto something, and their experimentation leads to something that enriches our world? (I'm not saying that it's likely, but it is possible.) It's not anyone's place to do much more than warn them, as has been done, and then to let them be.

<comment><USER4> While I'm in agreement with everything you've said, I'd like to try and play devil's advocate:

You could expand this to say that not wearing a seat-belt should be made legal or that all drugs should be made legal or many other things where informed consent should be made legal. The problem is that not only many people are less responsible or intelligent than you might be, their irresponsibility can lead to harming other people. Suppose the effects of a person experimenting on themselves might cause some temporary loss of focus or control as a direct result and this would happen while they were driving or operating heavy machinery etc. There is a certain balance between personal freedom and laws that limit it, and sometimes this balance is not in favor of a minority that don't need the law, but it has to apply to all.

Again, I don't agree with the above argument - just think one should be ready for it when it is given.

<comment><USER5> Not wearing a seatbelt is legal in many places, or at least not enforced. And enforcing brain zapping would be even harder, because people do it in the privacy of their own homes.

But the argument isn't about legality. It's whether scientists should work with these people. They are going to brain zap anyway. The scientists have nothing to lose by collecting their data. They could also give helpful warnings and information to limit the harm.

But above all don't call them idiots for trying this. There are desperate people with serious conditions that are willing to take a small risk for anything that might help their condition. The medical system is very slow, conservative, and risk averse, in adopting new treatments. So people that want better treatments are forced to take it into their own hands. If doctors offered this treatment today, this wouldn't be an issue.

<comment><USER4> Just in case I was misunderstood, I'm definitely not calling them idiots for doing this. This generalization is part of why I oppose the argument.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It may be relevant to point out that the efficacy of tDCS is far from established so far:

[http://www.brainstimjrnl.com/article/S1935-861X(15)00857-8/a...](http://www.brainstimjrnl.com/article/S1935-861X\(15\)00857-8/abstract)

> Methods

> Single-session tDCS data in healthy adults (18–50) from every cognitive > outcome measure reported by at least two different research groups in the > literature was collected. Outcome measures were divided into 4 broad > categories: executive function, language, memory, and miscellaneous. To > account for the paradigmatic variability in the literature, we undertook a > three-tier analysis system; each with less-stringent inclusion criteria than > the prior. Standard mean difference values with 95% CIs were generated for > included studies and pooled for each analysis.

> Results

> Of the 59 analyses conducted, tDCS was found to not have a significant > effect on any – regardless of inclusion laxity. This includes no effect on > any working memory outcome or language production task.

<comment><USER7> I cannot stop laughing.

Evolution might be dumb (i.e., non-intelligent). But it has had millions of years to optimise an electric channel. Give that some credit. We cannot sit down with current tools to push the envelope with just decades of (mis)understanding.

<comment><USER8> Evolution only helped millions of years of our ancestors get laid. Doesn't mean you can't push the envelope with a dab of makeup.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The HN discussion a couple of weeks ago on "Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers"[1] (144 comments) might be of interest.

The topic has appeared on HN other times, but never getting >=10 comments.

[1]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12078895](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12078895)

</comment><comment><USER10> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKUL5E2woc)

<comment><USER11> hahaha, I just finished reading the letter from the neuroscientists, and this sort of thing is exactly what they were talking about. very appropriate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Tms especially has been looked into heavily by researchers as well as the military over the last 20 years. The results have been remarkable both as treatment but also as a concentration/ skill and learning booster with effects being maintained long after treatment. I believe NPR did a segment on this recently as well.

It's ironic to think that given everything we think we know about how the brain functions , such a gross and simple procedure as wiring a battery to your head or inducing a magnetic field would have such strong and even beneficial effects.

[https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=transcranial+magnetic+s...](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=transcranial+magnetic+stimulation+military&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjqx7KG6YrOAhUQcCYKHSwDCScQgQMIIjAA)

<comment><USER13> I'd guess that putting the brain and body in novel states would stimulate all kinds of effects. Do you know of any more general studies on novel states? Does the impact of the treatment (TMS) reduce over time (not persistent effects, but the effect from a single treatment)?

<comment><USER12> As to your first question I am not sure what you define as 'novel state', I am assuming you do not mean in the form of and LSD trip. But if you could clarify I could attempt to address your question.

An interesting example would be the treatment of migraines, and or focal epilepsy using TMS. Migraine treatment with TMS, is believed to set the brain in a controlled firing rhythm, whereas migraines are believed to be caused by uncoordinated neural firing similar to epilepsy but in a milder form.

Recently the FDA has approved such a treatment: [http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/uc...](http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm378608.htm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There should be a way for these DIY-ers to share what they're doing with each other and the scientific and medical community. An application that can provide a network of support and communication would be beneficial to these neuro-adventurers (current mental and emotional state, motivations, treatment plans, etc). Self-medication is not a bad idea, but it can require proper guidance and information to be truly effective.

<comment><USER15> I mean [https://www.reddit.com/r/nootropics](https://www.reddit.com/r/nootropics) exists. Probably very few members if any have any involvement in medicine, but there's a lot of emphasis on randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, etc., whenever available.

<comment><USER16> Not really. More an emphasis on people with vague notions having their vague notions cemented by other over-confident under-informed people with more- cemented notions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Ben Krasnow has an awesome project using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rather than Transcranial direct-current stimulation)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUW7dQ92yDU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUW7dQ92yDU) (part1)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_olmdAQx5s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_olmdAQx5s) (part2)

<comment><USER18> It seems like this would be a more viable path, as TDCS has been shown to have a negligible effect on the voltage in the brain when tested on cadavers - <USER2> doesn't penetrate.

Since the magnetic approach induces the current, it seems more likely to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> From [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self- experimentation_in_medici...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self- experimentation_in_medicine)

"A number of distinguished scientists have indulged in self-experimentation, including at least five Nobel laureates; in several cases, the prize was awarded for findings the self-experimentation made possible. Many experiments were dangerous; various people exposed themselves to pathogenic, toxic or radioactive materials. Some self-experimenters, like Jesse Lazear and Daniel Alcides Carrión, died in the course of their research."

</comment><comment><USER20> Always a bit scary when people experiment on themselves. I've never understood why people would put their own brain at risk, either through untested drugs or untested therapies.

<comment><USER21> Having had experience with pharmaceutical therapies for ADHD and depression, I must say that the paternalistic medical approach towards those leave a lot to be desired.

You generally need to see a doctor or prescribing nurse on a monthly basis in order to get a prescription. The value of this visit seems to be fairly low, however; all of the monitoring they do is purely through self reporting, so they are relying on someone going through complex mental issues to self report accurately about whether something is helping or hurting. I have never once had a provider actually perform any kind of testing to determine if any part of my cognition has improved or declined with the use of these drugs.

These are powerful drugs with strong side effects and withdrawal effects. Even with just self reporting, I feel like my providers frequently brush off issues I report; as long as I'm not having severe physical side effects, they figure it's fine.

Then I had my prescribing nurse quit, and my therapist quit shortly afterwards, right before I moved to a new state and had to switch primary care providers at the same time. Of course, it can take months to go through the enrollment process, wait for medical records to get transferred, wait to find an available appointment, and so on.

This gap in coverage led me not to be able get my prescriptions filled, and thus had to deal with the fairly severe withdrawal symptoms while in the middle of dealing with a fairly stressful move. I had to take some time off work because I couldn't think straight, due to the combined withdrawal effects and stress of the move, and spend a lot of time scrambling begging various people to make appointments soon to get temporary prescription refills, before eventually just giving up and deciding to finish going through withdrawal.

Given that kind of background, of how poorly managed and frustrating to deal with drug-based therapies are, I can see the appeal to self-controlled therapies that don't rely on this complex, fragile, and overbooked network of licensed medical providers.

That said, I wouldn't try this kind of thing out on myself; one of my complaints about the drug based therapies is that they are entirely based on self-reported outcomes, and I find that lack of any kind of rigorous testing of whether they are effective or whether they are having unintended consequences in other areas of cognition quite troubling. But I can see the appeal of having something that doesn't rely on this fairly unreliable and in many cases unhelpful network of medical providers.

<comment><USER22> >This gap in coverage led me not to be able get my prescriptions filled //

I'm in the UK, on prescription with a fixed dose. When the tablets run out I'm responsible for renewal. Part of the problem with my "condition(s)" is memory troubles, my short term memory is terrible. I also have anxiety on communicating using the telephone.

The system is fine if one can manage oneself; I can't do that sufficiently.

What I don't understand is why, as the Doctor has prescribed a long-term regime of tablets and the dose is fixed, why there's no system to order my medication and then notify me. Now I realise that not re-ordering if it's not needed is an efficiency but if I've not reordered and the Doctor hasn't OK-ed it then something is going wrong in my life that medical authorities need to know to treat me: like I've been hospitalised, or I'm suffering flu-like symptoms (withdrawal) and starting to get encroaching thoughts of self-harm and suicide.

Last time I collected my medication the pharmacy (not physically connected to the doctor's clinic) told me I had to call the doctor for a in-person review. Took me a month to drum up the courage to phone them, first available appointment was 3 weeks away.

Now, I consider myself to be quite healthy, generally capable, not really that ill. There doesn't seem to be anything in place to allow this system (of review and medication acquisition) to take account of how my condition disables me from using the system. If I had severe memory loss I don't see how I'd manage at all - I presume I'd be treated differently and that I'm just falling through the gaps a little because my condition is not so severe.

TL;DR observations on impact of mental health on using UK health services.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> On a slightly related note, has anyone tried Thync ([http://www.thync.com/](http://www.thync.com/)). It uses tDCS. Wanted to know anyone's experience with the device?

</comment><comment><USER24> hmm... feels like there is something missing in this article. nice introduction and then the article ends. more like a recap of past events. Would like to hear some summary/conclusion/insights of the in reach diy "probands".

</comment><comment><USER25> I wonder if there are any studies that show this type of stimulation would be effective for Dyslexia?

<comment><USER26> I rtied ti nad my lysdexia gto crued. Sussecc!</comment></comment>


Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies - <AUTHOR> https://stratechery.com/2020/apple-amazon-and-common-enemies/ <comment><USER2> It's still baffling that Apple is allowed to have such strict controls over their platform while still competing with the products they're charging rent to to be on it (i.e. iTunes & Spotify).

I get why some make the analogy with _Grocery Stores_ and stocking their in- house brands (e.g. Safeway with Signature, Apple with iTunes), but with Apple, it's like the customer has already bought the grocery store and Apple is still charging rent on their shelves.

At least it looks like they're loosening the controls a bit with deals, but that's only for big overlapping partners like Amazon.

<comment><USER3> This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience.

As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early!

As a customer, I'd prefer _even stricter_ controls on the app store and even more curation to keep pushing the application quality higher. If Apple needs to charge developers to ensure the quality of applications is constantly improving, then I'm happy they do. I'm also happy to wait for a killer app[1], deploy it to Android first and then bring it over to iOS when the demand is enough to negotiate with Apple.

[1] e.g. When I switched over to iOS I had to give up Swiping to type on my keyboard, for a few years till iOS was able to catch up. I understood Apple's rationale and waited. Now with iOS and a Swipe keyboard I am an even happier customer.

<comment><USER4> > I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience

100% agree. I pay the premium because of the walled garden. I _prefer_ it. I _want_ Apple to have a tight grip over suppliers. I _want_ Apple to have a tight grip over the experience on their platforms. I _want_ Apple to have a tight grip over their 3rd party developers.

In fact, I say this as an engineer myself; I even develop for Apple's platform so I'm impacted by their dev-facing decisions!

In my nearly 2 decade history with Apple as a customer, I often align with their principles and I want them to make decisions for me. I _do not_ value an open platform. I only value a good user experience and I value my problems being solved in _consistent_ and elegant ways with a focus on design.

People act as if customers are somehow duped into the walled garden. NO! That's missing the entire thesis of Apple and the driving force behind their success.

This is my opinion and you don't have to agree with it. I almost never express this opinion in discussions like this because why bother. But I figured it's helpful for others to see this opinion represented.

<comment><USER2> Are those mutually exclusive though?

Apple can control the user experience on the device you bought without forcing a 30% surcharge against the competition.

<comment><USER4> > Apple can control the user experience on the device you bought without > forcing a 30% surcharge against the competition.

I don't disagree with you.

My response was meant to be general, not a direct response to the article. I didn't mean to imply that Apple gets everything right. I just wanted to express how all the things that HN thinks Apple gets wrong, are exactly the things that I (and many others) value deeply and pay a premium for.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> >Content has extremely high fixed costs, and zero marginal costs; it follows, then, that the fiscally responsible content producers sell that content to as many outlets as possible

I wonder if this means Netflix may try to maximize some of it's best content more by taking out of streaming inventory and charging to purchase/rent individual series and movies? all within the Netflix app?

<comment><USER6> Netflix doesn't need or want to segment the market. Most consumers will stick with one streaming service that is good enough. Apple needs transactions. Netflix needs subscriptions. Amazon takes both but really only wants prime members. Amazon is actually useful though because you can consolidate HBO, showtime etc.. under a single login. It can work under Apple but it's a lot harder to switch between devices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> TLDR: Both are afraid of Netflix making channel subscriptions superfluous.

It's an interesting read with lots of explanations.

<comment><USER8> I think this whole way of thinking about Netflix is dumb though, e.g. " Netflix dominating means that shows are sold directly to Netflix."

Netflix is not good at creating content. As time goes forward, Netflix is even less good as they need to cater to mass markets, thereby losing niche markets, and without having a brand or catalog like a Disney, or live sports, or trusted news, etc.

Netflix is not a business entity I would long. It is absolutely a fad, and will lose negotiating power to distributors and content creators.

<comment><USER9> > Netflix is not good at creating content.

Why would you say that? These days, many of the most talked about and watched shows are Netflix content. Like for instance, Tiger King is the most talked about show in America right now, Netflix owned and produced.

> Netflix is not a business entity I would long. It is absolutely a fad, and > will lose negotiating power to distributors and content creators.

This seems to be a five plus year ago view on the company. They've pivoted mostly to making original content at this point, which in my mind is the hardest reason to be long them. They've had to accumulate enormous debt to produce all of this content and have exclusive ownership rights, which makes their balance sheet look terrible.

<comment><USER10> I think a perhaps more accurate way of stating the position is that "Netflix is not good enough at creating enough good content [to make up for 1) existing back catalogs and 2) parallel activity from strong competition]. I don't think anyone could definitively state that Netflix content is subpar when it's at its best, but I also don't think anyone would suggest they'd be willing to give up the big studios and rely exclusively on Netflix original content.

<comment><USER11> As things start to fracture more and more, the big studios kind of find themselves in the same position. Disney+ probably has one of the strongest single-publisher back catalogs, and there's still a lot of talk about there being nothing to watch after you finish the few originals and whatever old thing you were interested in.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, Netflix has far more new exclusive content. And by that, I'm counting out all of the currently released movies Disney has also on Disney+, since many saw those in theaters.

<comment> mark-r Disney knows better than most how much appeal there is in movies that you've already seen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> "Apple's dominant position in portable devices, particularly the high end."

Is this person unfamiliar with technology specs because their products are average devices but cost excessive for what you get?

It seriously sounds like they fell for the marketing.

<comment><USER13> Not sure what you mean, but iPads and iPhones are high end portable devices in a market in which Apple holds a dominant position.

<comment><USER14> Brand new account, named "modsRapple", with only this comment. Safe to ignore.

<comment><USER12> Ahh because rational argument doesn't count because of a name?

Be careful Thanatos, don't rely on tradition and authority figures. That's pre scientific method ways of thinking.

<comment><USER4> Nothing about your argument was rational. All you made clear was that you do not understand what Apple's customers value.

Hint: It's not a technology spec sheet. And even if it was, their specs blow the competition out of the water. I think your focus on embedded systems is coloring your view of consumer technology.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Best strategies, analogies and/or scenarios for teaching kids CS skills? - <AUTHOR>

We're currently working on developing a teaching platform based around our BASIC interpreter DiscoRunner, and we would love to hear from HN readers as to what methods they've used in the past to teach kids computer science concepts -- which worked, what didn't, and why.
This will obviously be invaluable to us when it comes to working out the lessons that will be taught in our fight-to-save-the-world-from-evil learning environment, and we would be eternally grateful for any scraps of wisdom you could toss our way. =)
Thank you! <comment><USER2> I spoke last week to 50-60 middle school students (ages 12-14) during a day long S.T.E.M demo day. There were 4 sessions with 10-15 kids in each hour-long session. My theme was "Learn to Program" and why _everyone_ should learn to read and write code.

For the first 20 minutes, I reviewed some slides (the "who", "what", "why" of programming). For the rest of the time, we built a Flappy Bird game using the tutorials on code.org. This made everything "click" for them, since it was hands on and practical. Suddenly, abstractions like variables and events make sense when you think of them like "background scene" and "click".

After they loaded their personalized Flappy Bird game to their iPhone, we spent the rest of the time going through CodeCombat. Lots of kids really liked this because it was a game you play with code.

I wish I had a bit more time to do something purely creative (there's a "Frozen" movie art tutorial on code.org, but it's slower paced and would've taken up too much of my time)

\---

A few takeaways:

1\. You HAVE to make it interesting. Kids today need to go from zero to awesome in 2 minutes or less. I don't see this as a bad thing. When I learned to program, I wanted the same thing. Being able to write some stuff in Notepad and see a webpage in Internet Explorer in 1995 is what got me interested in programming in the first place. I wanted them to get that same feeling.

2\. Focus on them. How is computer science going to help them? Basically, these kids (or their parents or teachers) are your customer and you have to make the benefits obvious. I talked about the creative aspects ("stretching your mind"), the career path aspects ("Bill Gates and Mark Z started when they were in middle school"), and the long term impact on the world ("Bill and Mark are two of the most generous people on the planet"). Again, this is aimed at middle schoolers so I'm not going to get into the politics of anti-trust lawsuits or over-reaching privacy concerns.

3\. Only about 10% of the kids in a classroom are going to be really enthusiastic about learning this stuff. You'll have 80% that are indifferent and 10% that are bored/lost. That's okay. Not everyone is going to be interested in computer science just like not everyone is into music.

4\. I didn't get too deep to quick, just focused on helping them seeing results. I didn't get into any nitty gritty like is JavaScript better than Python or anything too technical at all. Keep it as high-level as you possible can.

5\. I also let them work things out. "Oh, your Flappy Bird isn't flapping when you click your mouse? Hmmm, which piece of code do you think handles when you click your mouse? Do you see any actions that you could attach to that event that might make your bird flap?"

\---

Overall, it was well received and there were a few kids that used their "Genius Hour" (a set time where they could further explore the STEM topics they learned about on their own) to go through more CodeCombat lessons.

I would definitely do it again, but really needed a nap afterwards. Teaching is HARD!! :)</comment>


Lost suitcases, or how to DoS an airport - <AUTHOR> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/lost_suitcases.html

<comment><USER3> Like their plans for a new super sensitive detector that could pick up a single molecule of explosive in the entire building - not quite though through.

Happens here all the time, airport gets shutdown for an hour every time a cleaner leaves a door open. We have a perimeter fence 20miles long surrounded by trees but they search the airport if somebody leaves a door unlocked.

</comment><comment><USER4> Last year, I bought a DVD of Terry Gilliam's 1985 movie _Brazil_ , prompted by amusing memories of its original theater screening.

The satirical dystopia has aged badly - now it looks like a documentary. Halfway through the movie, lacking the stomach for more, I rewound the DVD and put it back in the box.

<comment><USER5> Rewound the DVD?

<comment><USER6> You've never seen one of these? <http://www.dvguru.com/2006/10/03/the-dvd- rewinder/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Yea ... so what's the point of this post, was it for a laugh ?! Should they have acted differently ? Could they have acted differently ? For a country that has been witness to such bomb attacks, I think their course of action is justified.

<comment><USER8> It means a terrorist could easily perform a denial of service attack with much fewer resources.

<comment><USER9> Completely. The IRA proved at the peak of their notoriety that all they needed to do was make a threat of action. They closed Gatwick down for a day in '97 with only a phone call and forced Britain's Grand National horse race to be postponed with another, causing huge disruption, panic and anger. They got the attention they wanted but no-one lost a life. It surprises me that we don't see the tactic copied more often today.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Well if it was in Israel it would end up like this: [http://ohadp.blogspot.com/2005/12/they-shot-me-in- laptop_11....](http://ohadp.blogspot.com/2005/12/they-shot-me-in- laptop_11.html)

</comment><comment><USER11> I wonder how much worse the chaos would be if some or all of London's airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted, City) suffered this at once - <USER2> intentionally or through coincidence.

</comment><comment><USER12> Wow, that's outrageous. I wonder if the same sort of inefficient panic would occur at a US airport.

<comment><USER13> > _Wow, that's outrageous. I wonder if the same sort of inefficient panic > would occur at a US airport._

I expect you don't mean it as such, but that's an incredibly tactless, insulting and insensitive remark. Not least, there was no panic, and it was not inefficient. It was an orderly evacuation and shutdown to allow the threat to be dealt with. European airports and establishments, and UK locations in particular, have a depressingly long history of having to deal with very real threats of multiple deaths on a daily basis. Their responses are based on that experience.

In Europe certainly, people are looking at the responses of the US agencies to the 9/11 events. Comparatively speaking, the US has effectively no experience of a domestic terrorist campaign, and most of the reactions to 9/11 are regarded by the rest of the world as going into headless-chicken mode, not knowing how to deal with the sorts of things that Spain, Germany, the UK, and other countries have dealt with for decades. In some cases, for centuries.

It's not surprising that the US authorities have introduced the incredibly draconian measures that they have, but in my line of work I dealt with organisations in 8 different countries, and they are all calling the responses "disproportionate", which is diplomatic speak for a much stronger expression.

I suggest that in the future you consider carefully the different context before making remarks based on your limited experience.</comment></comment>


The GNU project is leaking into Microsoft - <AUTHOR> http://techrights.org/2020/06/29/gnu-redirects/ <comment><USER2> One of the benefits of using git is that it doesn't really matter where the upstream is. You are getting the whole thing when you clone, so development is distributed. I'm not really sure what the problem is here. If Red Hat or Canonical gave free hosting, would we be seeing the same complaints?

There's still a GNU website, even if subsections redirect somewhere else. I'm so tired of all this purity policing. You want GNU to use something other than github? Build that platform, don't make it commercial (because obviously that's that problem, right?), make sure it has all the same features, and then offer it to GNU to use for free.

<comment><USER3> Ensuring free software does not depend, for its maintenance and continued development, on non-free, closed software, and on companies whose profits are based on the licensing of such software, is not "purity policing", it's part of the essence of the project.

PS - Commerciality in itself is not the problem. Perhaps you should read about the GNU project's "philosophy" page to understand what it's about:

[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/)</comment></comment>