Posical, the Positivist Calendar for Python - <AUTHOR> http://blog.zdsmith.com/posical-the-positivist-calendar-for-python.html <comment><USER2> I've been a proponent of this reform for a while. Strangely on my way into work this morning I was trying to figure out why a week is 7 days and not some other division. I thought maybe it was religious, but I now think it has more to do with lunar cycles being close to 28 days and that predating any religious foundation.

12 months has the benefit of dividing the seasons into 3 month quarters. However having an uneven number of days per month and with the solstices and equinoxes falling somewhat haphazardly on the calendar, this doesn't seem like a good reason to stick with the current system.

As long as we're redesigning the calendar system, I think the solstice and the equinox should fall in the middle of a season with the Winter Solstice effectively marking the start of the calendar year as a holiday. The leap day could be the day that proceeds that, effectively being used as a day to mark the end of the year. Seasons would then define periods of similar daylight.

The only reasons not to adopt this sort of calendar are ceremonial. Having a 13 month calendar simplifies so much from financial calculations to having consistent day of week/month boundaries that I can't see any real down sides.

I have no idea how to promote widespread adoption of a new calendar, but it is something I've thought about a lot.

<comment> jack-r-abbit > _Having a 13 month calendar simplifies so much from financial calculations > to having consistent day of week /month boundaries that I can't see any real > down sides._

It seems like that would complicate the business practice of dividing your fiscal year into quarters. I guess each quarter would be 3 months + 1 week but then you don't have quarters starting/ending evenly with months.

<comment><USER3> Solution: everyone takes the extra month off.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4>
        Fri Sep 7535 20:02:59 EDT 1993

Think big. Let's decrease the speed of Earth's rotation so that a day is 20 (old) minutes 58 (old) seconds longer. Then we get to sleep in a little, and 1 day = 1°.

</comment><comment><USER5> I understand this is a bit of fun trying to rethink a very old thing, but the benefits are really bare even when looking past all the damage of a potential transition.

Basically, you're consolidating the unevenness between years/months/days of the week to one special 1 or 2 day period. Ok, that's alright, but it still requires a bit of extra help. You still have to think through calendars understanding "Oh! I have to add a day for the epagomenal. Oh, it's a leap year, so it will be 2 actually."

That might be preferable to having to think through 31 or 30 or 28 or 29 days, but not by that much. Is aligning months and days of the week to the same time every year a good thing? I suppose it's easier to determine what day Thanksgiving is every year, but otherwise, it seems like a minute benefit. On the other hand, I wonder if there are some benefits of that not happening. The only one that comes to mind is it would suck for your Birthday to be on a Monday every year, but I suspect there might be other reasons where enforcing a day to occur on the same place in the week could be harmful.

<comment><USER6> _Is aligning months and days of the week to the same time every year a good thing?_

There are benefits for things like accounting, logistics/scheduling, standardizing periods for better comparative analysis, etc.

Such systems are already in common use (though the extra day of the year does create a wrinkle): [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-4-5_calendar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-4-5_calendar)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I love the idea, but this has no chance of happening in my lifetime. I'm still holding out hope that the US will switch to the metric system however.

<comment><USER8> Believe it or not, world elites were once on the brink of adopting the International Fixed Calendar, which was basically the same as Comte's.

Then judaist religious backlash kicked in, and here we are.

<comment><USER9> Our current calendar has absolutely nothing to do with Judaism, it is the calendar of Rome with some very minor tweaks.

[http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm](http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm)

<comment><USER8> "The origin of the seven-day week is the religious significance that was placed on the seventh day by ancient cultures, including the Babylonian and Jewish civilisations."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven- day_week](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven-day_week)

"Some Jewish, Christian, and Islamic groups have been historically opposed to the calendar because their tradition of worshiping every seventh day would result in either the day of the week of worship changing from year to year or eight days passing when Year Day or Leap Day occurs.[11] Others have contended that Year Day and Leap Day could be counted as additional days of worship."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar)

"Thus, once or twice a year there would be eight days rather than seven between consecutive Saturdays. Thus the Jewish Sabbath, which must occur every seventh day, would be on a different weekday each year. The same applies to the Christian Sabbath. Hertz realised that this would cause problems for Jews and Christians alike in observing their Sabbaths, and mobilised worldwide religious opposition to defeat the proposal."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hertz#Calendar_reform](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hertz#Calendar_reform)

<comment><USER9> The seven-day week, yes, the rest of it is Roman in origin: the solar nature, the months, their names, their order, etc.

One of the weird ones is our (English) weekday names: Sunday, Monday, etc. Those are apparently from German, but after their contact with the Romans, and after the Romans adopted the 7-day week. Which means it is after the Christianization of Rome, but before the Christianization of the Germanic tribes. They took the Roman week and put their gods' names in place instead.

<comment><USER8> Even more peculiarly, anglo-saxon names actually do not reflect full Christianization of Rome itself: Saturday is still the day of Saturn rather than the Shabbath, and Sunday is still the day of "Triumphant Sun" rather than the "Dominicus" (belonging to the Lord). Which means they originated before the end of IV century AD, when Rome officially introduced these two Christian references in its weekday names (all others were maintained intact).

It has to be said also that Roman calendars were actually "pillaged" from Greek culture and then tweaked until right - a pragmatic approach they followed in so many different cultural and scientific areas when interacting with foreign civilisations. Unfortunately, they didn't go as far as trying to align the 7-day week (of Middle-Eastern origin) with their Greek-ish months, and their legacy ended up being managed by a Church that valued immutability over everything else. So here we are, 1600 years later, still celebrating the months of Julius (Caesar) and Augustus when the weather is the best around the Mediterranean Sea, the month of war-god Mars in the best period to start military campaigns in the same region, and with four months named by numerical positions they've long since changed... and still completely mismatched with 7-day weeks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's sad to see that, in what we all consider to be an "enlightened" age for science and rationality, the calendar problem is considered a de-facto taboo, something that will never be changed. It's such an obvious legacy hack, it should be refactored with a modern and proper design, but the API is so popular that breaking it would generate unbearable amounts of stop-energy. I wish we could have a wrapper or something.

<comment><USER10> Years and days are both reasonable periods to track and while some other system of tracking which day we are on is easy to imagine, the current system doesn't deserve to be called hard to deal with (it's 2 numbers...).

<comment><USER11> > the current system doesn't deserve to be called hard to deal with

OK, then tell me what day of the week May 4th, 2054 will be.

<comment><USER12> How often do you really need to know what day of the week a specific date in 40 years will fall on?

The current system will stand, because however irrational it is, it is _good enough_.

Not to mention, people don't like things that aren't classified. I think there would be a lot of people that didn't like having day 365 (and 366) be unclassified as days. That is another hack that would probably end up doing more harm than good. How would you model that extra day (or two)? You wouldn't have (13) 4 week months. You'd have (13) 4 week months, plus (1) one-day or two-day month. Hardly an elegant system worth changing for.

<comment><USER8> _> The current system will stand, because however irrational it is, it is good enough._

Exactly like a broken but popular API. It's still fundamentally bad.

 _> Not to mention, people don't like things that aren't classified. I think there would be a lot of people that didn't like having day 365 (and 366) be unclassified as days._

I think we'd all be relieved to have a separate classification space for leap days (29 February is an abomination) and other adjustments we might have to add here and there. We could dedicate these days to generic "spiritual and religious celebrations" to make traditionalists happy, call it "Holy Month" or something. It's a very subjective judgement anyway, one way or the other.

 _> You'd have (13) 4 week months, plus (1) one-day or two-day month. Hardly an elegant system worth changing for._

Still much more elegant that the current mess.

<comment><USER13> _We could dedicate these days to generic "spiritual and religious celebrations" to make traditionalists happy, call it "Holy Month" or something._

I can't tell if that's a serious suggestion, but if it is, I don't think that'd be very helpful. I'm trying to imagine which religion is standing around waiting for some benevolent calendar dictator to free up a couple new days in the year so they can implement a new tradition. :-D

Religions will stick their holy days on the calendar quite apart from your classification of them as holy. Provided you're not removing any capability for them to continue celebrating their current holidays, I don't think they're looking for any special consideration on the calendar front.

<comment><USER8> I'm Italian: every given day most of my fellow nationals are supposed to celebrate this or that saint... the Catholic Church is always more than happy to extend its cultural hegemony by attaching itself to celebrations of any sort, I'd be surprised if other confessions were very different on that front - there's always a scripture or an event that you can use to celebrate a specific day of the year. Even Christmas has not always fallen on the 25th day of the 12th month of the year, after all.

Any calendar reform unfortunately has to deal with this backward-compatibility nightmare with religious tradition, which doomed most previous attempts; hence my parent comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I like French Republican Calendar [1] much more for some reason. Months are 30 day each, no 7-day weeks, 10-day decades instead, so any day of the year is the same day of the "week" and the same day of the month. The rest 5 or 6 days are simply treated as "special days" (sansculottides), so it would be pretty easy to deal with them in any accounting software as well. The whole calendar has very nice spirit to it, each month is named in due to climatic effects of this one (at least it happens so in my location, and weather happens to change exactly according to this calendar, not Gregorian one), and each day of the year also has it's own name (something natural, like tree or fruit, no human names or something, which I find really cool). I really really like that symbolism. Such a calendar isn't just boring list of numbers, but something truly beautiful.

So I was using it for some time for reminders and such, but using calendar nobody else uses is pretty pointless, so I dropped it. Such a pity.

[1] - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar)

</comment><comment><USER15> There is also the slightly more modern International Fixed Calendar: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar)

It's essentially the same as the positivist calendar except:

* gregorian names are kept

* the extra month is inserted before july and is called Sol

* the extra day on leap years is inserted before the 1st of Sol

* was in actual use by Kodak until 1989 (amazing!)

</comment><comment> jack-r-abbit We need to be able to timestamp stuff still, right?

If the 28th of Bichat is _2014-13-28_ and the 1st of Moses is _2015-01-01_ , how do we timestamp those "uncharted" festival days? Would they just be _2014-13-29_ (and _2014-13-30_ on leap year) but just not have a day of week name?

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question. In the library, intercalary days are just their own month. So it would just be 2015-14-1.

<comment><USER16> In other words, there's actually a 14 month that either contains 1 or 2 days, both of which have no weekday associated with them?

I don't see how it would make things much easier, especially for timestamps in various date formats and date-input fields.

<comment><USER8> Why? It's still three numeric digits. If anything, it would be much easier to calculate date validity. In Python:

      acceptable_days = range(1,29)
      if pickedMonth == 14:
         acceptable_days = [1];
         if isLeapYear(year): acceptable_days = [1,2]
         # any future hack will just go here

      if pickedDay not in acceptable_days or pickedMonth > 14:
         raise InvalidDateException()

Compare this with anything we use today. Which code is simpler?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The Terran Computational Calendar ([http://terrancalendar.com/](http://terrancalendar.com/)) is an interesting read - "13 identical 28-day months, followed by a 'minimonth' that is generally composed of leap days and leap seconds."

</comment><comment><USER18> I like Asimov's calendar [1]. The year is divided into 4 seasons of 91 days (13 weeks per season), with one extra day a year that is not part of any season and is not part of the weekday count. For leap years, another extra day occurs between the second and third seasons.

I'd make one change to Asimov's scheme. He gets rid of months. I'd keep them, with each season consisting of 3 months: 2 of 30 days and 1 of 31 days.

[1] [http://calendars.wikia.com/wiki/World_Season_Calendar](http://calendars.wikia.com/wiki/World_Season_Calendar)

</comment><comment><USER19> Inserting a day between the regular weekdays once a year sounds pretty dangerous to me. I bet there are a lot of things that need to happen weekly that would quickly go out of whack if they are delayed a day.

<comment><USER20> I think we would need to be more precise about our measures of lifetime for some things (recent e.g. would be MH370's black box battery life rating) but the idea of measure lifetime with days since an event is already used quite widely (I rarely heard the phrase 2 weeks since that event) and could be adjusted to without much difficulty.

Financial and similar institutions would likely treat the festival day(s) as they do any long weekend at the moment. Pay cycles could be adjusted with end of year 'bonus' to cover out of cycle days.

I'm sure there's something but we've dealt with quirky calendars for a long time so really we're just attacking the same problem that we currently have with 30 day fixed cycles.

<comment><USER21> Once we get off the surface of the earth, seconds are more useful than days. Or, more likely, Ksecs and Msecs. A kilo-second is 16.67 minutes, 100 Ksecs is 27.7 hours, an Msec is 11.57 days. 30 Msecs is 95% of an Earth year. These are all useful measures for humans to work in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The article fails to make the distinction between lunar and solar calender. It's just about dividing the solar year to equal months, but we also want to make the month align with the moon, which circles earth for 29.5 days on average. The big problem with the Gregorian calendar, in my opinion is that it so clearly missed the lunar month. it just feels intolerably close, but not quite there...

by the way, no need to invent a new calendar. the Hebrew calendar is both solar and lunar.

<comment><USER23> It's actually unclear to me why we particularly care about how long it takes to orbit the Sun. Axial rotation, sure, the length of a day is important. But outside of that... why do we need particular units like weeks, months, and years at all?

<comment><USER8> Religion and seasonality. 7-days as a unit of measurement is written into unamendable documents hold as holy by all Judaist monotheisms (Jewish, Christian and Islamic). The ciclical experience of seasonal-weather and daylight-lenght changes are also too powerful to deny.

<comment><USER13> Unrelated, why do you call Islam "judaist"?

AFAIK, Islam traces its roots back to Abraham, who was Judah's great- grandfather. So it would seem more appropriate to call it an Abrahamic religion, no?

<comment><USER8> I'm not a religious scholar by any means (and certainly less versed in Islamic tradition than any Muslim), so you're probably correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Another mathematically elegant calendar is the 7date:

[http://tylerneylon.com/a/7date_spec/](http://tylerneylon.com/a/7date_spec/)

<comment><USER15> I really like the 7date notation with the base-7 notation counting the weeks down, but the 7month with the remaining 22/23 days of the year are still a kludge. With a 13 month calendar those remaining 1/2 days are neatly packaged and disposed of as "festival days". Harder to deal with 22/23 tailing days.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25>
      > Comte set year 1 of his new calendar as the first year of the
      > truly modern age: 1789, the first year of the Great Crisis.

For me 1789 is the first year of the Great Constitutional Ratification. I did a quick google search for "great crisis" and came up empty. Google seems to be convinced that when I type "great crisis" I am looking for "Great Depression." What is the Great Crisis?

<comment><USER20> It might be referring to la Grande Peur[0] (the Great Fear) which was the panic reaponse to the initial rebellions at the beginning of the French Revolution.

[0] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fear

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> So is the extra day, or two days during a leap year, simply appended to the year, waited out and ignored?

It's an interesting concept; similar to the Time-slip in Red Mars. Wanting a Martian day to equal that of an Earth day, colonists define the time between 00:00 and 00:01 as being 39 minutes 40 seconds in length.

I guess most peoples' minds go immediately to, "do I have to work it?". Mine did.

<comment><USER15> In case anyone hasn't read it, it's my LOTR: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Mars](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Mars)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> With all this talk about universal basic incomes and automation taking away jobs, etc etc, there really might be something to the idea of switching to 73 5-day weeks. I wouldn't be in support of taking away Saturday and Sunday ;) but a 3-day workweek of W-F followed by a weekend of Saturday and Sunday could have real possibilities!

<comment><USER20> Automation doesn't preclude the need for high levels of human productivity, especially in a knowledge industry based society. Having a 60% productivity (admittedly soft and cultural) limit for the week would be a more significant change than if we were to do 4-1 weeks instead of 5-2 (71.4%). 4-1 seems like it could be a perfectly reasonable way of doing things for a lot of hackers, maybe not for everyone though.

<comment><USER28> > Having a 60% productivity (admittedly soft and cultural) limit for the week

The culture will quickly adjust productivity levels back up. This isn't something you need to bother worrying about.

The Chinese government mandates an excessive holiday total; during those holidays, businesses and schools close. But the cultural solution is that schools open and businesses work for however many nearby weekend days the official holiday legally consists of (this irritates expats no end; I'm not quite sure why). So if M-W are a holiday one week, expect to work for the preceding weekend and the saturday after.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> > Finally it is perennial, in that the weekdays of every year are always the > same.

No, the epagomenal/intercalary days would change this from year to year. The weekdays would be the same from month to month within a given year, of course (assuming the extra day doesn't fall somewhere in the middle).

<comment><USER30> According to the great and wise Wikipidia,

>This extra day added to the last month was outside of the days of the week cycle, and so the first of a month was always a Monday. On leap years, an additional festival day (also outside the week cycle), to celebrate holy women, would join the memorial day of the dead.

Which to me reads that the extra day/s are not one of the 7 weekdays. Hence these days would fall between a Sunday and Monday, but would not be refereed to by any of our current weekday names. So, each year there would be the forth Sunday of Bichat, followed by the The Festival of All the Dead epagomenal day, followed by the first Monday of Moses.

edited out some typos

<comment><USER31> You know, I just really like the idea of leap days not being called anything. It sort of reminds me of the Egyptian mythology. Something-something- something, why doesn't the year have 360 days like degrees in a circle, blah blah blah, so here's some fake days to get around Ra and have your babies by another man. It's like metaphysical hackers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> >There are 365 days in a year (366 on leap years)

Wrong already. I do not understand this obsession to make a year exactly the length of a given number of days. They are both completely unrelated, exept in that they are units of time.

A year should be exactly one time the period of the earth moving around the sun. We just need to agree on a starting point. The day on which that starting point falls would be the last day of that year or the first day of the next (or both). And while I understand the need to group days (not sparate the year) into weeks the concept of month seems completely unnecessary. Just agree on a number of weeks on which pay is given out, rent payed,...

<comment><USER28> > Just agree on a number of weeks on which pay is given out, rent payed,...

You can do this now. In particular, pay is quite frequently handled by the week.</comment></comment>


What can we learn from the last 200 million things that happened in the world? - <AUTHOR> http://ideas.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/04/10/what_can_we_learn_from_the_last_200_million_things_that_happened_in_the_world#.UWXAH_m2tuc.twitter?page=full

<comment><AUTHOR> Version of the article without having an account on ForeignPolicy: [http://www.instapaper.com/text?u=http%3A%2F%2Fideas.foreignp...](http://www.instapaper.com/text?u=http%3A%2F%2Fideas.foreignpolicy.com%2Fposts%2F2013%2F04%2F10%2Fwhat_can_we_learn_from_the_last_200_million_things_that_happened_in_the_world%23.UWXAH_m2tuc.twitter%3Fpage%3Dfull)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> There is a version of the reduced dataset here: <http://eventdata.psu.edu/data.dir/GDELT.html> And a python script to make some sense of the data is explained on this blog here: [http://johnbeieler.org/blog/2013/04/04/how-do-i-gdelt- subset...](http://johnbeieler.org/blog/2013/04/04/how-do-i-gdelt-subsetting- and-aggregating-the-gdelt-dataset/)</comment>


Code is not inevitable - <AUTHOR> http://maetl.net/code-is-not-inevitable <comment><USER2> Some insight on this, both personal and inspired by a semiotics course I took :

Code is not avoidable because, be it text or image, you're still facing elements that are given a conventional meaning. That is the definition of a code.

Text is considered to be a digital code, because words have no "likeness" link with what they mean, whereas images form an analogical code because an image generally looks like something real.

Now when considering a programming language, textual or graphic, you're in presence of a third system, which is analogical no with reality, but with "conventional" parts of the textual or visual code. Since textual code is inherently conventional, one might be inclined to think it is better suited to programming languages than visual code, whose analogical properties are never used (visual programming languages use arrows and other conventional constructs, never representation of real things).

Moreover, textual code has what is called a metalinguistic property, meaning it can talk about itself but also about other codes (like visual code). Whereas a strictly analogical visual code cannot. Even a digital visual would be less effective since we already know the textual code's conventions but would have to learn the visual ones. And it is obvious that a programming language benefits greatly from metalinguistics (which sometimes goes by the name "reflexion", just consider macros).

Simply imagine the amount of work to implement lisp-like macros in a visual programming language, even if I think there are more intricate things to do in a visual programming language.

As a side note, remark that lisp macros could be made a lot more understandable with a more verbose syntax.

Speaking of which, it's interesting to note the article doesn't speak about conciseness (which as we all know from reading pg and personal experience is important :D). It's the trade-off for digital systems versus analogical systems : digital systems are harder to learn but are more powerful (because of new concepts) and easier (because of conciseness) to use once you know them.

And in the end, I just don't _feel_ something graphic would be easier once you get past simple if/while statements.</comment>


Show HN: After 50 iterations, I finally managed to publish my website - bogdan-ptr https://bogdanpetrescu.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> I'm not a fan of fade in or other animations that delay the display of important text or information. (Generally dislike animations as they are distracting )

I missed most of the content as I scrolled. (Hence why I dislike it)

<comment> bogdan-ptr Thanks for your feedback!

</comment></comment><comment> bogdan-ptr Hey guys! I am very excited to share my portfolio :D After 2 years and about 50+ iterations I finally managed to publish my website. If you got a spare minute, check it out!

</comment><comment><USER2> I like it! The fade-in and up on the paragraphs is a nice touch, and it has a minimalistic feel that makes me want to read each section.

<comment> bogdan-ptr Glad you like it :)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Document db with word2vec-driven scoring and Levenshtein automata - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/kreeben/resin <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, let me tell you a thing about building in-process document databases, competing with the works from FB, Google and MS: the codebase of a document database is very small. The size of your team does not matter as much as the ideas they follow. Resin has been based solely on my ideas up to just recently when now PR's are starting to show up. Check it out.</comment>


Apple Patents Peer-To-Peer Mobile Banking - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/31/apple-patents-crowdsourced-peer-to-peer-mobile-banking-that-could-use-itunes-to-provide-cash-on-demand/ <comment><AUTHOR> Mobile Banking, here they come!</comment>


Steve Blank: The Peter Pan Syndrome–The Startup to Company Transition - <AUTHOR> http://steveblank.com/2010/09/20/the-peter-pan-syndrome-%e2%80%93-the-startup-to-company-transition/ <comment><USER2> Like almost everything Steve writes, the story is great, but I would have preferred a different take-home message. As it stands, it seems to be: "You have no choice but to give up on your values and lower your standards to those of your competitors. Perhaps even lower if you want really want to win."

I guess I would have preferred something like: "You have to ask yourself if it's worth giving up your standards to compete for these contracts. This might be the right plan, but maybe you're better off lowering your projections and sticking to your core values --- it's worked for you so far!"

Am I just being naive?

<comment><USER3> I would read it as, "You need to learn how the system works inside out and backwards, and only then will you be in a position to decide what to do with that information."

One path forward is to lower standards. Another is to decide to compete in a different way (which had been working pretty well for them). But this is a big decision, and the only people who can properly make that decision for the company are the founders. And they can't do it without knowing what they are up against.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> At that level, especially when selling to the government the competition is lethal. But even on the web when you make a mildly profitable little business you're not immune from snipers looking to take your validation of the market and your research and to produce an outright clone of your offering.

So better be prepared, and remember that nice guys finish last, that doesn't mean that you have to go and be a mafioso, but at the same time it means that if someone lands you a punch you should not offer the other cheek.</comment>


Home Depot co-founder to donate $5.8B fortune, support Trump for re-election - <AUTHOR> https://www.ajc.com/news/local/atlanta-billionaire-plans-give-almost-all-away/gHi8FZhfwh4dFmaXCQksKK/ <comment><USER2> Campaign finance reform can't come soon enough

</comment><comment><USER3> The title makes it sound as though he's donating his entire fortune to support Trump.

Thankfully, the article goes on to clarify:

> _" Marcus said his political giving remains far smaller than what he gives > to philanthropic causes and what he plans to give in the future._

> *"After he dies, 80 to 90 percent of whatever is left of his wealth will go > to his foundation, which in turn will give to philanthropic causes, he > said."</comment>


Photographer wants everyone to work for free - <AUTHOR> http://www.gumtree.com/p/jobs/photographer-wants-everyone-to-work-for-free/1041786547

<comment><USER2> It's much like every tech person who has ever been asked to take a look at some gadget/computer to "fix".

<comment><USER3> All of us (considering we have families).

I personally don't mind doing a small task for free for a close family-member or friend if it doesn't turn into a running thing, and it improves their life somewhat. I have a decent quality-of-life so I guess it's only fair.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow, a failed photographer with a chip on his shoulder blaming everyone else for his failure! He needs an attitude readjustment. If he was truly a great photographer people would be falling over themselves to give him money.</comment>


In Hollywood, the future belongs to the writer-entrepreneur - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/movies/la-et-gold20nov20,0,372891.story?coll=la-home-entertainment <comment><USER2> I think that this is/will be the direction of every industry which hires people to do creative work, whether writing/hacking/design.

And the only way big companies will be able to persist is to create a mechanism for launching offshoots of themselves by investing in co-ventures between current/former employees/entrepreneurs and the company.

</comment><comment><USER3> Also see Marc Andreessen's similar article from last week: <http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/11/rebuilding-holl.html> (as Goldstein mentions)

</comment><comment><USER4> Creative accounting is why this does not work though standard channels. Hollywood loves to talk about sharing profit but never total revenue. A $40-million marketing blitz sounds like a great idea when they get a cut of that 40 million. Etc.

</comment><comment><USER5> the question is, will the name of the social news site for writers and journalists be "Hack News"</comment>


Screenhero  - <AUTHOR> http://screenhero.com/

<comment><USER2> I work remotely on the west coast for my employer on the east coast. I've used screenhero frequently and it works awesome. Great product. The recent addition of voice is awesome as well. Previously we would run google hangout at the same time. I'm interested in finding out what the price will be.</comment>


'My £1,000 Macbook Air was stolen at airport security and no one cares' - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/04/my-1000-macbook-air-was-stolen-at-airport-security-and-no-one-cares <comment><USER2> Singapore has the best system, you are given a plastic token with a number corresponding to the number on your tray. When you come out the other side of security and want to collect your tray, you have to present the plastic token otherwise they won't give you your tray back.

That other airports don't implement this system continues to astonish me.

<comment><USER3> It surprises me that other major airports choose to independently innovate without just copying Changi (Singapore's airport). Everything from free cinemas, to carpeted walkways, to water taps, to efficent immigration and security and more.

<comment><USER4> > efficent immigration

A couple of years ago I had to take a connected flight where one of the stops was in USA. I was never going to leave the airport, yet I had to form in a line while immigration was doing the routine bottleneck check on dozens of travelers, while my flight time was getting dangerously close. We just had to suck it up, any complaining just brought additional delays. The check was fairly automated, I guess they just needed more agents, or less gratuitous revisions.

<comment><USER5> > A couple of years ago I had to take a connected flight where one of the > stops was in USA. I was never going to leave the airport, yet I had to form > in a line while immigration was doing the routine bottleneck check on dozens > of travelers, while my flight time was getting dangerously close. We just > had to suck it up, any complaining just brought additional delays. The check > was fairly automated, I guess they just needed more agents, or less > gratuitous revisions.

I had this exact same experience with LHR (London Heathrow). I was never even trying to leave the airport, just make a connecting flight.

Not only did they decide that having a single security lane open was sufficient, but they also (effectively) only let one person unload their bag into the trays at a time, for a max bus throughput of 1 person at a time. If you left _anything_ in it - and I mean _anything_ [0] - they pulled your bag and tray to the side, and you had to wait for one of two agents to inspect it. The wait time for that was about 10-15 minutes. At no point did anybody have any sense of urgency whatsoever with their work, despite all of us being there to make connecting flights. They shuffled back and forth between the body scanner, X-ray machine, and the break area, chatting with each other. I was seventh in line, and in all, the entire process took literally 30 minutes (I timed it).

I was floored, because I've traveled around the world and never seen anything this bad. Even Heathrow security has never been _that_ bad for me when taking off from London. There was an agent from our departing flight there to escort us, because we were holding the whole flight up. I asked her if this was typical or not, and she just rolled her eyes and laughed, "yeah, this is how it usually is".

[0] One guy next to me had his back selected because he had left his eyeglasses inside his bag, in a plastic (not metal) case.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The only counter example to this story I've heard involved San Francisco International.

The TSA / luggage handlers were repeatedly stealing things from checked luggage. Of course, nothing was done to follow up on the police reports that were filed.

Then, one day, airport security stole a checked service revolver from a retired cop. Once that was reported, the police immediately ran a sting operation, and arrested the perpetrators.

Not sure what the moral of the story is.

<comment><USER7> SFO is hardly the only airport where this has been occurring.

A TSA employee at Newark stole $800K worth of items.

[https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/convicted-tsa-officer- reveals...](https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/convicted-tsa-officer-reveals- secrets-thefts-airports/story?id=17339513)

<comment><USER8> Wow. I'd love for a campaign to raise fund to buy airport ads (or post guerrilla flyers) warning travelers about TSA criminal activity.

TSA is more dangerous than what they are supposedly protecting traveler from.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I left BOTH of my laptops at the TSA checkpoint at O'Hare a few weeks ago. The TSA folks actually went to the trouble of opening the laptop, saw my flight info which happened to be on the screen, and contacted the gate, who called me up so I could go get it.

Experiences vary. In my case, the TSA went above and beyond to save me from my own stupidity.

<comment><USER10> The screen wasnt locked?

<comment><USER8> Does the TSA have a key to open laptops?

<comment><USER11> They have master password

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Unfortunately this is a recurrent pattern in our times: unless is something really serious (like a murder) no one cares.

A friend of mine waited 3 months to get police to read his report about an e-robbery despite presenting concrete info about the robber. No one cares.

<comment><USER13> Someone I know wanted to take apart an old car I had for a project to take parts he needed. When I declined he came back when nobody was home and tried to cut the parts out in a hurry, damaging a lot of the engine and smashing both headlights for fun. I filed a police report and even gave them a name, address, and phone number. There was no doubt in anyones mind who had committed the crime, but because Police work in a small town must be so difficult nothing ever happened. No phone calls, no follow-ups, no consequences. Makes me wonder if the police only take action in personal loss cases when the person losing is a business. They'll send three cruisers and half a dozen cops to a shoplifting incident at a grocery store with an impoverished perp, but if there's going to be any kind of he-said-she-said and nobody's dead or injured you're on your own.

I believe that policing in the United States is becoming more and more a method for controlling the masses rather than means to an end.

<comment><USER14> Policing, since the very beginning of its history, has only ever been about controlling the masses.

<comment><USER8> Not "only". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles)

<comment><USER15> And it actually works.

Police in the UK are far from perfect, but they definitely feel a lot closer to part of the community than elsewhere. When you see those videos of a police officer dancing or getting involved in the activity they're protecting, it isn't uncommon for it to be British police officers doing it.

Unfortunately they're under-funded and given too much paperwork, but regardless other police around the world could pick up Peelian as a way forward. It is definitely quite different from an "Us Vs. Them" attitude though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I understand that this is a bad experience, but I have to think that it is so rare as to make any attempt at mitigation far worse than the current system.

Since everything is on camera, and strong identification is required to pass through security, committing a theft like this is tantamount to turning yourself in to the police. While there may be a short-term gain from such a theft, in the end, the police know exactly who you are and you will get caught.

The timeframe of closure is an unpleasant experience, but far better than if someone just grabbed your laptop in a Starbucks and ran off with it.

<comment><USER17> I've got a mitigation strategy that won't be far worse than the current system. Stop requiring expensive gadgets like laptops and tablets to be removed and scanned separately. It's all security theater anyways, but that policy just separates valuable, easily-to-fence items from luggage and facilitates theft. While we're at it, stop requiring us to take off our shoes, since that policy stemmed from a comically failed attempt at terrorism that's just a dumb idea to begin with. There is less opportunity to steal from people when they're not forced to waste time and attention reapplying footwear.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This has always worried me. Once you're through the scanner you're free to loiter at the end of the conveyor belt. No one will bother you and I doubt TSA will blink an eye if you were to grab something and put it in your bag.

</comment><comment><USER19> Airport security is a farce. DutyFree shops are selling what should not be in a plane, not even discussing the batteries. The experience feel like an animal going to the slaughterhouse, except they don't put you to sleep yet.

<comment><USER20> Last month I flew out of San Jose, CA's airport.

They were very behind schedule from what I gathered from talking to people in line (it was my first time there).

They didn't even ask us to take our shoes off or go through the spinning metal thing or unpack electronics / liquids from our carry-ons.

I walked clean through with a do it yourself mBot robot kit[0] that wasn't in the box. It was just a bunch of loose parts thrown into a compartment of a backpack. I imagine from a random person's POV, this could have looked like a build your own bomb kit.

In the TSA's defense they did have a dog sniffing around the line. Not sure if that's standard. It was the first time I've flown since the TSA started.

[0]: [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1818505613/mbot-49-educ...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1818505613/mbot-49-educational- robot-for-each-kid)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> _By no means do the following ideas intend to imply that this is OK or that it 's a problem that should exist, or that the victims deserve blame._

Ugly-up your laptop lid with stickers like a teenager. That makes it distinctive, easy to spot, just slightly less valuable, and just slightly harder to fence.

Hang onto your laptop-in-a-tub until the very last possible second before you go through screening, and then insert it on the conveyor? (I've never tried this. For all I know it may work fine or it may get you detained for 17 hours and cavity-searched by over-enthusiastic fascist bureaucrats who are immune to all explanation.)

Rise up _en masse_ against our military-industrial overlords?

Boycott or curtail air travel? (My personal favorite, even though it's probably playing into somebody's hands.)

In case it happens anyway: Encrypt all your drives, keep daily backups, and maintain an insurance policy that covers replacement cost.

</comment><comment><USER22> > However, Manchester and Luton both told Money that they had no set procedure > and it was up to the passenger to call police themselves.

So first you are forced to be separated from your belongings ('never leave you possesions out of sight') and if something goes wrong it your problem. How convenient.

Welcome to a brave new world.

</comment><comment><USER23> > The pain is made worse by the ransom note she received from the thief. She > had remotely shut the Apple Mac down and left a message stating that she > needed it back as it contained vital dissertation and other work, and would > pay a reward for its return.

What's the ransom???

<comment><USER24> I don't follow. She's willing to pay a "reward for [the laptop's] return", but not the ransom? What's the difference?

<comment><USER25> Some order of price, surely.

Random is demanded. Rewards are offered.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Would the police in this case still provide a police report? Maybe that + insurance could cover a new laptop.

It's so easy to backup everything for free these days. Google Drive/Dropbox if you don't care about encryption or Arq.app if you do, Time Machine if you have a spare hard drive at home.

<comment><USER27> >It's so easy to backup everything for free these days. Google Drive/Dropbox if you don't care about encryption

those let you back up _maybe_ 50GB (if you abuse all the promos), which is pretty small.

<comment><USER28> Use Arq, backup to Backblaze storage, and pay $0.005/GB/month. That 50 GB would cost $0.25 a month. If you can afford a MacBook, you can afford an encrypted cloud backup of your HD.

<comment><USER29> I think that once you've paid for enough school, you can't afford not to backup your dissertation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> So the only safe way is to not take the laptop out, then they'll call you and ask you to get it out ?

<comment><USER31> This should be the top reply here. As a frequent flyer, I am worried about this issue every single time. But your suggestion is awesome: the suitcase containing the laptop will be kept safely behind the security line until you have passed through the bodyscanner, shoe swipe, blah blah security theatre; then you can wait there and watch it like a hawk when it comes back out of the machine.

Of course, at a seriously inefficient spot like "London" Stansted this will add about 20-30 mins to your time to clear security, thanks to understaffing and the enormous proportion of Italian/Spanish teenagers who don't pay attention to any of the warnings about removing all the cosmetics from their luggage. End result being a constant backlog of bags to be hand-checked. But that's probably better than losing your laptop. And at a well-run terminal like Heathrow 2 you're only looking at an extra five minutes to get it rechecked. I might just try this on my next flight...

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> a somewhat similar situation happened with a friend of mine in LAX. It is not the same because the laptop was not stolen, what happened was that he picked someone else macbook pro and the other person picked his.

He only realized that upon arriving here in Brazil. After phoning the airport and having a friend from LA walk there. He got hold of the real owner of the laptop (he noticed before flight and filled a missing item request at the airport). After some back and forth they managed to exchange their laptops back over FedEx.

So in the end, nothing but money was lost as they both got hold of their own laptops back but this should have never happened in the first place if the TSA or whoever is in the scanning machines took care of what is happening. If we can put with all the trouble regulation and schemes, they can do a better job of paying attention to the process. There are more than one person per machine already...

<comment><USER33> Some backpack makers (such as North Face) make TSA Approved backpacks that allow you to keep your laptop in the bag through the scanner. They basically open up like a book and the laptop is held in a pocket where the shoulder straps attach, so there is nothing above or below it.

<comment><USER32> I have one of those (from Timbuk2), the main reason I purchased it was because it was TSA Approved and yet TSA never allowed me to keep my laptop inside it, even with it open like a book, nothing else inside it, they still required me to remove it every time...

<comment><USER33> Really? I've never had problems with my Surge II Transit. The only time I've run into troubles is when I'm in an international airport and go "But this is TSA approved..." to which the usual response is an angry "Sir, we're not TSA."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I don't really understand this. It says in the article that she was advised to report the theft to the police, and that they would cooperate with the police investigation. Did she refuse to do so for some reason, but instead go to the press?

</comment><comment><USER35> This is why I use one of those "TSA friendly" bags for my laptop: it never leaves the bag, I just unzip it and lay the bag flat.

I'd be furious if this was me tho.

<comment><USER36> FWIW; you're not allowed to do this in Europe (at least in the airports I've been in). I spent extra money on a TSA friendly backpack too, so I'm bummed. :(

All items must be in a tray, electronics have to be in a separate tray and not stacked.

<comment><USER3> Yep same in most airports in SE Asia too. TSA made everyone's job harder, sorry I mean travel safer, by banning more than 100ml of liquid, so nowadays probably reluctant to adopt more TSA rules even if they are now somewhat logical.

<comment><USER8> SE Asia airport security procedure is determined by TSA, even though they don't follow TSA procedures?

<comment><USER3> I don't know the exact details, but everyone adopted the silly 100ml liquid max per bottle nonsense post 9/11?, but the rest of stuff such TSA approved laptop bags are not in practice or at least not known by the contracted staff operating the machines and scans I've experienced in SE Asia.

<comment><USER2> I believe the regulations on liquids are set by ICAO which is part of the UN. Sometimes the US sets extra security requirements for flights to/from/in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Certainly the story here is about the negligence of Airport Security, but let this also be a lesson to the girl about backing up your work to the cloud.

</comment><comment><USER38> They don't care because it happens all the time.

</comment><comment><USER39> > She has been refused access to footage identifying the crook because of data > protection rules.

I am really speechless

<comment><USER23> Tomorrow: "the airport gave my picture to a stranger without a warrant!"

<comment><USER39> Isn't the whole point of collecting security camera data for security? I don't understand how using the data for its intended purpose is breaking the law

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> She could have said she had cocaine hidden in place of battery. That would have been found in no time.</comment>


iOS code signing - <AUTHOR> https://solidgeargroup.com/the-ios-code-signing <comment><USER2> This is what I got last time I tried to build my app: "no valid private certificates found for profile" ¿any idea?

<comment><USER3> Many times revoking your certificate in Apple and recreating it again solves the problem

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Typical issue you find when you develop a mobile app with certain security level

<comment><USER5> Certificate issues are always a pain in the ass</comment></comment>


Hedge Fund Boss Retires at 37. Thanks "Idiot Traders" - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/18/banking-useconomy

<comment><USER2> That's pretty much one of the permutations that success can be.

You get enough money, you say fuck you to the industry, and you do what you couldn't when you were working hard: enjoy life.

Of course, that's not always the best way. The best way (in my opinion) is to make a lot of meaning WHILE enjoying doing so, WHILE amassing wealth.

<comment><USER3> I agree. It's really easy to say "throw away your Blackberry and enjoy life" when you don't have to earn another penny as long as you live. The rest of us just make the best of whatever situation we find ourselves in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> From yesterday:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=335815>

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about the dupe. Missed it yesterday and it looks like it's re-sourced here.

You'd think we'd have some kind of spiffy dupe-detection code here, huh?

<comment><USER4> If you submit the same link twice it catches it, but there's no logic to try to detect the same story reported in different locations.

<comment><AUTHOR> Some link sites (like DZone) will go out and load the page in question once the link is submitted. I know DZone makes a neat little thumbnail of the site, but seems like you could also do some basic text analysis while you're at it.

Not sure it's worth it, though. I don't think the dupe ratio here is that high.

<comment><USER5> Hacker news uses crowdsourcing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I want to be this man.</comment>


Ti NE555 – real vs fake: weekend die-shot - <AUTHOR> https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Ti-555-NE555-real-vs-face-china-chinese <comment><USER2> This is only half the story. The chips discussed in the article do the basic function advertised, but may not have the same tolerances as the genuine chip. But there are other types of counterfeits out there.

When we "recycle" our e-waste, much of it ends up in large landfills in China, where very poor workers melt down old boards, remove chips, and sort them by size and pin count. They then use a machine to scrub off the label and print on a new label of whatever part they want to market (usually obsolete parts that can't be bought from the original manufacturer). These end up in the supply chain of even reputable distributors. Amazingly, some of these counterfeits have made there way into military equipment, and as a result, there's a whole division of Homeland Security that conducts tests on suspect computer chip shipments entering the US.

<comment><USER3> Do you mean we end up with a labeled chip whose insides are something completely different, and so won't ever work? Surely that doesn't happen this way. It must be many times cheaper to just buy empty packages than to clean up old ones?

<comment><USER4> The worst part actually is, when those chips are the correct ones- but have been used and have all the wear. Means, you have them baked on and off board, slight overcurrent damages, wear on internal flash and Elektromigration. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration)

And this chip is integrated into your new device. The only way to avoid this, would be a standard start of life vault, that is writeable once with the date and burns of the pathway to to re-write after that.

<comment><USER5> Please, no. Manufacturers will use this to force selling us new equipment every 2-3 years. It's a very bad solution.

<comment><USER4> Manufactureres force you allready to buy new equipment 2-3years, by placing codensators near heatsources and other nice tricks (including the famous printer counter).

<comment><USER6> "by placing codensators near heatsources"

Oh you mean like every power source is designed today?

There are several _engineering_ reasons to do that, they don't do that to spite people

And it's called capacitor (in the XXI century at least)

<comment><USER7> In Sweden, we call them "Kondensatorer", i.e using the old form. For me, this causes quite a lot of jumbled/mixing of words, as my friends and I typically switch randomly between English and Swedish versions of component names.

<comment><USER8> Also, even in English condenser mics still refuse to become cap mics.

<comment><USER9> Capacitors in automotive ignition systems are still called "condensers" too, for some reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> dis-sys When I was working for a microprocessor company (which you use everyday) many many years ago, they were selling this JTAG debugger for a few thousand $ each. The cpu architecture was booming in China at that time, but that $ figure is not something people can afford. Clones started to flood the market pretty fast, a typical clone set you back for a few hundred $, that was already 1/10 of the original price.

However, that was still considered too expensive - then there was this vendor in Shanghai which came up a clone they sell for around $100 - after talking to them via some unofficial channels, we figured out that they had people stationed in those electronics dump sites to source the chips required. In those place, you don't pay for each chip, you pay for a kg price, e.g. I want 10kg of that chip, how much each kg please?

10+ years on, those engineers who first studied that CPU architecture back then using those cloned JTAG debugger are now pretty experienced/better paid, they are probably the ones complaining fake/reused chips on some Chinese forums claiming they are the victims.

<comment><USER10> The problem with faking chips is that the victims maybe out of a warranty claim later when they find a problem. Also there might be subtle differences which will only be found when in full production. For a cloned JTAG debugger the risks are lower since they are used in low volumes. Personally I think they it is okay to clone or reuse chips but don't claim to be the original manufacturer. It is quite easy to relabel chip with your own imprint.

<comment><USER11> I think a bigger problem with the 'chips by the kg' mindset, is that there is zero incentive and zero funding to develop good software to go along with the hardware.

Companies who are successful have spent way more time in ensuring that their software works reliably with their debuggers, across a wide range of chips and platforms. Sure it's expensive, but everything just works.

By 'stealing' this software in this way, cloning firms are dragging the entire industry down with the clones that don't work 100%, or the IoT devices that get infected due to lack of any security. I'm really hoping some certification body like UL, or major distributor like Amazon or Alibaba, steps in and starts ensuring at least a basic level of quality for hardware and software.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> When I read this article I wondered, why would they knock them off and then sell branded goods at the rock bottom generic price? Then I clicked through a few more articles and it seems that the answer is so an integrator can "cost- optimize" your board and profit the difference between genuine and fake components, while you are none the wiser.

</comment><comment><USER13> In one of our board designs, we were using a well-known manufacturer's 25Mhz oscillator, to provide a clock to a gigabit Ethernet PHY. When we wanted to assemble the boards, we could not find this oscillator in any official distributor, so we bought them from a vendor in China, who had some in stock.

When we assembled the boards, none of the boards functioned properly. There was no Ethernet connectivity, the PHY wasn't working

We contacted the "well known manufacturer" and provided photos of the part and they confirmed that the oscillator was not theirs. It was a counterfeit part.

The "counterfeit" oscillator actually did provide a clean 25Mhz clock, but the PHY did not work.

It amazes me there are companies out there that produce counterfeit silicon. I wonder what's their profit margin?

<comment><USER14> >The "counterfeit" oscillator actually did provide a clean 25Mhz clock, but the PHY did not work.

Did you find out why?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> People buying 7 cent chips off Aliexpress and similar know full well that it ain't coming from TI and usually isn't labelled as such - it might be called an NE555 but make no mention of manufacturer and not have one labeled on the chip itself. Obviously finding a datasheet from a different manufacturer won't be applicable...

If you're buying those you're most likely using it for an application that isn't pushing its limits - they're great for experimenting with as a hobbyist or cranking your design to the lowest price possible if you're not on those limits.

<comment><USER16> Mouser is selling TI NE555DR for $0.07 in quantity, so I am sure that TI's actual sale price is lower.

So, I think someone paying $0.07 on aliexpress is paying "full price" for something less, even if they rationalize they are getting a discount because they are not buying large lots (Buy only 100 at mouser and the cost goes up to $0.15, but for instance Arrow has a lower price than that for this quantity)

<comment><USER17> AliExpress has another benefit though; zero to very low shipping costs.

In the EU buying electrical components at a hobbyist scale often means having to save up your purchases (e.g., €0,24 for the NE555 at Conrad) until you hit the minimum free shipping limit (in this case €20) or pay the full shipping (€4,95 in this example) for one little component.

AliExpress just has the better user experience if you are learning and experimenting (just buy a couple of spares and be prepared to switch to genuine stuff when needed).

<comment><USER18> I don't understand why these places can't just use regular mail.

I wanted some discrete through-hole MOSFETs for bidirectional level shifting as described in this application note [1].

The ZVNL110A satisfies all of the requirements [2]. In small quantity they were $0.604 each at the time from Mouser, and I wanted 10, so $6.04 for the MOSFETs. And then another $7.99 for freaking shipping. (I ended up ordering 30, figuring maybe I'll eventually need that many, and then I'm "only" paying 50% for shipping instead of >100%).

These things are very small, and only weigh half a gram each. Just take an ordinary letter envelope, drop them in, put a first class postage stamp on it ($0.49), and mail it. A $0.49 first class stamp allows up to 99 grams, so orders up to a couple hundred of these could be shipped that way.

For those curious, the size constraints on a first class letter in the US are:

      3.5" <= height <= 6.125"
      5" <= width <= 11.5"
      0.007" <= thickness <= 0.25"

0.25" is 6.35mm. A large number of through-hole components would usually fit, such as transistors, diodes, resistors, and disc capacitors. Most surface mount components would fit.

[1] [https://cdn-shop.adafruit.com/datasheets/an97055.pdf](https://cdn- shop.adafruit.com/datasheets/an97055.pdf)

[2] [http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/115/ZVNL110A-95598.pdf](http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/115/ZVNL110A-95598.pdf)

<comment><USER15> I wonder what the breakdown on the actual shipping vs handling labor costs are for a big distributor like Mouser or DigiKey.

Compare with labor costs for either factories or small owner operated export businesses run out of Shenzhen and you can see where there might be a pretty big difference in the handling price.

<comment><USER17> Labour costs are probably the primary barrier for this, but I can't help but wonder if a big distributor couldn't make it work; after all, the labour costs are already factored into the component unit price, not the shipping costs. For a large, traditional order you get a shipping list, determine the box size needed, gather the components, pack the box, slap a label on, and place it in the outgoing mail trolley.

For these small shipments, you would get a shipping list, see that the order system determined that it would fit in an envelope, grab an envelope, gather the components (perhaps for ten envelope-orders at a time), place in envelope, slap a label on, and place it in the outbox for envelopes.

It doesn't seem that much more labour intensive or more expensive in terms of packaging, and the first distributor in a geographical area to do so might gain a bunch of customers. Even if the base price of components was increased by 10% or 20% for envelope orders a lot of us would still use that service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Actual title is "Ti NE555 - real vs fake : weekend die-shot".

Current title "Chinese fake microchips hit rock bottom with 7¢ Ti NE555" is bad IMHO.

<comment><USER20> I dunno. It seems pretty descriptive to me. It identifies the source of the fakes (China), the product being counterfeited (the venerable 555 Timer), and the price they're being sold at.

I found this on eBay - 100 pcs of thru-hole 555's for $3.29 (3.2 cents each) with the TI logo printed on them. They say brand new and unused - but that's just not possible at that price.

[http://www.ebay.com/itm/100PCS-NE555P-NE555-DIP-8-SINGLE- BIP...](http://www.ebay.com/itm/100PCS-NE555P-NE555-DIP-8-SINGLE-BIPOLAR- TIMERS-IC-factory-price/281680016124)

<comment><USER21> "They say brand new and unused - but that's just not possible at that price."

I just picked up 500 LM555s from RadioShack - 50 cents for the entire batch.

They weren't joking when they said "No Offer Refused" for their closeout.

<comment><USER20> You could probably have gotten the stand they were displayed on for only another $5.

I remember the Circuit City liquidation - the prices were insane. But it was also sort of sad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I recognize that chip at the bottom of the article! That's a Hitachi HA17555, which was on Zeptobars just a few months ago[0].

[0]: [https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Hitachi- HA17555-555-timer](https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Hitachi-HA17555-555-timer)

<comment><USER16> Interesting I wonder what the history of this design is? And how Hitachi's (or their partner's) die really wound up being re-marked as TI? If the die is a Chinese produced copy, why did they keep the markings during retooling?

I wish photographs of the packages were presented also.

Edit: The other "not genuine" die has quite a few similarities and it looks like one inspired the other.

<comment><USER23> If it's copied, they likely copied it entirely because trying to remove bits of the lithography mask is expensive and time consuming. Since it's not normally scene there's no use in spending the time or money to change it if you can get the mask.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> At the start of the ROHS era my startup was scrambling to get parts, and we bought some grey-market capacitors. Which turned out to be fakes. What a mess. It's all about the supply chain!

<comment><USER25> I'm a huge fan of the knock-off chips that are just a piece of copper connecting all the pins. I wonder why they bother with the copper, instead of just using a block of plastic.

<comment><USER26> I worked for a _huge_ company with their own manufacturing in China. We did a beta run of a product and they used some black market components for a TI regulator. When we got the boards the output was dead on the regulator so we sent it to TI. They x-rayed the part and it was just an empty plastic package.

<comment><USER27> Did you have a pretty good idea that this was the case before sending them to TI? Hardware design fascinates me and I'm just curious how something like this goes down.

<comment><USER26> We actually thought it was a problem with TI's parts, which is why we sent it to TI (we had a dedicated TI rep that came by every 2-3 weeks). When it came back that the package was empty it was actually a little embarrassing for us, since everyone immediately knew they were fakes. A bunch of calls went out and eventually one of the manufacturing managers tracked down the purchasing guy in the factory that said something like, "Oh this was a small run and I didn't want to buy a whole reel so I just ran down to the corner electronics market and picked up a 100."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The 555 is probably simple enough so that the "fake" version (which several times is just an alternative version from a different manufacturer) works as well as the original one

<comment><USER28> They probably work but probably not within the same maximum/minimum ratings as the original chip. Your design might need a max frequency, or a minimum operating voltage, or a certain current-driving capability etc. that the fake chip cannot provide, causing the final product to fail when the design prototype worked fine. There are many variants of the 555 with wildly varying characteristics, not all are interchangeable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> What are your thoughts on people not respecting Intellectual Property rights? Will it lead us down a path of gridlock where nobody is going to create anything new for fear of someone else using their work without payment/credit? Also, why is using someones creative output or deriving from it OK in some fields (like applied sciences) but not in others? (Here I'm not including the people who claim others' work as their own, merely people who clone)

</comment><comment><USER30> I bet there could be an actual business model of recycling components from e-waste. Obviously it'd require more QA work than what the counterfeit "recyclers" do, but, with enough automation, I bet you could structure it so that you at least break even on the e-waste disposal side, and then any resold components become pure profit.

</comment><comment><USER31> _That means our HA17555 was also fake._

Alternatively, it means that "G1083" was actually a remarked HA17555.

The "dotted X" logo on the other one I've seen before, but can't remember the name.

</comment><comment><USER32> Instead of pointing out the die layout, how about a rigorous test? Let's see clock accuracy, power consumption, etc vs the original TI part.

</comment><comment><USER33> The layouts look like a rogue/nethack level or maybe some new version of pacman.

</comment><comment><USER34> This is why companies need services like TexPlained.

[http://hardwear.io/olivier-thomas.php](http://hardwear.io/olivier-thomas.php)

</comment><comment><USER35> Although the author calls these designs "fake", they do perform the same functionality, but just simply don't meet the voltage tolerance and noise resistance levels of higher grade designs. So they're more of a "knock-off", "counterfeit", "imitation", or "derivative".

<comment><USER36> They are fake because they use the same name. Kinda like fake Nikes are still shoes but clearly fakes.

<comment><USER35> ok. Sorry I had to look up the definition of fake: "not genuine; counterfeit". So I guess fake is valid in this case. I was thinking fake meant "not real" or that it didn't actually do the same functionality.

<comment><USER24> "same functionality" includes a LOT more than just the basic functions. It also includes voltage tolerance, noise resistance, and all of the other things you dismissed.

<comment><USER35> But still as the author explains "If you're not reaching for the limits (like max VCC or precision) and have some luck - that might not cause issues." And I didn't dismiss that...I said "just simply don't meet the voltage tolerance and noise resistance levels of higher grade designs".

I guess what triggered me to write my first comment was the fact someone buying a "TI" something chip from eBay when it lists "China" as the seller's location and with a seller's name other than something easily verified to be TI, then it seems there is no pretense that the thing being sold is genuine TI. But the word "fake" holds the connotation that there is some deception going on. So that is why I don't think fake is the most appropriate word. I just hear that word used too much to disparage chinese made derivative imitation products. Someone who knows they don't need the noise levels and voltages tolerances can be perfectly happy and even benefit by using these instead of the more expensive genuine TI.

<comment><USER37> So, are you saying that if I suspect that I am being defrauded, it's not fraud anymore?

<comment><USER35> Not suspect. But know.

<comment><USER37> So, how do I know (and not just suspect) that a particular seller is not selling TI parts?

<comment><USER35> Well there is no way to verify that the device was manufactured by TI. That itself doesn't let you know as a matter of truth, but that does let you as a smart shopper know that it is likely fake. You can make an inference since (A) you are buying on a website that is known for providing a means for counterfeit goods from China, and (B) the seller is located in China and has no info that reliably identifies it as a seller of genuine parts.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there a differentiable measure on the equality of two sets? - <AUTHOR> I am doing some ML and I have two equal sized sets of numbers, A and B. B is actually a discrete uniform distribution - [0, n]
The net I am writing needs to take A as input and generate B as its output. The specific pointwise mapping a -> b is irrelevant, any injective function is sufficient.
I first wrote a custom loss function equal to the sum of the mean and std deviation minus expected. This worked somewhat but not well enough because those two measures aren't enough to uniquely identify a distribution.
I don't think the Kullback–Leibler divergence will work because it enforces an ordering / specific mapping.
Is there some differentiable measure that can be ran over f(A) aka the predictions, to ensure it is equal to B?
I cannot find anything about loss functions that are for sets rather than point-wise mapping. <comment><USER2> Having little experience in ML:

Write the sets in ascending order and, treating them as an n+1 dimensional vector, and use Euclidean distance.

Googling, you could look at section 2.1 of [https://papers.nips.cc/paper/3708-ranking-measures-and- loss-...](https://papers.nips.cc/paper/3708-ranking-measures-and-loss- functions-in-learning-to-rank.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can't you have input and output vectors that look like

[0,1,0,1,1]

for the set (1,3,4)?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes but the size of the sets is going to be enormous. Would like to avoid use of one-hot encodings.

That still doesn't solve the issue of solving for any injective mapping though - solving for a specific one can be done thru the standard loss functions - but the density of solutions is sparse in 1/n! where n is the output set size.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> i'm confused. can you define what spaces A, B and f(A) live in? what space does f(a) live in, for a in A?

edit:

> two equal sized sets of numbers, A and B. B is actually a discrete uniform > distribution - [0, n]

> The net I am writing needs to take A as input and generate B as its output. > > The specific pointwise mapping a -> b is irrelevant, any injective > function is sufficient.

> I don't think the Kullback–Leibler divergence will work because it enforces > an ordering / specific mapping.

I don't see how KL divergence enforces an ordering / specific mapping.

I'm going to assume that you want to learn a function f[Theta] that accepts sets as inputs and maps them to output sets, where Theta are some parameters you're going to fit. Further, to make things more plausibly continuous, i'm going to assume that f[Theta] accepts distributions as inputs and maps them to output distributions.

Let X be some reasonable space. Let A and B be distributions over X, i.e. A, B in D(X).

Let's say we want to learn some function f[Theta] : D(X) -> D(X) such that f(A) = B .

Aside: it seems a bit weird to be doing ML with a single training example (A, B) -- I'm assuming you have some very heavy structural constraints on `f[Theta]`, and/or a bunch of other training data {(A, B)_i}_{i=1...M} ....

If we tried to define loss using KL divergence, it might look something like

loss(f(A), B) = sum_{y in X} f[Theta](A)(y) log( B(y) / f[Theta](A)(y) )

as long as f[Theta](A)(y) is sufficiently smooth in your parameters theta, the expression for the loss might be reasonably differentiable.

So, how to interpret f[Theta](A)(y) ?

Assuming X is discrete, the dumbest representation of `f` I can think of would be to let theta be a matrix of weights addressed by pairs of indices from X*X . So the input distribution A could be interpreted as a vector of weights indexed by X (say with some constraints about non-negativity and summing to 1), and y itself is just another index from the space X, so

f[Theta](A)(y) := matvec(Theta, A)_y = sum_{x in X} theta_{y, x} A_x

Then the loss function would look something like

sum_{y in X} (sum_{x in X} Theta_{y, x} A_x) log( B(y) / (sum_{x in X} Theta_{y, x} A_x) )

So it's (1) definitely something you could evaluate (in principle) and differentiate, and (2) doesn't force some pre-defined mapping between points -- you can still set the weights Theta_{y, x} to whatever you want.

<comment><USER4> more coherently:

given a pair of vectors x and y representing our input and target sets (encoded as distributions)

find a function f from some space that best solves: f(x) = y

if we require x, y, f(x) to be distributions, we might restate this as a minimisation problem:

      given input x and target y s.t.:
        0 <= x <= 1 and sum(x) = 1
        0 <= y <= 1 and sum(y) = 1
      constraints:
        for any z s.t. 0 <= z <= 1 and sum(z) = 1 we require 0 <= f(z) <= 1 and sum(f(z)) = 1
      minimise
        d( f(x), y )

where d( . , . ) is some appropriate metric. such as KL divergence or inner product or so on.

in the simple case where we additionally require that f be a linear operator A, and pick the L^2 norm as our loss function, we get a constrained minimisation problem to solve for a matrix A that minimises ||Ax - y||^2 subject to all our constraints.</comment></comment>


Ryanair CEO says his planes won't fly if seats are kept empty for "idiotic" rule - <AUTHOR> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ryanair-ceo-michael-oleary-coronavirus-airlines-middle-seats-empty-planes-wont-fly/ <comment><USER2> It looks like a reasonable position. It would still be far from enough distance in such a small space. So not flying at all is a reasonable solution.</comment>


Naval Ravikant on Reading, Happiness, Decision Making, Habits [audio] - <AUTHOR> https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/2017/02/naval-ravikant-reading-decision-making/ <comment><USER2> I think the more you learn the more you basic your thinking becomes. I felt the same way listening to this podcast also, i.e. "my biggest priority is to workout in the morning" because health comes first.

It's like so many things in life are really simple but because of too much information and our nature to keep finding better, faster solutions, we keep getting lost. Consider for example, weight loss, there are a bazillion things on the internet about "Keto diet", "Paleo diet", this diet, that workout, but at the end of the day the formula is still as simple as _calories in - calories out = weight loss_.

Same goes for making money, there is an often cited pdf here about making money[1] written in 1880 which still beats most of the contemporary "cool" advice. The rules are simple and don't really change that much over time but we like to add layers and layers of our own stuff over it and then think to ourselves, gee look I've found the answers and my answer is the best answer.

[1] [https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/barnum/moneygetting/](https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/barnum/moneygetting/)

<comment><USER3> > the formula is still as simple as calories in - calories out = weight loss.

That is only simple in theory. To make that actually work for yourself it helps to have an approach like a high-fat, low-carb diet (which suppresses hunger e.g.).

<comment><USER2> You know I kind of lost 8 kgs (17 lb) in a span of 3 months and I didn't follow any diets or fitness plans. I did started exercising but nothing vigorous.

The only thing I started doing religiously was to install the MyFitnessPal app on my Android home screen and then track each and every food item I ate in it. I did for 90 days meticulously, not missing to log a single food item.

And like a freaking program my weight started dropping every alternate day. It was I could predict I'd lost another 0.1 every morning. I think the app keeps adjusting the calories you're allowed everyday but I kinda of kept a 200 calorie buffer every day just in case. If you're interested in details you can see my reply to @xupydb in this thread[1]. I just want to mention that I had maintained my previous weight for at least last 5 years and it didn't move one decimal point before and boom started checking calories and it started dropping everyday.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13708768](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13708768)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you're looking for more, Naval was also on the Tim Ferriss podcast a couple of times:

1\. [http://tim.blog/2015/08/18/the-evolutionary-angel-naval- ravi...](http://tim.blog/2015/08/18/the-evolutionary-angel-naval-ravikant/)

2\. [http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/01/30/naval-ravikant-on- hap...](http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/01/30/naval-ravikant-on-happiness- hacks/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Transcript: [https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/02/...](https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/02/Naval-Ravikant-TKP.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER6> Twitter is worth joining if only to follow Naval's timeline (@naval). Many thought provoking insights and questions on a wide range of issues including philosophy and technology. He appears to be a true visionary to me. Thanks Naval!

<comment><USER7> He does offer some keen insights, but like everyone there is a mix of odd things in there. For example, he was a Benghazi truther and somewhat of a conspiracy theorist a few years ago.

<comment><USER8> Shaq believes the world is flat[0], I would still take his advice on how to play basketball. I think its necessary to compartmentalize peoples believes away from advice in the area there experts in. This only goes so far, if Richard Spencer wanted to teach me how to hit a hole in one in golf I'm good, he is a bad person and those views are too abhorrent to consider his other opinions.

[0] [http://sports.yahoo.com/news/so-apparently-shaquille- oneal-i...](http://sports.yahoo.com/news/so-apparently-shaquille-oneal-is-a- flat-earther-too-035813782.html)

<comment><USER9> > he is a bad person those views are too abhorrent to consider his other > opinions

Provided someone is well grounded in their our own core values, there should be no danger in simply listening to a person like Richard Spencer. I went out of my way to check him out after hearing about all the hate he was getting. While I disagree vehemently on the white nationalist stuff, I found he had a very refreshing take on a number of other topics. I wouldn't call him a 'bad' person either. Misguided, yes. The sort of misguided that, I suspect, comes from not exposing himself enough to the 'other'.

<comment><USER10> Really? I think he knows exactly what he's doing. He realized he could make a name (in infamy) for himself by co-opting the abomination that is the alt- right. And no, I don't really give a sh*t if he actually believes what he preaches. The damage is the same nonetheless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Ok. I listened to a _lot_ of podcasts. This one is probably one of the most interesting I ever heard.

I'm sharing you my personal notes of it: [https://gist.github.com/BenderV/44901bac756ff3b8279d018eb1e2...](https://gist.github.com/BenderV/44901bac756ff3b8279d018eb1e2cc1f)

<comment><USER12> Thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Even Tim Ferriss in his book has stated Naval's perspective are far above the rest.

</comment><comment><USER14> Naval is one of the top spiritual and investing thought-leaders in silicon valley

</comment><comment><USER15> It's a nice episode, but not profound like the way the comments suggest.

The comments feel like they're from either shills or those currying favor.

<comment><USER4> I'd say it's in the eye of the beholder.

You may not think it's profound, but I'm sure you know several people in your life who would. I believe we all do.

What is inspiring - to me - about Naval's podcasts is they're an encapsulation of - and blueprint for - a person's quest for knowledge and self understanding.

He is not passing himself off as a guru, or a know-it-all. He's just reading, learning, synthesizing and practicing and that's a formula that anyone can follow.

There are better ways to "curry favor" with someone than to post a comment on the Internet. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Overcast link for those interested (It's not linked on the farnam street blog): [https://overcast.fm/+Ei1BFuA1Y](https://overcast.fm/+Ei1BFuA1Y)

</comment><comment><USER17> I heard this episode last month and this was such a fantastic interview. Naval is a gem, one of the best genuinely independent thinkers out there!

</comment><comment><USER18> In case somebody's interested, Naval mentions a cool book that is not listed in the accompanying blog post : _Thinking Physics_ , by Lewis Carroll Epstein.

<comment><USER19> Do you know which one in particular? I see two books by that author "Thinking Physics: Understandable Practical Reality" and "Thinking Physics: Practical Lessons in Critical Thinking" ?

<comment><USER18> It looks to me like they're the same book, only different editions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> His has been more like a great mentor to most of us. His thoughts/philosophy about life and recommendations has been great. Thanks Naval.</comment>


Why did ArchLinux embrace Systemd? - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/4lzxs3/why_did_archlinux_embrace_systemd/d3rhxlc <comment><USER2> Its nice to see this sort of explanation. I just wish this had come out earlier, like when Arch was in the process of switching over to Systemd.

>Lack of confiurability. It was impossible to change the behaviour of initscripts in a way that would survive system updates.

I wonder how often updates (dist-upgrades or package updates?) actually break initscripts. Further, would it make a system no longer boot fully (e.g. to the GUI login prompt)?

<comment><USER3> Most sane package manager i have encountered will place a copy of the new script or config file next to an existing one of there is some level of mismatch.

And rarely would you not get a system to boot to some kind of login prompt with traditional init. If the fear of not getting a GUI is what is driving he adoption of systemd, then i really worry about future generations of admins...

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> One thing to ponder is that many of the people that introduced the various problem spots mentioned, are the very same people that are today working on systemd.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's interesting contrasting Arch with the Debian hoo-hah.

* In Debian, there was a whole load of voting, including votes by the entire membership; and upstart, systemd, and OpenRC were all considered in detail. In Arch, just one person decided to stop doing the Arch rc scripts and switch to systemd, without looking at upstart, OpenRC, or anything else.

* In Debian (some) people gave thought to the impact on the users, and to migration paths. (It didn't work out well in practice. There's a never-fixed systemd bug that stops Debian 7 systemd to Debian 8 systemd upgrade. But that's by the way.) In Arch, the driving concern was what's simplest for the maintainer.

* In Debian, the discussion involved reasons why one should switch _to_ other systems. In Arch, the reasons given are all about why rc scripts are bad, something which we've known for three decades, and mainly deal in why one should switch _away_ from rc scripts. (See [http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/sy...](http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/system-5-rc-problems.html))

* In Debian, the rc script maintainer (Roger Leigh) kept on with rc scripts and switched to Devuan. In Arch, the rc script maintainer dropped rc scripts and kept with Arch.

There are a few outright errors that the sort of peer review that the Debian hoo-hah did (which extended to things like how the daemon readiness protocols worked) would have caught but did not for Arch, since it was one person making a decision and publishing the reasons only years later. For examples:

> _An system that can perform actions based on events - this is one of the > major features of systemd._

No. This is a major feature of upstart. It is upstart that has the radically new and paradigm-shifting event-driven architecture; not systemd.

> _Systemd has a 100% reliable solution for this based on Linux cgroups._

This is a myth. control groups are not jobs (in the VMS sense). They don't magically fix everything. There are (for example) systemd bugs, outstanding even now, dealing with the inability to atomically kill everything in a control group. systemd has to sit in a loop repeatedly re-reading the process list and sending out signals. An operating system kernel that provides a "job" abstraction provides a way of cancelling/killing an entire "job". Witness the Win32 TerminateJobObject() mechanism, for example. To repeat: control groups are not jobs.

> _Udev or dbus don 't start daemons anymore, they tell systemd that they need > a specific daemon and systemd takes care of it._

This is a falsehood. Desktop Bus activation is unfortunately still with us, as is udev activation. There's irony in the case of Desktop Bus activation. The upstart people wanted to come up with a general protocol that would pass everything over to service management in a general way. The systemd people blocked the proposal.

* [http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwa...](http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwares/nosh/avoid-dbus-bus-activation.html)

Indeed, Desktop Bus activation is one of the things involved in the recent kerfuffle over systemd killing nohupped processes, from wget and emacs to screen and tmux. The Freedesktop bug report (bug #94508) contains snapshots of several people's running systems showing quite a lot of servers that are still being spawned straight from the Desktop Bus broker.

It's also one of the reasons underlying the lesser-known still ongoing problem with systemd's DefaultTasksMax setting ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11675129](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11675129)). People have been reporting servers spawned from the Desktop Bus broker all running within the broker's thread limits.

<comment><USER3> > The upstart people wanted to come up with a general protocol that would pass > everything over to service management in a general way. The systemd people > blocked the proposal.

And Canonical gets yelled at for being NIH...</comment></comment>


The Uberfication of Everything: Directory / Master-list - <AUTHOR> http://digitalintelligencetoday.com/the-uberfication-of-everything-master-list-of-uber-inspired-businesses/

<comment><USER2> I dont see Uber for Tailoring? to create a networked effect, the skill barrier to entry needs to be lower?</comment>


Best Content Marketing Services India, B2B Content, Viral Content Service - <AUTHOR> http://modifyed.in/content-marketing-services-india/ <comment><AUTHOR> Content Marketing Strategy is strong strategy for growing your business, Because An excellent Digital Marketing strategy without powerful and Optimised Content is like a swanky attractive car without wheels – it just won't sell! Modifyed Digital Company who understands what your customers want. And it's provide many types digital Marketing Services: Viral Content Marketing Services, B2B Content Services, (SEO+SMo+ PPC), Social Media Consulting service etc.[http://modifyed.in/content-marketing-services- india/](http://modifyed.in/content-marketing-services-india/)</comment>


Canadian PM Justin Trudeau's wife Sophie tests positive for coronavirus - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-canada-trudeau-pos/canadian-pm-justin-trudeaus-wife-sophie-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-idUSKBN21008T <comment><USER2> Earlier version of story was already on front page:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22558859](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22558859)

<comment><USER3> This development shows that she was tested positive. The earlier article was just highlighting the risk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have a feeling, the reason why we are now hearing politicians, celebrities etc. being infected is probably because they are getting tested anyway. Symptoms or not. They either have the money to do it or they are in important positions and are prioritized.

Which could mean that the actual number of infections truly is much much higher than we know and therefore the fatality rate could also be significantly lower than what has been estimated so far.

I'm not a medical professional at all. Just guessing.

<comment><USER5> I'm a medical professional and I think you're right.

There are medical professionals I know who are quarantined with obvious COVID (or H1N1) symptoms but not tested because they don't fit the requirements. It matters because if it's just H1N1 they can be back in action sooner.

Not saying we shouldn't test famous people, just saying we should expand that type of testing much more broadly.

<comment><USER6> Where do you work that medical professionals with ILI symptoms don't meet screening criteria?

<comment><USER5> Oh, to be clear - the person with symptoms hasn't had patient contact in a long time. But the fact that they can't get tested causes another asymptomatic person who does have very heavy patient contact to be quarantined for 14 days.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> They live together and are currently together. This has to mean he has been exposed.

Only a matter of time I suppose until he tests positive. I wish them both a speedy recovery.

<comment><USER8> "Also on the advice of doctors, he will not be tested at this stage since he has no symptoms. For the same reason, doctors say there is no risk to those who have been in contact with him recently."

<comment><USER9> Sounds crazy. He and Trump should be both tested and given vitamin C, D, and zinc.

<comment><USER10> Just go easy on the vitamin A, he seems to have plenty of that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> And Trudeau himself is not being tested: [https://twitter.com/CameronAhmad/status/1238281503005642753](https://twitter.com/CameronAhmad/status/1238281503005642753). I don't understand why some governments seem so averse to testing in general and have really tight constraints around it. In comparison, Bolsonaro had an aid test positive for it and he's being tested with results coming tomorrow: [https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1238232367006912514](https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1238232367006912514)

<comment><USER12> if you're going to self isolate anyway there's not much point in testing I suppose other than for statistical purposes and at this point my guess would be that testing people on the frontlines is more important.

<comment><USER13> What "frontlines?" _Everywhere_ are "frontlines" at this point.

<comment><USER12> healthcare workers, public service workers, food, transportation, pharmaceutical and so on. People who need to definitely know if they are sick or not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Was it just me, or did POTUS seem hoarse/out of breath during the address yesterday?

I think this has spread to more people faster than anyone in several governments expected.

<comment><USER15> He often does. It's quite an eye opener to watch more of his live addresses and press conferences. When you read a recap of what happened it all sounds vaguely normal and presidential. But when you watch what actually happened you realise how far off the deep end he really is.

<comment><USER16> How does he do at the rallies ?

I imagine he talks for longer than 10 minutes

<comment><USER17> He does quite a bit better at rallies. I believe some of these press conferences catch him at times when he is more tired, and the subject matter is also different (less rehearsed, less stump speech-y) and dryer than his rallies so his charisma level seems a bit lower</comment></comment></comment></comment>