Musk: nobody ever changed the world on 40 hours a week - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1067173497909141504 <comment><USER2> Is it possible that this is true and yet applies to only a small subset of people? On LinkedIn this comment got near universal negative response along the lines of "that's impossible." But when you read their titles, it was universally jobs people have to pay their bills and not mission driven work. Why is the correlation between people who change the world and working very hard so constant if it's impossible or false? How could studies show it's false for the typical person but almost universally trust of the most impactful people?</comment>


Face Detection in Google Play Services - <AUTHOR> http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2015/08/face-detection-in-google-play-services.html

<comment><USER2> this is awesome, really great for verification scenarios - i've always wanted an app that would auto-tag my contacts in photos (i don't want to see the tags in gallery, rather when i'm in contacts: name, phone, email, photos their in, etc)</comment>


Mozilla removes -moz-opacity; man threatens to sue for $18,000 - <AUTHOR> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=765645 <comment><USER3> I like how he says in one sentence that maintaining code is too hard, and then in the next, asks Mozilla to maintain extra code. It is scary how few programmers realize that software they use every day is the same as software they write themselves. There is no magic.

Also, duuuude, the site in question is _awesome_ : [http://www.constellation7.org/Constellation- Seven/Josiah/Ind...](http://www.constellation7.org/Constellation- Seven/Josiah/Index.htm)

<comment><USER4> While the site is indeed good, if you want truly _awesome_ , BEHOLD the POWER of the TIME CUBE: <http://www.timecube.com/>

<comment><USER3> Too LONG; didn't READ.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> To make it easier for everyone, the comment where he demands the cash is here: <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=765645#c13> \- otherwise you have to read through lots of drivel before you get to the juicy part. This guy sounds absolutely nuts, the other property for opacity has been supported for over 8 years now and the dude is still using old code? Wow.

<comment><USER6> "Estimate this to be around 100 hours of time, as it has to be done manually in text files for every single instance of the code"

search and replace anyone?? carefully crafted query using even Funduc S&R would take it max 5 minutes... but hey, given the content of the site... I would be afraid of a guy quoting bible verses in replies too!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The bug was filed by no less than YHWH Himself. I've heard of cases where people tried to sue God, but this is the first time I've seen the reverse. Can't He just smite them?

<comment><USER8> For those who dont get it (as I didn't): <http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=YHWH>

<comment><USER9> For some reason I'm bothered by you saying 'get it' and linking to urbandictionary. To me it implies some kind of slang word or internet term. So I'll link a more normal dictionary or two.

<http://www.thefreedictionary.com/YHWH> <http://dictionary.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/yhwh>

<comment><USER10> The urban dictionary entry is the first one using YHWH in the link title in my google results. It's the third result total, but the first two use 'Yahweh' in the link title, not YHWH

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The Mozilla devs were surprisingly civil and patient with him. Kudos to them.

</comment><comment><USER12> <http://www.constellation7.org>

I think we've just found this generation's TimeCube.com

<comment><USER13> I had a hard time taking his complaint seriously after looking at his website.

<comment><USER12> But if you look at it with firefox 12 (before firefox 13) you'll understand his point a lot more vividly. With that opacity, it used to look great. Now... it's all broken. :/

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> surely this must be a troll... please let it be a troll.

Edit: OH DEAR LORD look at their web page!!!

<http://www.constellation7.org>

<comment><USER15> I got prompted by Chrome to allow 3 different plugins to run on the homepage alone.

This site might be useful to the internet as the canonical web design anti- pattern repository.

<comment><USER16> > We just create __visually appealing __, informative and Evangelical websites > since AD 1997. - <USER2>

emphasis mine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> "Yes, external CSS style sheets ARE BETTER..just haven't had the time to even CONSIDER doing this yet..." -YHWH

Why do these guys even bother to give people like this the time of day?

</comment><comment><USER18> "My hourly rate as CEO of this Corporation is HK$1900 or US$247.00 per hour.

Think that with a discount, US$18,000 should be sufficient to cover all my time related costs, fixing ALL code instances, for ALL the aforestated reasons..."

Then he adds:

"Thanks a bunch for being SO HELPFUL !!!"

Also, $18,000/$247.00/hour comes out to about 72 hours.

His first post was on 2012-06-17 21:06:44 PDT and his last post was on 2012-06-19 23:11:22 PDT, so it's only been ~50 hrs since he posted it until he asked for the money.

<comment><USER10> I once worked as a customer service staffer for a phone company. I was extremely surprised by the number of people complaining about service being cut for not paying bills who were "stockbrokers" losing "thousands per hour". Really, sir? Most of them knew their bluff was called when we told them about the difference between residential-class and business-class services, but a few hardy souls would stick on. Strangely enough, those few hardy souls whose time is worth thousands an hour were rarely willing to pay a phone bill worth a hundred...

<comment><USER19> ISP tech support is the same way. The guy paying $30/month for his internet is complaining that he has lost tens of thousands of dollars today. Perhaps he should invest in some redundancy if the internet is so important to him.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Isn't this obviously mental illness? Should we be mocking that?

<comment><USER21> Or a troll...

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I was assuming this guy was some sort of troll, though the website seems too elaborate (and horrible). I think he's actually being serious...

This one made me chuckle

> Ideally, ALL browsers SHOULD support ALL extensions,

I don't think he quite gets it.

</comment><comment><USER23> I don't see a threat to sue here? I see him saying he will send Mozilla an invoice for $18,000 based on his (very rough, very inaccurate, very arbitrary) estimate, but there's no legal force behind that. It clearly was an idle threat and his last responses seem to indicate he was resigned to having to eat his labor and treat the cost as a lesson learned.

But the title of this post is a bit inaccurate in that he didn't threaten to sue. He threatened to send Mozilla an invoice for his work, but he came out looking very foolish, and ended up tucking tail.

<comment><USER24> He did said he would take them to court if they didn't pay the invoice. It _was_ clearly an idle threat, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Ignoring his tone, it is a fair question: why not keep the prefixed alias?

<comment><USER26> In the thread, multiple people answered his question. Here are the two most significant reasons that I noticed.

1\. The prefix was already not being supported by most browsers, thus supporting it would mean supporting the development of websites that don't work properly in other browsers.

2\. Best practices suggest that one shouldn't rely solely on the prefixed version of an experimental alias. If this developer had written good code to start with, he wouldn't have had the problems he ran into.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> On the "threatening legal action against open source projects" thing, you wouldn't believe the number of times people have threatened to sue Wikipedia or individual admins because the spam article about them or their business was deleted.

Here's an example I blogged about a while back: [http://blog.tommorris.org/post/6898909918/quoted-for- hilario...](http://blog.tommorris.org/post/6898909918/quoted-for-hilarious- ron-knight-of-knight-mediacom)

</comment><comment><USER28> Reminds me of this: <https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=50696>

Minus the extortion of course.

</comment><comment><USER29> It looks like he was happy with the ending and did take peoples comments in to consideration. Not sure he understood the sed instruction being thrown at him though. Clearly not everyone understands temporary postfixes.

</comment><comment><USER30> It's funny that someone so enlightened as he is unaware of a suitable find and replace all in whatever tool he is using. Also, that had to be the most god awful webpage I have seen since geocities shuttered.

</comment><comment><USER31> This is almost certainly a troll. Pretty well done, too.

<comment><USER32> If it is, it is God-level, 10/10, serious long-term trolling executed masterfully. The domain has been around since 99 and the site has looked like... that... since at least 2001 according to the Wayback Machine.

So I doubt it. I'd love to believe it, but I doubt it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> The first mistake: Thinking a software group you aren't paying money, owes you anything...

<comment><USER3> But his hourly rate is $237 an hour!

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Bloody hilarious</comment>


RedLaser ― Impossibly accurate barcode scanning - <AUTHOR> http://redlaser.com/ <comment><USER2> Interesting that it uses the zxing library [1] which doesn't support EAN/UPC yet (on iPhone) and they have written EAN/UPC scanning and haven't been kind enough to donate the code back to zxing. I guess that would remove their developer license revenue stream [2].

I assume they use Amazon to get EAN->item mapping which is against the amazon TOS. If they don't I love to know what they do use.

[1] - <http://code.google.com/p/zxing/>

[2] - <http://redlaser.com/SDK.aspx>

<comment><USER3> I thought the iPhone didn't support those kind of barcodes due to physics based limitations of the camera/lens.

If they're doing something really clever to read these barcodes it makes some sense to not just give it away. The Apache licence does give them that option.

<comment><USER4> All iPhones have good enough optics to detect 2D barcodes like QR Code. Linear barcodes like UPC were trickier until the iPhone 3GS, which has variable focus camera hardware that also admits direct access to camera frames. On the 3GS, barcode scanning is a cake walk.

There are many surprising things about RedLaser's success, but technology isn't one of them. I agree with OP that apparent violations of licensing (access to Amazon.com via mobile is not allowed) are surprising. Most surprising to me is _how well RedLaser has sold_ given that barcode scanning was antiquated over a year ago by products like SnapTell. Why scan a UPC code when you can just take a picture of the cover of a book and have the product found just as fast, with as good or better accuracy? No matter if your photo is blurry, or badly lit, or out of focus, or only grabs a part of the book's cover...

<comment><USER5> _Why scan a UPC code when you can just take a picture of the cover of a book and have the product found just as fast_

Surely the error rate of that compared to bar codes is much higher. For common products Im sure it works just as well but bar code scanning doesn't degrade for edge cases in the same way.

<comment><USER4> You should try it. It is remarkably great, and while I can't speak to error rates I believe that it is on par or better than a good camera-based scanner. Also: using SnapTell with my decades-old textbooks in Greek religion confirms it's not just for "common" products.

(Disclosure: I have nothing whatsoever to do with SnapTell, but I have been consistently impressed with the technology.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Their marketing material reminds me of CueCat. Yup. Barcodes are the future. Any day now. "Query into a sea of information."

<http://www.redlaser.com/Next.aspx>

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

<comment><USER7> The main issue of the cuecat is that every time you needed to scan something, you wouldn't have your computer around to scan it. Plus the scanning on that cuecat thing was highly annoying, it didn't work on some types of packaging and it required you to put the device up close and slowly scan across it. Sometimes I felt like I could type in the UPC code faster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sorry, I've been in the land of cellular milk and honey for a while: is barcode scanning new and exciting still in the US? I remember having it on a free (subsidized) bar phone 7 years ago here.

</comment><comment><USER9> My android phone has been able to do this for about 2 years now

<comment><USER10> I just tried scanning their test barcode off the screen with my G1 and it worked fine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've been using the jailbroken Red Laser for a while-- it's accurate but not really "impossibly accurate". I spend a lot of times looking awkward trying to position products if the lighting or package shininess isn't just right. I've had it misread codes before, too.

</comment><comment><USER12> Very interesting to note that as the popularity of these types of apps rise, so will brick-and-mortar retailers awareness and deterrent of them.

How?

Many retailers do not allow pictures to be taken in their stores, something that is very loosely enforced, but is enforced nonetheless.

One time I needed to take a pic of the description of a product in Home Depot so I wouldn't forget. Told the associate that and he said we don't allow pictures in our store, regardless of the reason. -- I took it anyway ;)

Now, with everything else facing retailers, especially the cost of payroll, I doubt they will fight too hard, but don't be surprised if it comes up in their training of employees more often and encourage those employees to enforce it more often.

<comment><USER13> I don't know how the iPhone apps like this work, but the Barcode Scanner for Android doesn't take a picture. You just hover your camera over the barcode and it figures it out from the preview.

I suppose it's technically taking a picture, but you could argue that you're not pressing the camera button, so you're not really taking a picture.

<comment><USER14> It doesn't take a picture. The RedLaser SDK uses an underground API to access the camera's video frames, which is technically not allowed but overlooked for RedLaser?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Free app idea that I don't have the time to write... coupon-o-matic.

1) scan coupon barcodes, ideally using video (1-2 seconds per full page of coupons in one of those mailers?), beeping only for those you ought to keep based on what you buy and/or how good of a coupon it is.

2) automatically generate shopping list, based on coupons + what you normally buy.

3) Profit! (Well, less cost; potentially much less cost, given how many coupons there are out there, doubling, store coupons matching mfg ones, etc.)

3a) Optional: scan product barcodes as you're shopping, automatically crossing them off the list, indicating the coupon savings you should get, and also reordering the list based on what grocery department you're in...

<comment><USER7> It's too bad that the iphone screen doesn't scan via the laser barcode readers, otherwise it would be great to just show the coupon on screen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I use RedLaser a bit and the scanning works better when I use the macro lens of my Clarifi case (<http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/clarifi>). Note: I'm not associated with Griffin in any way. Just thought I'd share this tip.

</comment><comment><USER17> Their video shows people scanning bags of chips and jars of food and plastic containers. Wouldn't it have made more sense to scan more expensive items, electronics perhaps?</comment>


Facebook's Oculus Plans Still More Virtual Than Reality - <AUTHOR> http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/facebooks-oculus-plans-still-more-virtual-than-reality?

<comment><USER2> I really hope they didn't buy it and kill it. Hopefully even if they did, one of the alternatives that appeared when it was clear people were interested in VR will do well. I like this technology, but it's movies rather than VR oriented: Avegant Glyph</comment>


Evidence that Refined Carbohydrates, not Fats, Threaten the Heart - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=carbs-against-cardio

<comment><USER2> I dropped over 70 pounds mostly by eliminating carbs (bread especially) and substituting lots (and lots) of vegetables. If anything, I increase my fat intake.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been an advocate of low, or at least "lower" carbs for a while, but will still indulge in tacos on occasion. I've been trying something new lately by adding whey protein alongside most meals. It's been very mild on my digestion - always a good thing - and it really helps reduce the cravings for other stuff.

</comment><comment><USER4> I am gonna define the singularity to have occurred when we know once and for all which one is more healthy: a cheeseburger or a bag of potato chips.</comment>


EU copyright law proposal rejected - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/Senficon/status/1014814460488413185 <comment><USER2> It is extremely important not to lose focus on the problem because they're going to try again and again to pass it, one way or another. They'll never stop: it's about profit both for the corporations bribing for those laws and the politicians being bribed to push for them, so they'll just keep pushing until they find the right weapon of mass distraction to keep the public attention away.

Also it is important to keep in mind the old tricks used to pass bad laws: they push initially for worse laws then after public protest they slowly step back to the initial goal to pretend people were listened to, so that not only they get what they wanted, but the public is also being fooled into believing their protest were successful and they have politicians who actually listen to them. How lucky!

<comment><USER3> I recall seeing a tweet this morning stating the same for ethics committees in academic research papers. Students are being taught to put questionable things in - that are easy to excise. They get challenged, remove the red herring, and are approved since the "offended party" feels appeased.

Anyways, Interesting analog. Intellectual dishonestly aside...

I have no first hand knowledge, but it seems highly probable.

<comment><USER4> _Students are being taught to put questionable things in - that are easy to excise. They get challenged, remove the red herring, and are approved since the "offended party" feels appeased._

I've heard similar stories with regards to censors. I've also seen it at work with release reviews. Pointy-haired management was given something obvious to correct, to keep them from thinking of something out of left field.

<comment><USER5> It's a weak strategy. If you make an obvious error in many contexts you are very likely to (at best) invite a cascade of critique that otherwise would have been skipped. At worst, you'll be written off permanently as a fool, fired and/or sued.

<comment><USER4> _It 's a weak strategy. If you make an obvious error in many contexts you are very likely to (at best) invite a cascade of critique that otherwise would have been skipped._

It depends on who is on the other end. Against someone who isn't that intelligent, who prioritizes and really just wants to show their dominance, it can work great. Against a genuinely observant and intelligent perfectionist, it's the wrong move.

I've seen it done with alignment and spelling errors. The pointy haired boss feels superior and useful in their attention to detail, and everyone has their needs fulfilled.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This battle is nowhere near over, copyright holders are constantly bribing and pushing towards more and more draconian laws to keep competition out and maximize profits.

Having said that, it's good to see EU didn't sell us out at the first chance.

<comment><USER7> The copyright holders and their lobbyists are untiring in their push, because they only need their proposals to be successful once to go through, but we need to continuously get them voted down to retain our freedoms.

It's very much an uphill battle.

<comment><USER8> Can't laws that are equivalent but opposite be formulated? Laws that specify what is legal and should not be considered infringing. Similar to US constitutional formulations "congress shall pass no law.."?

<comment><USER9> Such contra-laws are would be 'only' useful for casual citizens, so there's no way to get multi-million lobbying support for them by mega corporations.

<comment><USER10> This is why we need to support organizations like EFF. Even if they are not multi-billion, they may be strong enough sometimes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The good thing also is, that the Worldcup will be over when the law is discussed again. You can spot pretty easily how laws like this are always pushed in a time where most people are occupied with something else, usually around summer. It's ridiculous how often that happens. Let's hope we don't have a big distraction coming up in September.

<comment><USER12> It's funny you should mention The World Cup, FIFA are hugely annoying when it comes to copyright.

It's only just making the _normal_ news[0], but their pettiness has plagued the sharing of small clips and highlights.

Do they really want me to wait for an incident to be televised before I can discuss it online? Should I have to track down specific moments in a game using my own recording in order to be able to discuss it? FIFA, the World's Most Corrupt Organisation™, should realise that fans enjoying and discussing their events adds a lot of value and will drive more viewers.

[0] [https://inews.co.uk/video/fifa-delete-twitter-video-of- boy-c...](https://inews.co.uk/video/fifa-delete-twitter-video-of-boy- celebrating-world-cup-goal/)

<comment><USER13> FIA are pretty in the dark ages with F1 too. FE is slightly different and seems to be where they're experimenting. GTE is getting better too.

<comment><USER14> F1 hasn't been too bad; you can access live recordings of the Grand Prix, race highlights and sometimes even links through to third party retrospectives through their Youtube channel.

<comment><USER15> Yeah sure - I bet if you live in a region where no company has bought exclusive television rights to F1. In my country, a pay channel owns exclusive rights to all F1 broadcasting, so all official F1 content on YouTube etc. is simply blocked here (shows the infamous "This content is not available in your country" error.)

They have gone to great lengths to ensure the only way I can view live F1 GPs legally is to pay 25€/mon subscription to the cable company. _If_ I had a choice, I would actually be happy to subscribe to UK's Sky Sports F1 channel, who for 20€/mon have much more extensive coverage of the whole GP weekend, with world-class commentators in studio and on track-side, including retired F1 drivers' title holders. The cable company broadcasting in my country has lower quality and less content, so I don't feel like paying them each month more than I pay to my ISP.

But of course, due to the very same geo-blocking rules, Sky Sports F1 is unable to sell their subscription to my country, because they only have rights for UK broadcasting. Same thing applies to Netflix etc., where some content may be available in one EU country but not in another.

This is actually a violation of the EU's core single market principle (customers should be able to freely procure services from providers in any EU country, not just providers in their home country). And a few years ago, the EU Parliament was actually bullish about abolishing the whole practice of digital content geo-blocking within EU.[1] They eventually did pass new digital market regulations, but of course the content industry was able to water it down so that it doesn't actually apply to them _at all_![2]

[1]: [https://torrentfreak.com/europe-will-abolish-geo-blocking- an...](https://torrentfreak.com/europe-will-abolish-geo-blocking-and-other- copyright-restrictions-150506/)

[2]: [https://juliareda.eu/2018/02/eu-did-not-end- geoblocking/](https://juliareda.eu/2018/02/eu-did-not-end-geoblocking/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I am always impressed by the support efforts to curb copyright expansion, as it relates to practical freedoms of expression, information and control over the internet. It's a nuanced issue, international and unrelated directly to any major political wing or ideology. So, the fact that it attracts a dedicated and effective activist base is both surprising and heartening. This for the "cause" least likely to get you laid.

Thank you to whoever is involved. You are fighting for _me_ and I appreciate it. I'm going to make a habit of writing MEPs and generally getting behind you guys. I want my next comment on the subject to be in the first person (we).

But.....

I feel like _we 're_ at a real structural disadvantage. Copyrights (up generally) are under constant expansive efforts. Expanding rights. Expanding duratii. Expanding enforcement. Practical enforcement edforts that will result in dragnets (like this, now defeated proposal).

The saintly activists are working to defeat restrictions, but they can't win every fight. This proposal will be back, in modified form. It's a ratchet. Sometimes we don't lose. Other times we lose. There are no wins, just defense against loss.

For a practical example: YouTube is the biggest video site, and it does not honour fair use. You can't (easily, anyway) automate fair use detection, so it gets caught in the copyright violation dragnets. In practice this weakens fair use rights. I'm sure pressure from copyright holders played a role on YouTube's policy decisions.

Is there (or can there be) an activist effort that puts pressure on YouTube (just for example) to protect fair use rights, and freedom of expression generally.

Are there wins we can aim for? Is an effort to shorten copyright duration feasible? I think the economic argument is on our side, even if we accept the other side's premises. Is a fair use expansion campaign possible?

<comment><USER17> We need new business models for new media, which are not based on artificial scarcity. Then new media can afford to outspend old media. It's unfortunate that the current flag-bearers for new media are funded by advertising, rather than creativity and innovation unlocked by fair use and remix culture.

<comment> bjelkeman-again I hope efforts like the Dutch De Correspondent works out in the long run. I know readers that love their work and happily pays for it.

[http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/05/dutch-news-organization- de-...](http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/05/dutch-news-organization-de- correspondent-is-getting-more-money-toward-its-global-expansion/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If you'd ask me personally I think Article 15 is far worse than Article 13. Computer programs are also copyrighted so this would make really hard time for anyone trying to maintain the business once it grows. If this is passed (if I understand this correctly) a subcontractor could sue you for extra money you gained on some of his contributions. It's like contracts no longer define how much you owe to people because everything may change if you succeed. How do you reinvest the money in such conditions? Do you hold some cash just in case someone pops up demanding more money?

<comment><USER19> I think that when you hire someone you are not:

      entering into a contract for the exploitation of the rights

because you are the of the rights yourself. The person you hired to write a program for you doesn't have any rights to it. That being said, the whole article is ridiculous. If it passes you will be on the hook for % of the profits you make possibly forever if you licensed any kind of work to run your business. Maybe they should add another article where you can apply to get some of your money back if you don't make or lose money trying to run your business.

<comment><USER18> Thanks for slightly optimistic reply in this regard. But I think it will all come down to how this will be implemented in member states (and I'm sure it will be far from common in EU), here where I live not all rights are transferred as part of the contract, some rights are non-transferable. Nevertheless it's scary how this is developing, I wonder who will be deciding about "fairness" of compensation, will it be courts deciding how much some services are worth... I wonder if UK will accept it, if not I'd expected lots of business moving there from EU.

<comment><USER20> "Work for hire" rights have been enshrined for a long, long time, and don't affect just software. It would affect every memo, marketing campaign, advertisement, or drawing made for pay. Something that would destroy the entire white collar economy would get fixed pretty fast.

<comment><USER17> Or, we could avoid breaking the economy while hoping that it can be fixed quickly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I have to say (and I am not a fan of modern copyright law at all) that I'm undecided about this law.

I guess the contrarian in me requires more analysis and reasoning than I've found in the top google search results or following some of the links posted here on Hacker News. In fact I'm aware that I often take positions based on disliking the presentation of arguments and this is a personal flaw.

But I have to say most of the pieces I read rub me up the wrong way by seemingly just repeating arguments from authority or presenting interpretations without any logical reasoning built on primary sources (i.e. the text of the directive).

Many of the pieces, even by respected sources, seem very click-baity where it seems there is competition to come up with the most apocalyptic claims. The directive will lead to the end of the internet itself seems to be the bar.

When I finally found a piece which actually quoted text from article 13, for example, it didn't seem to explicitly support many of the claims. Is there a mandate or even reference to upload filters in the text of the article? Does it reference memes at all? I'm happy to be correct if there is. But if there isn't, I don't see an obvious path from the primary text to these sort of claims.

The actual text of the article that I've seen quoted seems to simply codify the status quo that currently exists in nearly all countries. Which is that content aggregators are oblidged to cooperate with copyright holders to block copyright infringement. Google, youtube, eBay, etc., etc. have been doing this for years without "killing the internet". Don't all countries with copyright laws already provide legal mechanisms for holder to force content aggregators to remove infringing material?

If that's the case, then this is simply a typical EU directive - which just represents some sort of minimum standard based on the existing laws in the 28 countries.

As I said, I'm happy to be corrected if someone can provide an argument based on the text. Please reply with links or references instead of down voting :)

<comment><USER22> I would argue that controversial laws have to be at least delayed in order for all the points to be address.

I would rather _not change anything_ instead of risking broken legislation that does more harm than good.

> Google, youtube, eBay, etc., etc. have been doing this for years without > "killing the internet".

Google has the infrastructure and resources to do so with YouTube, going out of its way to detect copyright infringement and to react automatically to take down notices. Smaller players don't have Google's resources.

This is not the same issue as with GDPR. Even if companies need to invest resources in being GDPR compliant, it can be argued that business models relying on the ignorance of users are criminal enterprises and that GDPR-style consent should have been asked for without having a law for it, being common sense in a world where people don't understand the repercussion of their actions when using technology.

But copyright? That's a government granted monopoly and like all government granted monopolies it can do more harm than good. It can be argued that copyright is flawed, especially given the forever extending duration, currently being life plus 70 to 120 years, which is absolutely ridiculous. Give us 20 years, like patents and then we can discuss about extra protections otherwise fuck media companies lobbying for even more protections.

<comment><USER23> > > Google, youtube, eBay, etc., etc. have been doing this for years without > "killing the internet".

> Google has the infrastructure and resources to do so with YouTube, going out > of its way to detect copyright infringement and to react automatically to > take down notices. Smaller players don't have Google's resources.

Worse, _even Google sucks at it_. There are _so many_ original creators whose youtube video get slapped ads on because someone else used their music in a Youtube video before the original author did. Google wrote a fully automated, non-appealable copyright judge and jury. This is scary shit! I don't understand how anyone can look at stuff like that and think "wow, awesome, we need more of that!"

<comment><USER24> > Google wrote a fully automated, non-appealable copyright judge and jury.

And executioner. Because they remove accounts over this.

<comment><USER23> I'm not sure the analogy extends that far. Sure, Google auto-vaporizes accounts and that's terrible, but they'd do that too if they didn't have Content ID. It's not very related to copyright anymore, just to The Google Suck.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> The vote was worryingly close though:

        In favour: 278
        Against:   318

The pessimist in me can't see this getting rejected a second time :(

<comment><USER26> What I'm reading is that they'll mostly just adjust some part of this proposal until it does pass; whether Article 11 or 13 make it (which are the most controversial) then is to be seen.

Yet, I'm worried now that those articles were just ludicrous distractions for the real problem. That is, it shouldn't pass without those articles, but those that would oppose it normally would now vote in favor of it because "at least it doesn't have those articles anymore".

like how [politics] the current political climate and news coverage is pushing what used to be extreme-right standpoints more towards the more acceptable political middle. As in,"well at least we're not separating kids from parents anymore"[/politics]

<comment><USER27> "US Congress quietly slips cloud-spying powers into page 2,201 of spending mega-bill"[1].

Could the EU copyright law be slipped in the same way?

[1] [https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/23/cloud_act_spending_...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/23/cloud_act_spending_bill/)

<comment><USER28> Technically: maybe. But the EU legislative process is very transparent (which is partially caused by the different legislative bodies that need to participate) and the European Parliament would probably not approve of such a hidden policy change.

<comment><USER29> Actually they did (in 2005) try to slip a vote on software patents in by scheduling it for an "Agriculture and Fishery" meeting. Luckily, they failed.

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2005/jan/23/eusd...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2005/jan/23/eusdirtytrick)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I think that current implementations of update filters are not ready and satisfactory to make internet a better place, thus I am glad that it is rejected for now.

When youtube content id matches 10 seconds of black screen as a copyrighted material, it shows that these systems are nowhere near production ready.

I am all for fair use and credits when it comes to creators getting paid for what they deserve but, when you need couple of lawyers to dispute something as a student on internet against enterprises, then freedom and equality of Internet disappears.

<comment><USER31> > I think that current implementations of update filters are not ready

There's no one filter nor any way to do this. YouTube designed and implemented a system. Some other sites might have their own design. Most have nothing.

Try to think about what's needed to create something like a filter. It's quickly obvious that it's a massive undertaking (expensive). If I'd be Google, I'd actually be happy with a strict law as YouTube has a filter. All other competitors would immediately have a huge disadvantage.

Note: I quite like Formula 1 and I've noticed that people quite easily get around the YouTube filter. They make the video a bit smaller, add some moving stuff around it and they're done. This while the filter blocks valid use cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Interesting how The Guardian are choosing to report this: "YouTube and Facebook could escape billions in copyright payouts after EU vote" [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/05/youtube-c...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/05/youtube- could-escape-billions-in-copyright-payouts-after-eu-vote)

<comment><USER33> I think they're right to point out that there are corporate interests on both sides, but I also think they're doing the public a disservice by failing to mention the effect on smaller companies and even on regular internet users.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> ...listening to BBC Radio 6 today, I was pretty shocked about how they only portrayed it in a positive light. Their spin was that it's all about making sure YouTube can no longer pretend they're not benefitting from copyrighted material being uploaded illegally, and how Paul McCartney thinks that's a great thing for artists.

<comment><USER35> Radio 4's Today show had Jimmy Wales and William Orbit on with Justin Webb (08:32 GMT). Rory Cellan-Jones introduced it pretty well as the Beeb's Tech correspondent. Their thoughts, roughly summarised: copyright is good as creators need to get paid; mandatory upload filters aren't going to work and will certainly be a barrier for smaller players. Generally an excellent discussion. Wales said we needed to look at how artists are being paid by, for instance, Google but as they already have upload filters in place this isn't useful leverage.

<comment><USER36> You can listen here. Just skip to 2:33 [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b85mct#play](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b85mct#play)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> The only long term solution is to create law that scuttles these kinds of articles in the future. When you play on the defensive you are leaving the definition power to the copyright lobby.

<comment><USER17> What are precedent laws or legal principles that adopted this approach, in any country, for copyright or licensing?

e.g. trade agreement, national constitution, fair use, orphan works, compulsory licensing, RAND licensing, creative commons, public domain, freedom of speech, freedom of information act, right to know, accessibility for blind/deaf, access by libraries and archives, educational use, citation rights, remix models, national incentives for creativity and innovation, ...?

<comment><USER37> The fundamental problem is that EU law can basically ride roughshod over existing member laws undoing decades of organic law creation in each member country. This means that you have to kind of pass those laws at the EU level to ensure they don't get wiped out by something like article 11 and 13.

<comment><USER17> An interesting experiment would be for a group of EU countries to agree on a modern innovation/copyright regime, for which they would prioritize national enforcement resources.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> For those who want to see detailed breakdowns (by European party grouping, by national party, by country, etc.) see [http://www.votewatch.eu/en/term8-copyright-in-the-digital- si...](http://www.votewatch.eu/en/term8-copyright-in-the-digital-single- market-draft-legislative-resolution-vote-decision-to-enter-into-inte.html) (note - you'll need to create a login).

Interesting takeaways:

1\. As is usual, party discipline was very strong on the national-party level, but usually weak on the level of the European political grouping.

2\. The center-right EPP grouping voted by a large majority for the regulation.

3\. There was a very strong national divide between France (>80% in favor) and every other large state (small majorities against).

4\. Party discipline on the European level among the Socialists (S&D) broke down completely, leaving them split about 50/50\. For example, German SPD voted unanimously against; the French, British, Italian, and Spanish socialists by large majorities in favor; and most of the socialists from small states voted against.

5\. The liberals (in the European, FDP sense), were split _within_ parties at a high rate.

6\. The nationalist far-right (the French party formerly known as the Front National, Lega Nord, etc.) and the Eurosceptic right (e.g. UK Conservatives, the governing Polish PiS, etc.), which usually vote similarly, split along national-party lines.

</comment><comment><USER39> They'll never stop.

And, they're using your own money against you. Sales revenue, all the higher and more profitable as they tighten their control.

Your tax dollars. Here in the U.S., there is an ongoing conversation about the continued efforts to "criminalize" IP infringement. Not only do the "big players" already have the advantage in terms of the ability to pay -- potentially endlessly -- for attorneys. They are trying to get the government, with its deep pockets and salaried attorneys, to take over prosecution of civil law infringements.

Which also means less government attention to crime that may actually concern you, its citizens, more.

Now, if the world were getting better, one might debate whether these are useful changes. Instead, it seems most people who take the time to understand this, and who aren't benefiting from tacking on another 20 years to Micky Mouse's exclusivity, find the changes both absurd and a hindrance to real productivity and creativity.

Workers in the U.S. have had to compete not only against lower wages, but also against lower costs of producers who don't respect and pay for the IP they use. Some of the same companies that scream bloody murder about infringement in the U.S., turn around and use those producers abroad because of their lower costs.

They're using your own money against you.

(And, I've got nothing against the rest of the world catching up. I do resent and oppose the arbitrage practiced by such entities, in combination with convenient legal and political collusion, to greatly enrich themselves while perhaps even impeding real progress.)

P.S. Regarding the "tricks" used to escalate their control, mentioned by the parent commenter. One of those is the current proliferation of "trade agreements". One member is convinced, bribed, coerced to increase an IP "right". The trade agreement includes an automatic mechanism for "harmonization" between members. The other member states use said "harmonization" as the cause that increases that right in their own state.

People living in the latter may never have agreed to e.g. another extension to length of copyright. But suddenly they have it, via "harmonization". And politicians saying, "The treaty made us do it."

This has all been discussed before, on the Web. But I haven't seen it surface prominently, in a while, and it bears repeating for those who are just becoming familiar with the issue.

<comment><USER40> 100% THIS. Great details here. Glad to see this posted and we need to make as many people aware of the details in your post as possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Here is how different countries voted: [https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/8wbbsy/analysis_of_...](https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/8wbbsy/analysis_of_the_copyright_vote_per_country/)

And here is how different parties voted: [https://i.redd.it/xcr22o59g5811.png](https://i.redd.it/xcr22o59g5811.png)

</comment><comment><USER42> Wonderful, thanks to everyone that helped making some pressing on the MEPs, from Wikipedia to the last of the tweeters!

</comment><comment><USER13> Looks like votewatch.eu has gone done, I presume from all of us checking what MP's we're going to have the school.

<comment><USER38> Back up!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Seeing how close it was I am really pessimistic about EU and further integration. I want my country to have a shot at sane copyright/patent/tax laws. If they fail I want other countries to have that shot, maybe at least one succeed and I could move there. With one centralized government there will be nowhere to run if things like UK prison-for-wrongthink or German/Spanish copyright and censorpship laws are implemented.

<comment><USER43> That argument scales up and down, which makes it pointless without an accompanying argument about absolute size.

Why is your country's current extent and size optimal? Why not split it up, maybe even down to sovereign towns?

Why not unify it with one of your neighbours?

<comment><USER19> I am all for giving more power to the local governments. The more local it gets the better. That being said at least on a country level there are people who speak the same language and are brought in somewhat similar culture. There is much bigger chance the laws are going to be acceptable for me if they are made by people who live here, know our history and are brought in our culture.

For example after 45 years of in-fact occupation by the Soviets people here won't easily accept censorship and wrong-think laws. Those things are too fresh in memory. It might be easier for our politician to vote for that in EU parliament when they are safely away from home (they didn't from what I understand) but they would think twice voting for it here.

Another thing is that people follow country level politics much closer than they follow EU politics which seems to be very detached. What usually happen is "GDPR got voted in EU, we need to adjust our laws" without any kind of public discussion about if we even want that law to begin with.

It may work somewhat better in USA where at least there is one language and some common element in education system (history, civics etc.). Here it just seems that People's Party Committeein in Brussels is making up laws and we are supposed to just accept it.

<comment><USER44> > without any kind of public discussion about if we even want that law to > begin with.

That is an omission of your politicians for not involving the public into the discussions, as there certainly are deep debates at the EU level that your elected politicians participate in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> This is still quite a defeat IMHO. The vote was won just by a margin of 40 votes. The real deal will cover up in September. If the margin gets smaller - were kinda busted. If the negative votes increases - well, the internet might be saved. Now only money talks and who takes which side will decide onto the rest.

</comment><comment><USER46> List of votes is on pages 7-8 of this document:

[http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f...](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bPV%2b20180705%2bRES- RCV%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN)

<comment><USER47> \+ 278

\- 318

0 31

Too close. They will try again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Nice, that's one bullet dodged! Back to the drawing board doesn't sound very comforting.

<comment><USER49> This isn't SOPA/PIPA, where the entire thing is bad and should be just tossed in trash.

This is a copyright reform that needs to be adopted (its main purpose is to reduce inconsistencies in copyright laws across EU countries), and the fight is against two very specific articles (11 and 13) in the current version of it, through which there was an attempt at doing something bad for the Internet.

That doesn't mean that the entire copyright reform is just rotten to the core. You'll notice that nobody asked for the entire thing to be abolished, just for those two articles to disappear.

<comment><USER46> You probably mean 11 and 13, just for reference

<comment><USER49> Thank you for flagging, I've edited my comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Wow, not by a huge margin. I'm sure it will pass sooner or later.

It's really amazing how people have to keep these idiots that are _supposed to_ be there to guard our interests in check.

As long as parties are allowed to accept contributions, things like this will happen. It should be absolutely forbidden to give any politician any money-- both while campaigning and in case of victory. That way they would actually work for us and not corporations.

</comment><comment><USER51> Congratulations! But they'll come back with some new garbage, they always do. So there will another need to repeal something like that.

</comment><comment><USER52> Many commenters here point out that this is not necessarily the end, and that lobbyist will keep trying. Seemingly implying that this is an eventuality.

I don't think so, if we keep fighting we can win this. I for one plan to keep applying pressure to members of the legal committee.

Realistic optimism is not a cause for complacency. But we must also recognize that this is battle we can win, as to not give up without a fight. For all the faults of our democracies let's recognize that it worked today :)

</comment><comment><USER53> This not only a problem with the EU, but with concentrated power in general. It wouldn't be cost effective to lobby every single government to pass this type of legislation, but when you concentrate it into a single place, suddenly intense lobbying becomes cost effective.

I have a similar attitude to the US Federal government and why I think state rights are supreme. You lose economies of scale, but gain a distributed and hard(er) to corrupt system.

<comment><USER52> Yet, both of these policies (article 11 and 13) have been tried out in a few countries.

IMO concentration of power merely means that you need to be more careful with it. The EU will rarely be critized for standardizing boring regulation.

I keep thinking that in the post brexit world maybe the EU should strive away from controversial topics for a few years. But I could be wrong :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Remove articles 11 and 13 with too ambiguous and fuzzy limits. They provide an open door to abuse.

It's time to change business models and evolve. Destroying the internet just to protect some profits should not be an option. Make subventions from states to newspapers illegal. Make scholar journals selling other peoples work in numeric form illegal.

Terminate google news and equivalent services. Journals don't deserve that free publicity.

<comment><USER55> Why having any of those articles anyway?

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> People seem to be viewing this through the eyes of US copyright proposals (longer terms, stronger enforcement etc).

That's not was this was at all. It was a change in the liability structure to make platforms liable for content published on their platform.

It was basically about news. European news organisations hate that people are getting news via Google and Facebook so they want to restrict that.

</comment><comment><USER57> Open Science fan here, I have some concrete questions about this copyright, publishers and linktax story, for example: (0) - will Scihub be affected? (1) - will arXiv link instead of the published article link be affected? (2) - will the social media companies start to apply filters to the search results and timelines???

<comment><USER57> After more reading, it is horrible. Even if the answers seem to be (0) no (1) maybe (2) yes, the main point of interest for researchers is that they will become publishers slaves, or else they have to not publish (anything which might result in a copyright filter). Give not publish, or be a slave.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> So the internet won... By a 6% margin.

</comment><comment><USER59> So, is the EU Parliament postponing it because they didn't like the media attention and want to try it again when there are other things that attract media attention in three months time, or because they actually think it is a bad idea?

<comment><USER60> How do you think a parliament works? It consists of multiple parties who generally don't agree with each other; it does not generally do things as a group.

<comment><USER61> He is right in that this was tried passed during the summer & world-cup when most people are not paying attention though.

That's clearly not coincidental.

<comment><USER62> Why would the world cup be a factor?

<comment><USER61> The big masses are busy with the World Cup and not paying much attention to news in general.

Not to mention that the newspapers themselves are reducing political coverage significantly to give room for the World Cup, so that those who still would like to pay attention have a reduced ability to do so.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> Thank goodness, that thing was horrific. It even read like ISPs were supposed to filter user content.

It was Copyright > everything else > freedom of speech (granted I get that's a US phrase but you get my point).

</comment><comment><USER64> Glad to hear it, but eternal vigilance etc. Keep an eye on them.

</comment><comment><USER65> First #GDPR, now #Uploadfilter... What is next? A totally censored internet? The EU is becoming more and more absurd with its regulations that do nothing but hinder technological advancement. Already way behind than the East Asian countries as well the US and Canada...

<comment><USER66> GDPR is good and this is not Twitter.

<comment><USER67> In fact Twitter is one of the few who CAN comply with GDPR, because it costs big ( very big ) money to comply.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Does anyone know if (and how) you can check which MEPs voted for and against it? Does that data get published somewhere?</comment>


Show HN: SvgVerlet.js a SVG-based physics library - <AUTHOR> http://mike-tucker.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Github Repo: [https://github.com/miketucker/svg- verlet.js](https://github.com/miketucker/svg-verlet.js)

All pages are based on an SVG file, such as: [http://mike- tucker.com/13/svg/hello.svg](http://mike-tucker.com/13/svg/hello.svg)

After loading into the engine, optional plugins and effects are added: Gravity, wind, mouse attractors, etc.</comment>


Show HN: K2, quickly build cool dashboards using TypeScript and React - <AUTHOR> http://k2.emumba.com <comment><USER2> Took a look and couldn't find an answer to the following: Is there something that differentiates this from many of the other UI kits out there? Many of which are free?

If so, would be good to clearly call that out on your website. Overall the website tells a better story as to why than most other UI kits, but it doesn't state what is different other than "ours is better than doing the colors/style yourself".

[https://uxplanet.org/top-50-dashboard-ui-kits-and- templates-...](https://uxplanet.org/top-50-dashboard-ui-kits-and-templates- in-2019-8583e41b775d?gi=6ff3b0e1a97)</comment>


History of Chrome team: Animorphic Smalltalk engine - <AUTHOR> http://astares.blogspot.com/2008/09/google-chrome-javascript-and-smalltalk.html

<comment><USER2> Wow: V8 is built by people who worked on the legendary Strongtalk VM. That's huge.

Edit: the linked-to comments by Dave Griswold, originator of Strongtalk, are worth reading. "The release of the V8 VM is the beginning of a whole new era for dynamic languages":

[http://groups.google.com/group/strongtalk- general/browse_thr...](http://groups.google.com/group/strongtalk- general/browse_thread/thread/40eb8f405fbd3041)

This is exciting. One interesting loop is that Strongtalk was heavily influenced by Self... as of course was Javascript.

<http://www.strongtalk.org/history.html>

<comment><USER3> From what I can tell V8 is JavaScript only... Although from that comment by Dave, it seems the implication is that it could act as a target for other languages?

To me this implies there is some kind of intermediate language that can be targeted, but I can't see that from the documentation available. Or will JavaScript be the intermediate?

Anyone know what the intent is?</comment></comment>


Tools that allow remote teams to work efficiently - <AUTHOR> http://blog.ghost.org/distributed-team-tools/

<comment><USER2> I would add Workflowy to the list</comment>


Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI - <AUTHOR> http://semantic-ui.com/ <comment><USER2> This is semantic:

Title
  <button class="active">Home</button> <button>Link</button> <button>Link</button>

not this:

Title
 Home Link Link
 Signed in as user

<comment><USER3> Yes, this EXACTLY. We need CSS libraries that encourage the use of new HTML5 tags. We're no longer living in a world of scrambled DIVs, we have a page structure to follow now. I feel as if this may even be a step backwards, just the third example code in which the Bootstrap version has button while the semantic version is a DIV makes no sense, it's a button, not a DIV.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The bootstrap markup is actually more semantic than Semantic UI. Classes like large, red, floated, right, circular etc.. are presentational not semantic. If you want to use a framework and keep semantic CSS then look in to using the LESS/SASS version of Bootstrap or Foundation.

Edit: After a more detailed look, the framework is actually really nice (and very comprehensive). The name still doesn't make much sense though.

<comment><USER5> I don't understand this. It's CSS. Of course it's presentational. Do CSS class names have to describe the semantic structure, as well as the DOM structure?

<comment><USER6> There's no such thing as a "CSS class". HTML has classes, and CSS has class selectors.

So yes, since HTML is designed to describe its content, the class names should describe the content and the CSS should select that content to style.

<comment><USER7> Not true. A "CSS class" is where you go to be taught about CSS.

<comment><USER8> Any good sites I can select a CSS class?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wouldn't call writing "ui large red labeled icon button" in HTML semantic anything. I'd called it confusing orgy of style and content.

<comment><USER10> I agree. First of all, why is a ui class necessary? Second, what's large? The icon, the button, the label? All of it? What's red, the icon or the button? Certainly not both. There's a reason we have classes like "btn btn-small icon-* icon-2x". A large icon in a small button. I think those names are more 'semantic'.

<comment><USER11> I assume the ui class is there for namespacing, which I think is a good idea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> In their examples, none of their buttons were actually buttons. Nor were they even links. They were all DIVs. This is pretty terrible HTML, for many reasons, especially for accessibility.

<comment><USER13> I really liked it visually speaking but yes, buttons implemented as divs it's sad.

<comment><USER14> It's a tag ambivalent CSS library. There's nothing sad about that. Just use buttons tags, it's not stopping you. Don't get hung up on the demo code.

<comment><USER15> It's a little concerning using library claims to be about "semantic" when the demo code doesn't even care about using the semantic tag for button. It makes you worried if the author actually knows what he's doing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Hey, I'm jack the guy behind semantic UI. Semantic isn't ready for release yet. A lot of the copy on the site is only currently in draft form. and there are plenty of inconsistencies with the code base itself. Hell, there isn't even a download link.

I've been privately been working on the framework trying to get it to a place where i'm happy enough to open it up for outside feedback and it's not quite there yet.

The idea behind semantic UI is that html tags aren't truly semantic, but have become conventional to programmers. There is nothing semantic about using an 'a' tag to refer to a link or td for a table cell. These codifications make web development less accessible to non programmers. Ideally we'd all start going around creating our own top level tags to define user interface, but we don't really have that opportunity today.

The only chance, I believe, we have to build a linguistically semantic web is to build conventions around class names usage, the bit of web design where most FEDs make their decisions.

Semantic uses DIVs as an equalizing factor. If we can't control how browsers interpret tags then we might as well ignore them. I'm sure a lot of this stuff sounds terribly bombastic. The intention is quite the opposite. Define by convention, not by prescription.

I'm looking forward to bringing semantic back to hacker news sometime when its more fully completed.

<comment><USER17> The HTML in the project is brittle, problematic for consumers and parsers, confusing to developers and designers, and future-unfriendly. I encourage you to spend some time researching the reasoning behind HTML and markup in general, including why it's important to use id and class names that describe the content (rather than the presentation) and HTML elements other than div. They exist for a reason.

Think about this: I can see from the linked page that you understand how adding _type= "password"_ to an _input_ makes some consumers, like various web browsers, treat that field differently. There's a lot of stuff like that in HTML.

If you want a short intro that also explains some of the "why" behind various aspects of HTML5, read this: [http://www.abookapart.com/products/html5-for- web-designers](http://www.abookapart.com/products/html5-for-web-designers)

The HTML5 spec also has a lot of info ( [http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/grouping- content.html#the-div-ele...](http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/grouping- content.html#the-div-element) ). For example:

 _> Authors are strongly encouraged to view the div element as an element of last resort, for when no other element is suitable. Use of more appropriate elements instead of the div element leads to better accessibility for readers and easier maintainability for authors._

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Can you guys please stop whining about the name and talk about the features? Didn't your elementary school teacher tell you not to judge a book by its cover? They could always change the name if they had to. They never actually say they're semantic HTML, it could have other meanings. Or, you know, it could just be a name. There's plenty of projects with meaningless names.

<comment><USER19> Don't be an idiot.

Semantic UI has a meaning. The authors chose to ignore its meaning while trading on the cachet of the name. While their web dev skills may be unsurpassed, it's a reasonable criteria on which to judge them.

<comment><USER18> Ad hominem attack, really?

A single post or two on the name I could understand, but every comment? HN fixates on the absurd.

<comment><USER20> Because semantic actually _means_ something, it's not a subjective term.

Calling something Semantic UI and comparing it to another library, that more follows the actually meaning of semantic, is silly. Yes you can change the class name but setting up the name as something meaningful, something semantic, such as 'submitButton' lets you redefine it in the CSS.

If I'm building something that multiple clients will use I don't want each client having buttons with class names specific to the client, but something I can modify easily in the CSS to get the look and feel they want.

It's ass backwards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Great idea except you don't namespace anything! I like namespaces because one library or css import from another won't ever stomp on each other. I've seen 'ui', 'button' and 'red' in several other packages and places. They're going to conflict. The one with the greatest specifity is going to win and cause untold hours of frustrating debugging.

<comment><USER22> +1 with that. I dont understand why css framework authors dont namespace their frameworks. That's should be a basic requirement before distributing any css library.

<comment><USER23> Because it makes the selectors less efficient. On individual selectors it probably doesn't make much of a difference (for most of them at least) but add it all up and you can have a significant impact on performance for large DOM trees.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> What I'd really like is a UI toolkit for developers that goes

<comment><USER25> Frankly, Bootstrap is exactly that, for me. I've been converting our products (Webmin/Virtualmin, which are 15 and 10 year old codebases, respectively, and it shows badly in the current UI). Converting to Bootstrap, while extremely time-consuming, is not requiring significant design skill on my part to make everything look freaking awesome.

<comment><USER26> Thank you for redesigning Webmin. I used it for a client's server and the functionality was fantastic, the design a bit less so. A Bootstrap'd frontend sounds fantastic.

<comment><USER25> You're welcome. Here's the most recent screenshot of progress:

[http://i.imgur.com/l5gEwUJ.png](http://i.imgur.com/l5gEwUJ.png)

It is also immediately theme-able with any Bootstrap theme, which is a major leap forward. And, it is responsive...another major leap forward. The old way of handling mobile is to have a custom theme for mobile devices (currently based on Joe Hewitt's iUI, which is pretty long in the tooth, and looks like ancient iOS versions).

We're about a week away from an alpha release (suitable for testing in the wild), a month away from a beta release (suitable for daily use by people who understand how to file bug reports), and two months away from it being the default theme in all of our products, both Open Source and commercial. Assuming I am able to maintain the current pace of development.

Bootstrap (and maybe moreso, jQuery) is pretty miraculous, honestly. I've tried to do this on two separate occasions in the past with YUI and ExtJS, and failed miserably, because they simply don't work well in a progressive enhancement environment (and my brain doesn't work the way their developers brains work...jQuery fits my Perlish brain a lot better).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is a great idea, however the website needs some work I keep getting struck scrolling because the code boxes have overflow scroll on them. Also the navigation arrows at the top don't work :/

</comment><comment><USER28> I expected something about declarative, generic UI definitions.

I got a half-hearted lecture about HTML.

</comment><comment><USER29> Very nice, and has lots of components. I like it.

Regarding the semantic-ness of the class names - I see people complaining that "ui three column grid" is not semantic. I don't understand what the big fuss is about - how could a generic, non-preprocessed grid be semantic ? It's presentational by definition, and the class names reflect that. If they implemented the framework as SASS mixins, sure, you can be as as semantic as you want when you use those mixins. That's what I like about Foundation. For example:

      .my-foobar {
        @include grid-columns(3);
        @include panel;
      }

</comment><comment><USER30> This is actually pretty regressive given the examples. This is the reverse of the attitude that brought us the
 tag. I disagree that stuff like this should be in classes, so definitely not for me.

</comment><comment><USER14> I think the point that a lot of people are missing is that the library is just tag ambivalent. The demo code uses divs, but of course you don't have to use divs. You can use whatever tag you like. It's hard to see why that could be construed as anything other than an advantage.

If you like <button> tags then by all rights use button tags. It makes sense that the demo code would use divs, because to do otherwise would imply that a certain tag is required for the css to work.

<comment><USER31> Advantage? Tell that to screenreader users.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> If the website creator is reading this - Please do something about the moving background image. It's nausea-inducing, and I had to exit the website due to it.

</comment><comment><USER33> Should "large" and "red" really be part of the semantic, or should it be up to the CSS to style the element with appropriate size and color ?

</comment><comment><USER34> Why does it do away with using <button> for buttons?

<comment><USER14> It doesn't. You just don't have to use <button> or any other tag for that matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Sorry if i misunderstand it, but where is the semantic and where the ui? This contradicts to all efforts of the last years for real symantec and a good readable html page with simple customizable css.

I see you intention to make a page readable for an ui designer and add symantec to ui elements. But whom help this? (except a designer)

</comment><comment><USER36> This. I like this. It's sort of like an OOCSS Bootstrap.

<comment><USER37> No. Not at all. OOCSS focuses on patterns that are reproduced in the page (or site) multiple time with little variation of look or positioning. This is everything but that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I like the design a lot better than Bootstrap, but I don't think "Semantic UI" matches the implementation.

</comment><comment><USER39> Shouldn't a language for sharing UI be human readable like QML ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QML#Basic_syntax](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QML#Basic_syntax) ) instead of machine readable like XML with its claustrophobic tag soup mess, flow killing end tags, and so on?

</comment><comment><USER40> What is this? Inuit css is more semantic than this, and i don't see the point to use classes in html document anymore, I actualy inject them via js or just extend reausable classes made in scss, semantics of html should just have attributes that actualy describe what the element is for with ARIA, roles, etc.

</comment><comment><USER41> I see semantics is much inclined to OOCSS (object oriented CSS) which is actually good because the project is cleaner, works really great for large websites with lots of pages.

But it's poorly executed. The good deal is, to use Bootstrap + OOCSS. Ive had really good experiences and full control of the project by this method.

</comment><comment><USER42> I don't what about this is semantic except the class names. But even that comes with a heavy loss in maintainability. If I have to customize say, the border radius of an icon button, I'd have to override this specificity: `.ui.vertical.labeled.icon.buttons .button:first-child > .icon` Not cool.

</comment><comment><USER43> This is not semantic at all!

</comment><comment><USER44> am I the only one suffering from massive CPU usage while on that Semantic UI page due to the "#example .masthead:before" CSS3 background animation? my MBA fan starts spinning up like crazy.

</comment><comment><USER45> Would be good if it didn't suffer such a big case of divitis...

</comment><comment><USER46> Ok so the name and tagline of this library is wrong/confusing. But forgetting that, visually it looks like a nice alternative to bootstrap. Still some work to be done.

</comment><comment><USER47> Some parts are so beautiful, it's a very good inspiration.

</comment><comment><USER48> Looks great. I am also using a Chromium-based browser, so half the elements do nothing when I click on them, but that's understandable seeing how new this is.

Keep up the good work!

</comment><comment><USER49> Agree with everyone else on the semantic issue, nonetheless I'm loving the theme and built-in features and would 100% use this for some prototype builds.

</comment><comment><USER50> This is really nice, certain parts are just amazing. Such nice UI flow. I will keep an eye on it and try and use it in my next project!

</comment><comment><USER51> Showing a modal takes ages on Chrome on iPad, presumably as the blurred background is being rendered.

</comment><comment><USER52> The first example claims that "ui three column grid" is semantic. Not in my book.

<comment><USER52> Actually, I think we've all misunderstood this: it's "Semantic". Nowhere does it actually claim it's 'semantic' :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> _You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means._

</comment><comment><USER53> Wow, I really like this.

</comment><comment><USER54> This is cart-before-the-horse-ism.

Where did this trend come from to use presentation frameworks as a barometer for developing semantic markup?

Go to [http://schema.org](http://schema.org) to understand what descriptive semantics is about.

"What it looks like" is not basis for initiating a project into generic semantic structures that involve interoperability with existing, mature systems.

These exercises really need to stop. There are no "three column grids" in e-mails. C'mon, folks !

How can we get drag-and-drag complex objects from microdata? — This is a question of semantics, and this framework follows a principle of "UI is the language of the web." With this axiom, one cannot even begin to talk about interoperable/shared semantics!

Following such a principle, what do we end up saying about the lingua franca of the Web, HTML, which does not describe any UI component? We're not "writing for UIs"; we're writing for other humans, and possibly other species which can parse a base language. If all we're writing for is the UI, we'd first need to describe our grammar before we can begin to send a message, and this is clearly not the case with natural language. We describe what we [mean] before we go about describing how we meant it!

</comment><comment><USER55> This site infuriates me. Half the stuff I click does nothing(chrome).</comment>


Is there a smooth path to migrate from Xtext to Racket? - <AUTHOR> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61622912/domain-specific-languages-in-racket-compared-to-model-driven-frameworks-such-as <comment><AUTHOR> I am the author of the question at stackoverflow.

The racket topic on SO does not seem very active, so I thought I could get answers here as well.</comment>


Using Emacs and Git with Magit 2.1 - <AUTHOR> http://lwn.net/Articles/649535/

<comment><USER2> Magit is so good, I nearly forgot how to use git commands anymore.

Navigation is intuitive, diffs are great, discarding and commiting hunks is superb, and it's snappy. It's really an outstanding interface for git!

<comment><USER3> > I nearly forgot how to use git commands anymore

This is my one fear. I am however willing to put up with this decay given the increase in productivity. It's up there with org-mode as an emacs feature.

<comment><USER4> After more than two years using Magit, I can only think of one instance when I didn't recall a git command when I needed it. It took about 5s of googling to find.

You can always see what command Magit is running behind the scenes by hitting `$`, in case you're curious -- I've learned a few things this way.

<comment><USER3> Yes I agree and the mappings are largely one to one. As you say magit-process with $ is great.

Next up to play with: whazzup.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> For anyone who loves Magit as much as me there's a donations page [http://magit.vc/donations.html](http://magit.vc/donations.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> I appreciate how Magit isn't something that takes away from the git experience by holding your hands like a GUI might. Magit is just an efficient interface that in the end is just like using standard git in the command line.

<comment><USER7> As someone coming from a different discipline, git is tricky. Why would you _not_ want to take away from that tricky experience by having a GUI? I understand the power of git, but it's really hard to use coming from a user's perspective, especially if you're working in less command-liney languages. I'd love to have a gui for git!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I just switched from command-line foo to magit today (export GIT_EDITOR=emacsclient) by accident, and I'm very surprised how much easier it is now to solve complicated rebase scenarios. I'm a very sceptical emacs user, who prefers the terminal over M-x shell and friends.

Once I got used to the few keys, it is much better than anything else I saw before, and much faster than doing it manually.

Moving picks up or down with one key, killing it, fixup, squash, inspection, ... all with one key.

<comment><USER9> i wanted a terminal in emacs that was as standard as possible and created 'sane-term'. Just ansi-term with a couple useful features. Sorry for the plug

<comment><USER8> Just tried it, it's awesome. It could persuade me. Everything just works naturally.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I have used many Git UIs over the years, and Magit is the first one that lets me work with greater speed and safety than just using the command line.

</comment><comment><USER11> Magit is love. Magit is life. If you're an emacs and git user but don't use magit, it's a big, big waste of the powers of emacs.

</comment><comment><USER12> Anyone able to help me out here? How do you get it to install? I tried the Melpa instructions and added the following to my .emacs:

      (require 'package) ;; You might already have this line
      (add-to-list 'package-archives
                   '("melpa" . "http://melpa.org/packages/"))
      (when (< emacs-major-version 24)
        ;; For important compatibility libraries like cl-lib
        (add-to-list 'package-archives '("gnu" .   "http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/")))
      (package-initialize) ;; You might already have this line

I bounced emacs, it seemed to come back up okay. But (emacs 24.5.1 OSX) when I type "M-x package-install" it claims magit [No Match]

I use emacs- but I don't tend to customize it much.

<comment><USER9> Try "M-x package-list-packages" to see a list and then find it. If it's not there then your package setup is incorrect.

<comment><USER12> That did it, thank you.

<comment><USER13> M-x package-refresh-contents

do this periodically to get your list updated w/ new packages and the latest releases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I really live having good formatting and spell check in the commit messages. It's much nicer than the `git commit -m "blah"` messages. Sure I could use another GUI, but magit is very easy when I'm already in emacs.

<comment><USER15> Perhaps you do not know, but if you leave off the -m switch, git will launch $EDITOR with a commented list of files changed, where you can write your commit message.

<comment><USER16> Perhaps he did not know, but I find that a lot of developers, especially those not using GUIs, end up using -m every single time and writing poor commit messages. With Magit, at least in my experience, you are more inclined to write better commits.

If you give developers a "lazy" option, a lot will default to it, which isn't ideal. -m is an alternative for a quick commit and end up being front and center when using the CLI.

<comment><USER17> > With Magit, at least in my experience, you are more inclined to write better > commits.

I have flyspell-mode enabled for git-commit-mode. Avoids embarrassing typos in my git commit log.

It's little stuff like this adding up, making Emacs too great to ever be without.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> My experience with Magit:

I played around with it, and didn't see any advantage over using git commands.

Then I tried pushing a change. I was expecting some confirmation on what refspec to use... but no! Magit pushed my change directly to refs/heads instead of refs/for, completely bypassing gerrit code review.

I got burned. That was it; I'm never using Magit again.

<comment><USER19> So you didn't read the manual or at least the help for the command you were about to use and blame magit for not doing what you expected?

As with many emacs commands you use C-u if you want to specify the refspec to push to.

<comment><USER5> Or with the new version it's `P o` (Push, other).</comment></comment></comment>


Why Citationsy.com Doesn't Have a Cookie Notice - <AUTHOR> https://citationsy.com/blog/why-citationsy-doesnt-have-a-cookie-notice/ <comment><USER2> Thank you for not using the cookie notice! This is clearly a better way of following this law, and probably what the EU intended when they created it.

Cookie notices have become a massive pain on the Internet. What really annoys me is that these notices are on websites that don't even serve the EU. The other day I was browsing the website for a local (non-EU) cellphone company, on a local TLD, from an IP address registered to a local ISP, and I still had to accept this meaningless popup.

<comment><USER3> Well the law applies to all EU citizens, at home or abroad, in one of the weirdest jurisdiction overreaches I've ever seen.

So the company could have one or more EU citizen customers who even live in the US.

But I clearly like the one cookie for sessions approach better, and most of these alerts don't actually fulfill the requirements anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Even if cookie notices did constitute some kind of consent (pretty debatable) they would be a dark pattern that should be banned in the public interest anyway (like, while I'm on the topic, infinite-scrolling slot machine pseudo-"timelines").

</comment><comment><USER5> Great job, Citationsy! That's how you do it.

</comment><comment> em-bee if users are logged in you can track everything they are doing while logged in without any extra cookies.</comment>


Taylor Swift now dating Node.js - <AUTHOR> http://blog.strongloop.com/taylor-swift-now-dating-node-js/

<comment><USER2> why is this on the front page?

<comment><USER3> I'm convinced most April Fool's jokes are secretly part of a troll campaign to destroy the tradition entirely with shitty slaps at humor.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Got an offer to leave my current employer, need advice - <AUTHOR> Hello. I have a really big dilemma. My situation at the moment is that I am employed in a software house like other ~400 developers, I'm here for a little over 2 years. About 6 months ago my company aquired contract with a company X to maintain and extend their current system (quite a niche one). 6 months passed after I was assigned to this project, my role went from simple maintenance to management of team of 4, analytics and so on.
Around now I have got an offer to leave my current employer and work for company X to build a new team there from scratch.
This is kind of offer which you cannot reject (2x raise, basically anything I need or want, trainings etc. - things I cannot get at current employer).
I think I already made a decision but me leaving means the contract is cancelled, 4 guys will need to find different projects and I think my current employer will be really mad for leaving company and taking with me their income.
This is a first time I need to make such decision, HN please tell me what did you do / what would you do in this situation? <comment><USER2> Leave.

1\. Guilt and inertia are tools that companies exploit to compress the wage of loyal employees.

2\. Starting a new job is a great skill to learn and develop.

3\. When I left my last job, the managers were the nicest to me they had ever been. If other employees see you mistreated then it will tank moral.

<comment><USER3> _2\. Starting a new job is a great skill to learn and develop._

This. I can confirm that it's a skill, based on my recent job-hunting experience. Even relatively few hours of training and practice will set you apart from the vast majority of applicants.

Edit: And I can recommend Ramit Sethi's material, in particular. The guy does his experimental research.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You should definitely go. But I want to add another point not being mentioned: Make sure you have the offer officially in writing before telling your employer. I know of a number of people who were burned when something fell through on the other end and they were left in the lurch.

Also, business is business... Any software consultancy SHOULD understand the inherent risks of a client poaching and/or bringing work in-house. If your current employer will "be really mad" for you advancing your career you should get out ASAP as they don't care about their devs.

</comment><comment><USER5> Caring about your direct reports and peer relationships is a core management competency.

Do right by your current company and team. Tender at least 4 weeks notice (knowing this gives them additional runway if necessary). Attitude is key-- state that you'll be happy insure to a smooth transition, distribute projects, restructure the team/workload, and put together a knowledge transfer doc. Leave like a pro. Your new employer will likely take note.

<comment><USER6> Good point! Never burn a bridge.

<comment><AUTHOR> This. I want to keep in touch with people which I WILL make mad

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> You'll want to consult a lawyer about the contract (perhaps the other company can offer a buy-out or the like).

That said, I made a similar decision just over a year ago and, even though I lost the new job I took, I would do it again. Research shows that your long- term and short-term satisfaction with life depends on a willingness to take risks and care for yourself.

And, if your employer is someone likely to get angry at you for taking your career into your own hands, then what are the chances that they'll ever promote you again?

</comment><comment><USER7> Business is business, your current company is 400 strong, they´ll be mad for loosing a client, but it´s not like they´ll have to let people go for just one account with 5 people.

I think it´s more important to make a decision is how the other company is treating their employees, working conditions?. Do people working there recommend it to their friends?.

It´s a great opportunity, and worth taking it, unless there are big No-Nos at the new company, I´ll take it hands down.

</comment><comment><USER8> Go. Do what's best for you. As you said, your current job is underpaying you by 50%. You only owe them two weeks' notice.

Does the contract with the client specifically mention you? How do you know they can't hire/promote someone else to take your place? You're leaving but the rest of the team is staying.

<comment><AUTHOR> Company policy states that if customer will buy-out one of us they will revore the contract and company x want to start own dev team to get rid of dependency on 3rd parties.

I know that they will find other projects, what I'm worried about is how to leave in peace as managers will be mad as hell and HR wchich i love will also feel consequences of not being able to keep me.

Other aspect is that probably I will take with me 2 other guys from company.

Long story short - I want to leave without causing damage to myself and my friends

<comment><USER8> You're switching to working for the client on your current project? If that's a "buy-out", your employer is presumably getting big $$ when you leave. They won't care if it's written into their contract with the client.

Regarding taking coworkers with you, many workplaces have non-solicitation clauses in their employment contact. However, your new employer can buy them out also. Ask your new employer.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is no "buy-out" option that's why people probably will be mad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> You can ask your current employer to make counteroffer. Also, indicate that you are willing train the next guy before you leave. You want to leave in good-terms.

You should also know that when an employer want to terminate you, they don't think about your current situation before they lay you off. You still get laid-off when you are in middle of having a baby and need insurance. So employer's current situation shouldn't affect your decision.

</comment><comment><USER10> Get that offer in writing and ask a lawyer first. Probably if there were something illegal its company X who's doing wrong but you don't want to be in the middle of that.

Said that, there is a sentence by Julio Cortazar (as I remember) that applies in this kind of problems and I found really useful: "When someone says that he will go, he's already gone". Go.

</comment><comment><USER11> Strangers on the internet cannot make the decision for you, but like you said - it sounds like you've already made your decision. Your current employer will adjust, and fill your role - just as they filled it with you when there was a void.

Good luck with your new job! Sounds like you've earned it through all you've learned and accomplished in your current position.

</comment><comment><USER12> [http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees- that-stay-in-companies-longer-than-2-years-get-paid-50-less/)

1) Make sure you can legally switch.

2) Switch.

</comment><comment><USER13> Go. BUT, Give your current employer the opportunity to counter-offer. Don't tell them _who_ made you the offer, but tell them it's solid and you're prepared to leave. Your current employer might surprise you.

</comment><comment><USER6> Go. If your employer don't care about your training and other good things, don't spent your time too. I think it can be better for other guys, if you tell your current boss why you leave the company.</comment>


Google is limiting third party email software on Android - <AUTHOR> Today accounts that have login on lost of third party email software on Android received the following email.
Hi,
Although you don't need to do anything, we wanted to let you know that the following apps may no longer be able to access some data in your Google Account, including your Gmail content. If these apps are unable to meet the deadline to comply with our updated data policy requirements, they'll lose access to your Account starting July 15th, 2019.
*(email software name) We are making this change as part of ongoing efforts to make sure your data is protected and private.
You can always view, manage and remove apps you've given access to your account by visiting your Google Account.
Thanks, The Google Accounts team <comment><USER2> > Google is limiting third party email software on Android

Interesting interpretation.

[https://developers.google.com/terms/api-services-user- data-p...](https://developers.google.com/terms/api-services-user-data- policy#additional-requirements-for-specific-api-scopes)</comment>


Is it better to learn C or C++ if I'm a C#/Java/Swift programmer? - <AUTHOR> For people who are new to programming, especially those who never went through a "proper" Computer Science degree program but instead are either self-taught or went through a boot camp to get them to a point where they could be hired as a .NET, Java, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, etc programmer, and are now wanting to learn at a deeper level with a "real" language, is it better to learn C++ or eschew the superset and learn C directly? <comment><USER2> It depends on your goals. I use C and C++ everyday, but I'd suggest if you are trying to learn how to deal with very low level concepts than C is probably the best thing to learn initially. So much has been written in C over the years, and so much continues to be developed in C that it is really a powerful tool to know and understand. There are plenty of good code bases to look at for either C or C++, but C will give you a rooted understanding of core concepts.

Plus look at it this way, every time I use a higher level language I know that it is helping me get things done faster, but I also know everything it is having to do for me at a lower level. Which means when I debug it, I look at things differently than others whom don't have the same low level understanding. So IMO it makes you a better all around programmer even if you decide to work mostly in a higher level language. One draw back to that too, is you have to look at the obvious first and not get lost in the weeds.</comment>


Scientists cast doubt on the uncertainty principle (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.rdmag.com/news/2012/09/scientists-cast-doubt-uncertainty-principle <comment><USER2> Why does every article on that site say "Advertisement" at the top? Makes me skeptical of everything there.

<comment><USER3> I'm sure that that word refers to the banner ad underneath it, not the entire page.

<comment><USER2> OH. Adblock Plus to the rescue. They should really look at their site with that on because the whole thing looks like a scam site.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> the actual publication is a little less cryptic: [http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v109/i10/e100404](http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v109/i10/e100404)

basically, the uncertainty principle still stands. what is being questioned is the application of the uncertainty principle to describe the relationship between measurement and the disturbance it creates, which has never been proven, but is commonly taught as an application.

<comment><USER5> Thanks! This makes some sense. It's basically saying that the uncertainty (if it still exists) is caused by something else than a disturbance from measurement?

<comment><USER4> It's not saying the uncertainty is from something else, but just the relationship of how much disturbance there is from a measurement is not fully understood and is not accurately described by the uncertainty principle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Can any physicists comment on the article?

<comment><USER4> done. i'm not a physicist by trade, but i did my university studies in physics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> [http://quanta.ws/ojs/index.php/quanta/article/view/14](http://quanta.ws/ojs/index.php/quanta/article/view/14) Here is an explanation that weak measurements does not contradict the Heisenberg principle.</comment>


Ask HN: What SaaS customer service tool(s) does your startup use? - <AUTHOR>

I am selecting a customer service workflow tool to help manage inbound customer communications.  A small group of employees will be logged into this tool to receive questions via email, social media posts, and (probably) live chat from prospective and existing customers.  The goal is to help maintain a record of all communications, ensure no messages "fall through the cracks", and help us measure our responsiveness, efficiency, and productivity as a service organization.  The tool we select should ideally also help us generate and manage a knowledge base / FAQ site.
The candidates I have identified so far:
Desk.com (formerly Assist.ly) - $49/user/month ZenDesk - $20 - $49/user/month UserVoice - $15 - $35/user/month FreshDesk - $9 - $25/user/month
Does anyone have experience using these? Your suggestions and feedback are appreciated. <comment><USER2> We use Freshdesk. We need to pay for 3 instead of 4 of us, as first agent is free. For a SAAS startup that is just getting started this fits our needs perfectly - support tickets that are captured via mail and listens to conversations on twitter, facebook and converts into tickets. Saves plenty of time. All the other features you mentioned are all covered - like knowledge base, feature requests etc.,

Disclosure: We are friends of Freshdesk team - Zoho alumni network. :)

</comment><comment><USER3> I've used Assistly (for about an year) for this, and they are extremely good for all that you have mentioned. I've never used them for live chat (do they even have that function?) so I can't say anything. I loved the UI; it's extremely easy to use.

From the outside, Freshdesk and Zendesk look good too.

</comment><comment><USER4> You could try Zoho Support ($12/user/month) - this will provide you with a help desk including social media monitoring.

In terms of live chat, you will need to find a service that integrates with Zoho (i've seen a few of them around but, can't recall any right now).</comment>


Germany's Typhoon problem: Only four fighters can be made combat ready - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/germanys-typhoon-problem-only-four-fighters-can-be-made-combat-ready/ <comment><AUTHOR> Our defense minister has more children than working aircraft (someone on Twitter). ;-)</comment>