Quantum Python: Animating the Schrodinger Equation - <AUTHOR> https://jakevdp.github.io/blog/2012/09/05/quantum-python/

<comment><USER2> Very impressive! I've never seen the dual Fourier synthesis so clearly explained. (i always felt that if you can 'explain' it to a computer; you ought to be able to explain it to an attentive science student)

I couldn't get the animation to work in firefox. It was something to do with flash problems. With the help of wget I was able to directly download the mp4 file and it's very nice indeed - well done!</comment>


Ask HN: What's the coolest technology you worked on? - <AUTHOR> Throughout your programming career what was the most coolest technology did you work on ?
And how did it helped you progress in your career <comment><USER2> Coolest in several ways. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AAR-47_Missile_Approach_War...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AAR-47_Missile_Approach_Warning_System) I cannot talk about the tech. Which was cool. But I can talk about an event.

A military guy visited our place to give us a plaque of appreciation. He also had a picture. At the base, they asked people whose lives had been saved by our product, to come out for a quick picture. They had over 100 people show up. Being a part of a product that clearly saved all of those lives, plus many more, filled me with pride.

Hard to beat that for compensation, not all salaries are measured in cash.

</comment><comment><USER3> Early in my career (as a co-op student) learning C on the job, I had to implement the HP PCL interpreter for a printer. The trick was it had so little memory (no page frame buffer) that you had to be very efficient and render into a short-height band across the page as the laser beam is rastering over the moving paper. Luckily I had hobby experience doing similar things on the Atari 8-bit. Some other student did the macros. A magazine did a benchmark test of a bunch of HP and compatible printers. Ours won most benchmarks except for storage efficiency for user-uploaded fonts which HP did better. They may have used more advanced compression. Partway through the project they took the hardware blitter out of spec to save like $12 so I had to replace it all in software including 0.25x,0.33x,0.5x,2x,3x,4x scaling which was also fun.

</comment><comment><USER4> Not the coolest, but the one I enjoyed working on was a project to port Mortal Kombat: Dead Alliance game from GBA to a puny(but interesting) linux mobile phone. The linux phone had no graphics hardware acceleration where as GBA has. And I am no graphics expert, I am a generalist software engineer and there was no support or documentation* of the original source code and platform so it was super fun ;)

* Don't ask me why, there were some business reasons.

</comment><comment><USER5> \- Stealth aircraft

\- Ground Moving Target Indicator: [https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/sys...](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/gmti.htm)

\- Synthetic aperture radar (think ultra-high resolution radar that looks akin to HQ video)

\- GPS (when it was originally in development by the military)

<comment><AUTHOR> Omg really how was your experience working on stealth aircraft

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nothing - I work at a bank it's boring af.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hahah i can relate to you But there are some interesting projects at the bank too

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Nothing that cool but did stuff interfacing with hand readers and touch devices in 2002 when that was a new thing.

<comment><AUTHOR> True But now tech has changed alot</comment></comment>


Net Neutrality Complaints to FCC Not Submitting - <AUTHOR> Is anyone else having difficulty submitting complaints to the FCC with 503s being returned?<p>URL: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/proceedings?q=name:((17-108)) <comment><USER2> I'm sending Pai a postcard. He doesn't control the USPS.</comment>


Powering down Bitcoin with silicon photonics: Low power PoW algo and HW - <AUTHOR> https://sciencex.com/news/2020-05-powering-bitcoin-silicon-photonics-power.html <comment><USER2> >To decentralize Bitcoin mining once more and eliminate its massive electricity consumption, a proof of work decoupled from energy-intensive computation is clearly needed.

Here's the central thesis and there's so much wrong with it.

Leaving aside the topic of whether you think the way bitcoin requires the consumption of electricity is good or not, the consumption of electricity is not a side effect, it's the whole point.

You must burn electricity to be part of the game. If you are part of the game, you have a chance to win. If you win, you will well and truly cover your electricity costs. If you cheat, you will be ejected from the game, and lose all the money you've spent on electricity. It is to your advantage to discover other cheaters so you can eject them, as that will allow you to win more.

Bitcoin 101. Reducing the energy consumption of the hashes will not decentralize the network more.

The reason the bitcoin network is less decentralized today than it was in 2010 is because ASICs are hard to manufacture, which means they are only made in a few places and are very expensive per unit. That makes them hard to buy in small batches, and near impossible to buy in many countries.

This situation will not be improved by making photonic ASICs.

There's more nuance to this, and that nuance makes this proposal even worse, but lets leave it at that.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's pretty well established that CAPEX is the source of security in PoW not OPEX. See our paper and papers like

httpss://uncommoncore.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/A-model-for-Bitcoins- security-and-the-declining-block-subsidy-v1.06.pdf

<comment><USER2> >It's pretty well established that CAPEX is the source of security in PoW not OPEX

You're literally the first person I've ever heard express such an opinion. Could you give citations for "pretty well established"?

Multiple, please, since it's "well" established. Preferably ones that have citations at the bottom? The document you linked contains no citations and is thus an opinion piece, not an academic paper.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> > It is to your advantage to discover other cheaters so you can eject them, as > that will allow you to win more.

Are you talking about miners constructing invalid blocks? Their blocks would simply be rejected by everyone else. And no miner is stupid enough to waste electricity producing invalid blocks. This whole paragraph seems irrelevant to the issue at hand...</comment>


2-Stage Light Gas Gun - <AUTHOR> http://www.chrisfenton.com/2-stage-light-gas-gun/ <comment><USER2> The money quote:

My Mom actually made me collect all of the pieces, lay them out, and try to root-cause the failure.

<comment><USER3> The part that made me laugh out loud was "Whatever happened to just grounding someone?" right after that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Might have been wiser to use helium instead of hydrogen. Great experiment, would have liked to have seen a video though

</comment><comment><USER5> Much more fun than shooting tennis balls out of tin cans taped together. There is a bit of a problem with the description however which is that while air speed will be limited to the mach number that is the _net_ air speed. Generally in a projectile weapon the accelerating gas is moving along with the projectile and so within the moving gas cloud the projectile can much much faster than the surrounding air. That is why your typical 30-30 hunting rifle will have a muzzle velocity >2000 fps which is in excess of the mach number (and the speed of sound).

<comment><USER6> But you're limited by the mach speed of the fluid pushing the object, not the mach speed of the fluid you're _traveling_ through. A bullet out of a rifle is limited by the mach speed of the hot gases created during combustion. A compressed-air gun, however, is limited to the speed of sound in compressed air.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is a rediculously unsafe project. Plastic PVC is not rated to be able to contain that much pressure (better to have used metal pipe and brass hardware) and hydrogen gas is extremely flammable.

<comment><USER8> PVC also doesn't show up well on x-rays either. A student at our high school had a potato cannon explode next to his hip one year. He ended up with a trip to the emergency room where the radiology tech shared that nugget of wisdom with him. Fortunately, when PVC fractures, most of the pieces remain large, so he was mostly bruised, but he had a couple of nasty cuts.

In this case, however:

> Fortunately, everyone was safely behind a barrier a safe distance away, and > no one was hurt.

It sounds like this particular experiment was conducted by people with enough sense to stay out of harms way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Great experiment, great writeup, great parenthood. Extrapluskudo's to your mom for making you figure out what went wrong. That's the way to teach something. Build->Fail->Rinse->Repeat</comment>


Lean Startup "Marketing Bullshit" - <AUTHOR> http://giffconstable.com/2010/05/lean-startup-marketing-bullshit/ <comment><USER2> I personally find Steve Blank has some interesting things to say and Eric Ries not so much, comparitively. The latter _seems_ to be trying to turn a simple idea (combine agile engineering practices with Steve Blank's "customer discovery/validation" idea") into a consultingware "movement" with kool-aid conferences and such, just as with all business fads. The jury is still out on the eventual success of such efforts.

The nearest analogy is the whole "Agile" movement. There was a useful/interesting kernel of ideas but it was soon overrun by scammy consultants (e.g the hwle "Scrum Master" certification scam). I suspect "Lean Startups" are on the same path.

I do think Mr.Ries has some (mildly) interesting things to say, but (and this is probably blasphemy for at least a subset of HN readers) my "marketing bullshit" filter _is_ on at high when I read or listen to him these days. I believe that the whole "lean startup" movement is in its _early_ stages of being overrrun by scamsters so there are still interesting ideas there.

So yes, (imo) at least some part of the "Lean Startup" (the phrase is copyrighted by Mr Ries btw!) stuff _is_ marketing BS. As always you as the consumer of such fads have to use your intelligence to discard the marketing fluff and find the useful core. And every fad generally has a (sometimes tiny) useful core.

Caveat Emptor. Useful idea, especially as it applies to methodology salesmen, irrespective of whether said methodology applies to sw dev (agile) or building/running a business ("lean startup").

<comment><USER3> I believe that Eric's heart is in the right place and he truly wants to help more entrepreneurs. I don't disagree that born-again evangelism and "scammy consultants" is an unfortunate side effect of what is going on.

While people will like or dislike my op-ed as they will, I'd just like to say that in writing the blog post, I had no such motives (consulting, that is) -- I'm just another startup guy trying to build a company.

I do agree with the other commenter that there is a new set of "buzzwords" floating around, like MVP, product-market fit, pivot, etc. These phrases emerge as shorthand.

But still I do believe that these authors are more rigorous, more into measurement and results, and more down-to-earth practical than the kinds of biz-consulting blowhard that turned everyone off business speak in the first place.

<comment><USER2> " I'd just like to say that in writing the blog post, I had no such motives (consulting, that is) ".

I never said you did (just in case it wasn't clear :-)). It is obvious you honestly believe that there is a lot of valuable insight behind the "marketing bullshit" enveloping the "lean startup" buzz.

I don't agree (or at least I don't agree about the ratio of hype to substance, but that is all right, differences of opinion are _good_ ).

I do think (as I indicated above) that Steve Blank's books and blog posts are worth reading as are _some_ of Eric Ries's _early_ blog posts (before he got onto this "evangelism"/paid conferences kick). I am not claiming they are stupendously new insights but definitely worth reading and thinking about.

I think 700$ "lean startup conferences" (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1179623>) are very like 700$ "I will teach you to be rich" scams. People who are really rich don't go around holding seminars on How to Be Rich and charging people money for those.

I believe you could get much more value from reading patio11 's posts here and on his blog, Paul Graham's essays and mixergy interview transcripts of startup founders than attending these vague conferences (unless you are into heavy duty echo chamber networking), thus avoiding paying good money to be initiated into "A New Era of Enterpreneurship that is dawning" [ from the marketing spiel at [http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2010/03/new- conference-...](http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2010/03/new-conference- website-speakers-agenda.html) ]

Is there something to the "lean startups" idea? Definitely. Is there a lot of borderline scammy hype right now (in other words a lot of "marketing bullshit") around those ideas? Definitely.

<comment><USER4> Not that Eric Ries et al need validation from me, but I nearly went to that conference. (The timing just did not work for me.) You think $700 is a lot of money? I was getting ready to buy a plane ticket across the Pacific. I thought it was likely to be cheap at the price, given the quality of the novel insights Eric Ries et al have been writing about.

Take Minimum Viable Product, for example. It is similar to 37Signals "do less", but it doesn't end there: you're eliminating parts of the product which don't provide value, but you're also strategically deferring parts which do provide value until you've got a handle on the big business risks. I think that is a pretty powerful idea. Hugely powerful.

I've talked on the Business of Software forums for literally years now on how important polishing the first five minutes of interaction with your product is, but it never occurred to me to get that five minutes out before building the rest of the product. The story about spending 6 months to make the IMVU IM client being wasted because no one downloaded it, and how you could have gotten the same information without actually coding the IM client simply by putting up a download button and having nobody click it, was a lightbulb moment for me. Hey, wait a second: instead of building the whole product and then optimizing the living daylights out of the first five minutes, I can build the first five minutes and see if that knocks socks off. If so, then invest in building the rest of the product. (If not, figure out why it isn't knocking socks off and recalibrate. I'm not sure I like "pivot.")

This was hugely influential in my choice of Appointment Reminder over a notebook full of other ideas for my next product. There are probably a few decent ideas in there (amidst a lot of drek and random scribblings), but Appointment Reminder was the one that had an obvious opportunity for a very compelling demo implementable in a few weeks. And I think it will work fairly decently for me.

Heck, I think I stole three ideas just from watching the videos.

<comment><USER2> "You think $700 is a lot of money?"

Sure it is, for the _differential_ in the information you can get by paying it and attending the "New Age Of Entrepreneurship Dawning" seminar vs reading, talking to people who actually run startups today, reading HN and so on. Obviously there are people who think otherwise.

Doesn't change my views on the essential _marginal_ value of Ries's offerings and "insights" vs Steve Blanks' originals. As to extracting lessons for startup experience, one can do that from any startup story without buying into the whole "lean startup" filter.

"Take Minimum Viable Product, for example. It is similar to 37Signals "do less", but it doesn't end there: you're eliminating parts of the product which don't provide value, but you're also strategically deferring parts which do provide value until you've got a handle on the big business risks. I think that is a pretty powerful idea. Hugely powerful."

Sure. Why do you need to pay 700$ to understand that idea? Sure you _could_ pay. It is your money. I am just saying _I_ wouldn't. And I don't believe in "I will tell you how to get rich" type seminars. If you have the money to spare Mr Ries has (had?) a $180,000 for 3 days of wisdom sharing deal too. ([http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/08/introducing- lea...](http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/08/introducing-lean-startup- cohort.html)). On that thread I defended his right to price his wares any way he wanted to. I still do. I am just saying I don't think it is worth that kind of money, which is a different thing.

As I said, Caveat Emptor. Listen to opinions. Then do what you will with your money and time.

<comment><USER5> Your missives on the value of the conference would carry more weight had you actually attended it. The majority of the presentations were from people actually running startups -- exactly what you recommend.

Conferences like this will help bring structure to a concept that continues to be quite amorphous. Scammy consultants have a greater ability to flourish when there isn't someone or something guiding what the term means. You may quibble with the marginal value of Eric's insights, or disagree with his fees, but I would hope you'd agree that his is trying to bring people to together to consolidate these ideas and concepts in a wholly transparent way. Kudos for that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The author is lacking an understanding of business jargon. Very little jargon was vacuous when coined. It is the endless repetition by the uninformed that renders it meaningless.

Ries is trying to change the way people think about startups, and as a part of that effort he is consciously promoting neologisms that capture the principles of the lean startup. I like those principles, I understand that he wants to create language to concisely express those principles to help grow awareness of his philosophy.

I think "Tipping Point"--which the author cites as true "Marketing Bullshit"-- is a good analogy. The general public (people who hadn't read _Complexity_ or _Chaos_ ) didn't understand complexity before Gladwell, and so the phrase "Tipping Point" was coined and used to capture the principle. It worked: pretty much everyone understands it now. It's just that the term "Tipping Point" is now slightly irritating to anyone who "got it" a long time ago, and it has been (predictably) misused enough to place it in the Business Jargon Pantheon.

That's how business jargon works. Just consult your Buzzword Bingo scorecard for examples.

<comment><USER7> Gladwell didn't invent that term 'tipping point'. I remember seeing it and using it long before his book came out, which according to Wikipedia was around 2000.

<comment><USER6> Please send me a link if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure he coined the non- scientific, or at least popular usage. I don't remember having heard the phrase tipping point before the book came out, even though I was fairly familiar with the idea.

<comment><USER8> Dictionary.com lists Gladwell in the etymology. However, Wikipedia's entry for "tipping point (sociology)" (which, to my knowledge, is effectively the same as Gladwell's use) says, "The phrase was coined in its sociological use by Morton Grodzins, by analogy with ..."

The page on Grodzins says, "He is known for coining the term "tipping point" in studies of white flight, such as The Metropolitan Area as a Racial Problem (1958)".

No doubt Gladwell popularized the phrase, but I don't think he coined it by any means.

<comment><USER9> Perhaps one could say that his book was a tipping point in the wider diffusion and knowledge of the term? :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm admittedly short on my knowledge of this newfangled "lean startup" notion. But, it sounds to me like the fundamental principle is "lazy product evaluation." Ie, instead of building anything up-front, go out, find out what people want, and build _that_ , MVP, reacting to markets that you know, provably, to already exist.

At the risk of getting told I don't "get it", this sounds like a great way to build a very successful but horribly boring startup.

<comment><USER11> Would you rather build a very successful & boring startup, or work on something super cool, with no clear way of turning a profit?

<comment><USER12> Success is success. The details are secondary.

<comment><USER3> this attitude doesn't prevent successes, but it does lead to unnecessarily high failure rates

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Here's a snippet from a HN submission currently ranking about as well as the Lean post:

"Introducing, Braintrust, my bootstrapped lean startup . . . Braintrust is hosted in the cloud, works in real-time, and provided as a SaaS offering."</comment>


Building a Toy Self-Driving Car: Part One - <AUTHOR> https://blog.floydhub.com/toy-self-driving-car-part-one/ <comment><AUTHOR> hi I'm the author. Ask me anything about the article or my plans for the self driving toy car. I'm currently working on the custom controller and servo motor setup, part two should be up in a week or so.</comment>


Stare into the face of every fan at the World Series - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/29/mlbs-tagoramic-lets-you-stare-into-the-face-of-each-and-every-fan-at-the-world-series/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

<comment><USER2> I'm really impressed with the way MLB embraces technology. I (from the UK) subscribe to MLB.TV to watch all games online, and the flash interface they've created is just so massively superior to any other sports (or, frankly, other TV) coverage I've ever seen online.

Maybe this is more a case of the US being ahead of the UK, rather than MLB being ahead of other people, but from my memory of NFL Game Pass (which I haven't subscribed to since 2 or 3 seasons ago) it wasn't nearly this good.

(The one thing that does annoy me is they cut commercials out and put on a shiny animated image saying "commercial break" - I'd rather actually have the commercials in there personally, it's no superbowl but they're still part of the experience, and it just seems a little blank to have the picture/sound cut off regularly.)

Edit: On a related note, given the number of HN readers who must be based in and around SF, how many people here care enough to be following how the Giants do in this World Series?</comment>


Salaries for Developers and Designers across the world - <AUTHOR> http://blog.splinter.me/salaries-for-developers-and-designers-across-the-world/

<comment><USER3> According to this a web developer in Italy makes 52k, while a senior web developer makes 30k. I wonder how many data points per country they have…

</comment><comment><USER4> There is something off with these numbers, especially the UK figures. $43000 average for a software developer would be about £26500, thats quite low. I would expect it to be in the mid £30Ks.

<comment><USER5> Indeed. Graduates aren't even far off starting on around £25k+ in the UK[1]. Somebody with a good few years experience can quite easily get almost double that.

[1] - [http://targetjobs.co.uk/career-sectors/it-and- technology/286...](http://targetjobs.co.uk/career-sectors/it-and- technology/286195-what-graduate-salary-can-i-expect-in-an-it-job)

<comment> UK-AL Where I live grad salaries are 18 - <USER2>

<comment><USER6> I started on £25k

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This infographic has such slanted view of the development world. There is web developers and designers, SENIOR web developers and designers... and then everybody else.

As if the only purpose of software development were html pages.

As important as HTML and mobile development with cute stock pictures and animated charts have become the boom, this type of development does not represent 20% of the software development world.

</comment><comment><USER8> Canada's salary points seem really low....or there's a lot of "you must know everything and we'll pay you minimum wage" jobs that they're scooping from the Canadian Job Bank. From that list, I want to be heading to either Australia or the US.

Also for PHP dev average, where do you get 75k for junior, and 100k+ or senior? Sure isn't Canada. 75k here is senior level salary, and that's in Toronto. I've only ever seen one PHP job in Canada that paid 100k, and that was an architect position, 10 years experience, and needed to have experience with incredibly large datasets.

<comment><USER9> I'd assume that the $100k jobs are filled already. Estimating the average salary from job listings is like estimating the economy from economic forecasts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The site seems down from here.

Google Cache: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:blog.sp...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:blog.splinter.me/salaries- for-developers-and-designers-across-the-world&strip=1)

Relevant image: [http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/salaries-of-web- de...](http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/salaries-of-web-developers- in-india-the-philippines-usa-and-around-the-world_502914bb1691a_w587.jpg)

<comment><USER11> Here is the text, but the main part is the image:

Are you a Developer or Designer curious about your potential salary in different countries? You've come to the right place.

Below are some averages of yearly salaries per country. As it seems, the best paying countries for Web Developers are Australia (87K $), Japan (86K $), the US (76K $) and Canada (60K $), while the lowest paying countries are India (12K $), Malaysia (8K $) and Philippines (7K $). Graphic Designers seem to be most appreciated in Switzerland (96K $), followed by Australia (64K $). The numbers jump quite higher when talking about Senior positions, as well as for Software Developers in comparison with Web Developers.

Salaries of web developers in India, the Philippines, USA and around the world

If you are considering the startup life and you are attracted by popular startup hubs, the numbers look a bit different. Sillicon Valley's Developers have an average salary of 119K $ per year, while London's Developers make 79K $ per year and Berlin's Senior Developers reach on average 80K $ per year.

And of course, you might consider working for one of the most appealing tech companies at the moment. Seems like the best paying ones are Google with 128K $ for Software Engineers base salary per year, followed by Facebook (124K $) and Apple (114K $).

So where are you going to head to? splinter.me is here to help you make the leap by keeping you in the companies radar for work opportunities that fit your skills and interests. So don't forget to create your profile :)

Join splinter.me, it's 100% free

<comment><USER12> What would be more interesting is to see a comparison on take-home pay, that you can actually spend. The numbers don't seem very accurate at all on the site. Furthermore it's sort of beside the point : you're not working for money, you're working for value.

Eu generally has 50%+ tax rates, and a ~20% VAT on anything you want to spend, combining (roughly) to between 60% and 70% of your income disappearing in govt. coffers.

California seems to have slightly under 50% taxation, combined with 4.7% VAT. Which combines to 53-55% taxation.

So US is not just well-paid, but you actually get to keep a bigger part of that. From a $76k pay you could have ~$30k disposable income after rent (outside of SF proper), while the $50k in the EU, you'd be lucky to get $15k disposable income after rent out of that (and that's ignoring that tech stuff is more expensive to start with before the tax even comes into the picture).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Any idea how a "web developer" in Japan make $86K while a "software developer" in Japan only makes $31K?

<comment><USER14> Because these numbers are drawn out of a rabbit's arse?

They don't provide methodology, or any decent description of categorization; this infographic is worse than useless, it obviously has an agenda.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The infographics are dismal. The bars in 'Average Salary by Specialty' indicate that Python developers make twice what Javascript devs earn, while in reality it is around 10%. When you look at Java, an approximate 10% difference between Junior and Midlevel results in much more similar bar heights.

What's missing is where the numbers are coming from, how many replied and whether it is in any way representative.

The numbers for Germany are very odd. 24k for a designer is pretty close to the poverty line, I believe. Is that before or after tax? I guess it suffers from a lack of participation from many non-anglosaxon countries, so I would not use any of these numbers in actual interviews.

</comment><comment><USER16> These seem to be quite high, especially the Australian salaries.

The _average_ web developer here earns $93,000 AUD?[1] That means that half of web developers are earning more than that.

That's substantially higher than the national median _household_ income of $63,000 AUD [2]

[1]: As few have pointed out, this is correct if we assume the graphic meant average == median. But my point still stands: A reasonable chunk of people get paid more than that.

[2]: [http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/...](http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/quickstat/0?opendocument&navpos=220)

<comment><USER17> I guess the author should clarify if the reported number is the median salary (in which case your assertion that half the web dev are earning more than 93K AUD is correct) or if 93K is the average salary (which can be biased by a few very high earners).

<comment><USER18> Yep. Usually when talking about salaries the median is used and it is stated explicitly when talking about the numbers so I was surprised myself when they kept using the word average. After all, there are 3 ways to calculate averages so it's quite ambiguous for splinter to simply say _average_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Those numbers are worthless. 69700 USD for a software developer in Switzerland is much too low. Even starting salaries are higher than that in most parts of Switzerland. I think the average is probably around 120000 USD.

</comment><comment><USER20> The "join splinter" modal that automatically displays while reading the page completely obscured my mobile viewport but the close button was offscreen, and I was unable to continue reading.

</comment><comment><USER21> Ah, another inaccurate salary comparison chart that doesn't take into account standard of living and how that differs vastly from country to country (and regions within the countries).

<comment><USER22> Its not as much standard of living, but cost of living. Which varies not only between country, but even state. Average for some countries makes sense, but for countries like US the average is pretty meaningless. The average difference in income for two comparable developers between say Texas and California is going to be huge.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I wonder why software developers in Japan make so little (35k), but web developers there make a lot (85k)?

<comment><USER14> Because these numbers are drawn out of a rabbit's arse. No other way to explain it. Doesn't help that they don't give a description of the categories, or methodology

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Too bad there's a huge popup covering the article that you can't clear on an android phone...

</comment><comment><USER25> On average Senior Web developers in Spain make $52,600 (37,000€)... no way.

Of course some people make this(and much more), but we are talking on average so this number it's false.

</comment><comment><USER26> The next step would be cross reference this with GDP per capita.

<comment><USER16> Or the Big Mac Index! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> What's special about swiss graphic designers?

<comment><USER28> The cost of living in Switzerland is pretty high.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Across the world ? Where are Latin America and Africa ?</comment>


[Ask YC] - Javascript for python developers - <AUTHOR>

All JS books I can find are either too basic. (Start with what loops are, ) or too esoteric.
Is there a book which teaches Javascript for experienced developers, and is preferable geared towards people who know Python already?<p>Ps. How can I get a set type behaviour in JS. This is the python code I want to do in JS ( http://dpaste.com/94047/ ), and cant find one simple way <comment><USER2> Professional JavaScript for Web Developers, Pro Javascript Techniques, Ecma 262 Spec , O'Reilly Definitive 5th Edition, Javascript: The Good Parts

are books I'd recommend for learning JS, and most of the authors have experience with various languages ( though none of them are really geared toward a Pythonista ).

You could create your own custom function that emulates Python's set, but you can't do advanced expressions such as using the binary minus with 2 operands ( sets ) on either side. You'd have to do something like set.diff( firstArray, secondArray ).

</comment><comment><USER3> JavaScript has arrays and objects, either of which could be used to do what you want, though you'll need to write your own library of set operations.

JavaScript and Python are very different languages. I'd suggest you start here:

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript></comment>


CNC Fabric Cutting - <AUTHOR> http://www.neufeld.newton.ks.us/electronics/?p=1827 <comment><USER2> Site is down, so I'm winging this comment until I can check again later or find an archive, but I wanted to note that my company has cut all kinds of fabric (and also food!) using a "water-only" (ie, no entrained abrasive) method with an ultra-high-pressure CNC waterjet.

Depending on the material and tolerances, you can cut through significant stacks simultaneously to save time, and with the correct settings and setup you get very little splashback or other wetting.

Since the 60,000+ PSI stream is coming out of the nozzle at something like mach 2, the water is travelling too fast to make the edge wet!

<comment><USER3> This is really interesting since waterjet often doesn't work well for non- rigid materials. Do you have to add a backer to keep the fabric stiff/in place or are you able to just rely on the thickness of a stack to keep it properly placed and non-moving?

<comment><USER2> For floppy materials we use a few approaches: first, instead of putting the material on the standard "metal slat" bed, we use a product called Rhino Board, which is essentially a whole bunch of plastic straws glued together into a rigid mat. It provides more granular support. For materials still needing more support, we put a sacrificial board (either OSB or plastic sheeting) underneath. And for materials that we can't glue down, or are even more problematic, we also put a sacrificial sheet on top.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Interesting. Author describes a few methods for cutting fabric on a hypothetical fabric CNC. Lasers are out because of the impact to the material, so they investigate a few cutting options:

Blade - Cuts well, but drags material

Roller - Cuts well, but needs heavy downforce and overcuts the fabric border

Scissors - A mechanical nightmare

The author suggests a reciprocating blade might solve the issue, but introduces other complexities (it destroys the material underneath.

A reciprocating blade seems like a much more complex solution than trying to solve a fabric rigidity issue or heaviness issue from a rolling blade. Like, if you are already considering a sacrificial material, why not sandwich the fabric between two rigid, high friction materials, and have the knife cut through all three?

I think about this a lot, as the partner does a lot of sewing, and a significant amount of time is spent on cutting pattern pieces. It seems like such a solvable problem, but also, such a challenging problem.

<comment><USER5> If my memory can be trusted, then it can be done with a high-pressure water jet. As a kid, my class took a field trip to a factory that did this. I remember being fascinated by the idea that water could cut.

EDIT: No need to trust my memory:

[https://wardjet.com/waterjets/water- only](https://wardjet.com/waterjets/water-only)

[https://textilelearner.blogspot.com/2015/07/fabric- cutting-b...](https://textilelearner.blogspot.com/2015/07/fabric-cutting-by- water-jet-cutting.html)

\---

Incidentally, this was a long time ago (~1980?), and another thing we saw was a computer whose operator explained that to boot it up, they had to go through a sequence involving toggle switches on the front panel. Someone commented that it sounds impossible, and the operator said it gets easy after a while.

They also had some stations for design work with basically a drafting table and a mouse-like device with a ~12 key keypad on it and I think a glass with a reticle, presumably for aligning with points on a blueprint or something like that.

<comment><USER6> We had a waterjet at the granite shop we worked at for cutting stone slabs. Even after years of working there, I'd still just sit and stare at it sometimes fascinated.

That thing was always a hassle with maintenance though and sometimes things on the intensifier would explode....

Programming it was pretty cool. Different than the routers I programmed. We had a camera system rigged up that could take photos of the slab. The cad files were then loaded in and dropped and arranged on the stone.

The guy that did it at our shop was really good at matching everything. Connecting the veins for pieces that needed to be joined or mitered.

<comment><USER7> A friend operates one at a granite shop. They use a software that maps the surface and then uploads it to a webapp that lets the customer choose the pattern layout.

One thing I found interesting about water jets is that you absolutely do not want to be cut by one. The force is strong enough that it can inject the abrasive garnet into your bloodstream. The machine I actually came with instructional tags to pin to the shirt of anyone headed to the ER.

<comment><USER6> >A friend operates one at a granite shop. They use a software that maps the surface and then uploads it to a webapp that lets the customer choose the pattern layout.

That would have been pretty cool. One of the biggest holdups to our schedule used to be waiting for customers to confirm layouts before cutting. They always come into the shop to verify.

We used old unsupported software called stonecam from Park Industries. Only one guy still working there had any experience with the software. We ended up having to recalibrate the camera on the machine while I was there. It involved manually configuring variables in text files with variable names written in a mix of German and English. Apparently the software was written by one German guy who vanished some time ago who never told anyone else how it all worked completely.

They'd switched to officially supporting AlphaCam a while ago. We had licenses for our two routers for alpha cam but they were ten grand a piece and the boss was holding out as long as possible before switching the waterjet over.

>The force is strong enough that it can inject the abrasive garnet into your bloodstream

Oh wow had no idea about that. I figured you absolutely did not want to get your body into the flow, but never heard that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Site is down, but from the cache link posted, this looks like an exploration into DIY CNC fabric cutting, recognizing that higher volume/higher price alternatives already exist in the market.

Basic CNC control seems to mostly be a solved problem these days, there are lots of options that product reasonably good precision using stepper motors, lead screws, and some open-source software.

The challenge for CNC cutting fabric for low cost/low volume applications seems to revolve around what to use to make the actual cut. In this segment, there does not appear to be a clear option for something that works reliably, without a lot of material waste, and within the budget of a bespoke garment producer.

</comment><comment><USER9> Google cache: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.neufeld.newton.ks.us/electronics/?p%3D1827&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS898US898&strip=1&vwsrc=0)

<comment><USER10> Archive:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200919222512/http://www.neufel...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200919222512/http://www.neufeld.newton.ks.us/electronics/?p=1827)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Related question: any good recommendations for garment/fabric specific CAD software out there?

As purely a passing interest I recall trying to find a platform years ago but being disappointed with what I found.

I've always wanted to design the 'perfect' (for me) laptop bag but found the task daunting. This is coming from someone whose worked with Lasers/CNC Mills/CNC Routers/3D Printers/traditional mechanical & electrical CAD enough to be comfortable with the concepts of computer aided design and machine operation.

<comment><USER12> Unfortunately most of the standard stuff (Optitex, Gerber) is industrial software with "contact us" pricing.

What I've found works best for me is:

\- Seamly2D ([https://seamly.net/](https://seamly.net/)) and Valentina ([https://gitlab.com/smart-pattern/valentina](https://gitlab.com/smart- pattern/valentina)) - these are two forks of an open-source project. They do pretty much everything I want them to do.

\- Clo3D: [https://www.clo3d.com/](https://www.clo3d.com/) \- horrendously expensive subscription software ($50/month or $450/yr) but there are.. Uh... Less legal options available online. My favourite aspect of this particular software is that it lets you view the constructed object (usually a garment) in 3D and run physics simulations on it.

I've tried Optitex and Gerber as well but despite being the standard in industry, I don't find them to be great pieces of software. Of the two, Optitex is much better than Gerber but both are really hard to use.

I think Clo3D is probably the most approachable option but it does cost. Seamly2D/Valentina have a steeper learning curve than Clo3D but they're also much more capable when it comes to design and in particular, parametric design.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I actually went down the laser route but I'm mostly interested in synthetic fabrics. To address the TFA's concerns:

\- You don't need a whole lot of power for the kinds of synthetic fabrics you'd want to wear. I use a 20W laser from AliExpress that outputs ~7.5W of actual energy.

\- Safety is definitely a big concern. The biggest problem is that a lot of synthetic fabrics produce lethally toxic gases when cut with a laser. However if you build an enclosure, you can filter the exhaust to ensure that it's safe.

\- Don't know why liability is a problem, not American.

\- It won't scorch most synthetic fabrics, it will melt them. However this is often a good thing, as it seals the edges so that they won't fray.

They also have a huge advantage: they're cheap and easy. My 1000x1000mm laser cutter cost me ~$120 from AliExpress. Just had to screw it together and it worked out of the box.

At the very least, you can use it to cut out paper patterns for you or put cut marks onto the fabric.

<comment><USER13> What model of laser cutter do you have? $120 is very cheap - is it any good?

<comment><USER12> It's AliExpress, they typically don't have model numbers.

It's nothing life changing but it does what it says it does.

It doesn't need to be expensive for a job like this. It's just:

\- An Aluminium profile frame

\- Stepper + belt driven axes

\- A laser module

\- Probably <$10 worth of control electronics (an Arduino and some cheap stepper drivers)

\- A cheap DC power supply

I'm pretty sure the most expensive part is the laser module but those go for ~$30-40 on their own.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> jagged-chisel If you take a Backstage Magic Tour at Walt Disney World, the costuming department has some kind of [magical] CNC fabric cutter that does a single layer of fabric quickly and cleanly, apparently cookie-cutter style. You see the design on an LCD screen, the operator places the fabric, the machine closes on the fabric, it makes quiet slapping sounds for a few seconds, and it opens revealing the perfectly cut piece.

You're not permitted to take photos of the machine. Textile cutting isn't my thing, so I don't know how it works, but I found it mildly interesting.

</comment><comment><USER14> One of the most abiding memories of my trip to North Korea 8 years ago was the ubiquity of the CNC Song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPPlTX2a974](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPPlTX2a974)

I can't read about CNC's without whistling the tune.

<comment><USER15> I can think of only one other CNC-themed pop video, and that requires thinking of string-trio Rammstein covers as pop.

<comment><USER16> Have a link?

<comment><USER15> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfFtPFJWufs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfFtPFJWufs)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm really confused. What this person is looking for is a "oscillating tangential knife". Lots of hobby CNC machine manufacturers offer it as an option. A medium sized CNC machine + knife will probably cost around $5k. Smaller machines are cheaper but you get less value per dollar.

</comment><comment><USER18> Okay, I'll bite. This is an interesting idea, but "Why?"

The hypothetical use case "Made to measure suits for women" is one that a human with scissors does just fine. I suspect a single person with scissors can do this in less than an hour. The tailoring and sewing is _FAR_ more time consuming.

The point of CNC is either to 1) enable repeatable volume or 2) enable something that couldn't be done before. This falls into neither category.

<comment><USER19> > ...enable something that couldn't be done before.

They want to take critical measurements and automagically generate the pattern for the suit.

Kind of like the custom bra manufacturer that was making the rounds a while back I suppose.

<comment><USER18> Erm ... she did a post mortem on that bra manufacturer.

Something like "cutting the fabric" didn't even rank on why the business failed.</comment></comment></comment>


The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains - <AUTHOR> http://jseliger.com/2010/06/28/the-shallows-what-the-internet-is-doing-to-our-brains-nicholar-carr <comment><USER2> This seems to be a common theme lately, as there are several articles about this, lots of software and the minimalism/uncluttering self-help niche has reached astronomic heights (which is probably somewhat ironic).

Similarly, people complain about the huge number of workday hours lost to Facebook browsing or people playing flash games or simply solitaire.

I'm a bit cautious about drawing too many conclusions there. I think we've always been very easy to distract, any excuse was okay. We just have more and easier excuses right now, especially at places where just a few years ago, you couldn't be as easily distracted. At home, with friends calling, books in your library, a TV, your spouse, kids, etc, distraction was common place, and as you didn't feel like you were losing productivity, nobody really complained.

That's one of the reasons why people were forced into cubicles -- minimize potentials for distracting interaction. Now graphical computer interfaces, the internet and mobile phones made it possible for you to waste enough time, while sitting perfectly still. No wonder that a lot of journalists complain about that. Just a few years ago, they were sitting in front of typewriters (or DOS machines with XyWrite), where focus was no problem. Now it's not that easy anymore.

But is forcibly blocking this really the ultimate solution? /etc/hosts, Freedom, cubicles, log cabins, monasteries… Don't we just fight a symptom that we should tackle otherwise? There's probably some evolutionary reason why we're prone to this ("There, a sabretooth tiger!"), but only to a certain point. I think above that, you _want_ to be distracted and thus easily give in to temptation.

It's like when we were kids. Cleaning up your room, then your neighbor throws pebbles against your window? Off you go! But when you're all centered on playing with your Legos, your Mom has trouble getting you to dinner.

Maybe we shouldn't try as much to be monks, but set out to change our lives to contain more Legos.

<comment><USER3> > But is forcibly blocking this really the ultimate solution? /etc/hosts, > Freedom, cubicles, log cabins, monasteries… Don't we just fight a symptom > that we should tackle otherwise? There's probably some evolutionary reason > why we're prone to this ("There, a sabretooth tiger!"), but only to a > certain point. I think above that, you want to be distracted and thus easily > give in to temptation.

Precisely what I was thinking reading this article. Despite being a relative early adopter of the 'Net due to my college exposure last millenium, I've never really lost my ability to read or focus on a task… if I'm willing to do it. I didn't feel tempted to follow any of those links in the article, for example.

That said, with my recent bout of self-employment, I've found David Letterman's pronouncement that the iPad is the "ultimate in procrastination technology" to be mostly true. However, everytime I let this happen, I conclude that it is a sign of my being afraid or reluctant to do something related to my current task. Once I solve that underlying problem, I get productive again.

I think the takeaway from the above is that in recent times, people only _seem_ to be more easily distracted, because, IMHO, that people, for some reason or another, have become more likely to do work or take on tasks that deep down they really don't want to do. It isn't just the current recession, but something deep in our hireing practices or job opportunities that is letting humanity down…

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Only the sugary candy of the Internet encourages this, just like in any other venue. One can read crappy magazines or scientific journals. One can read trashy romance novels or literature. One can watch reality TV or in-depth documentaries. Online, one can spend the day playing farmville or they can check out the Open university, MIT's online courses, or any other of unlimited options.

The Internet provides never before seen access to information, and just like with any other part of life, it's up to each person to make sure they get a balanced intake.

The Internet is not encouraging this, it's the people. With great power comes great responsibility.

<comment><USER5> Having read Carr's book, he also mentions the fact that so much of our social lives has found its way online, that people can feel disconnected if they're away from their Facebook, or Twitter stream, or IM, or on demand email.

You're point is valid, that it's up to each one of us to find the right balance. It just becomes harder when unplugging from the Net is the modern day equivalent of pulling a Thoreau.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think the distractive power of the internet is the key point, and is and will be a major sociological factor. A (to me) related book is _Bowling Alone_ which discusses the decline of community in America. I think the two are linked: in place of constant electronic stimulation people don't just sit around staring at a wall: they tend to create and participate in social organizations, whether it be casual neighborhood card games, a church group, civic organization, etc. However the Internet and television inhibit this because it is just too easy to get an Internet fix and not be aware you are sitting alone in a room staring at an lcd reading the anonymous words of people you will never actually meet or know.

I have a script on my computer to disable my internet during the 9-5 on weekdays so that I can actually think. It still doesn't work; I manually override it probably 20min in everyday.

<comment><USER7> Yes, but at the same time, it has also made it easier to (say) connect with other foodies in Grand Rapids, MI. Not everything is purely about snarking on clueless schmucks on the internets.

While there's clearly a point at which the internet is a self-sustaining asocial distraction, it doesn't have to be that way. It can be used for local discussions to great effect.

Of course, not everybody exposed to the internet uses it in a social manner. Perhaps it just amplifies existing inclinations?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> One thing that has been pointed out in the article is how inline links can be exteremly distracting. They encourage you to take a break in the middle of reading something and go read something else.

One thing I've found helpful is in readability[1] which can take inline links and make them footnotes. I've also made a Drupal module[2] which acts as an input filter so you can do inline links as you write (to not break up your flow of writing) and have them automatically be turned into footnotes (which will work with WYSIWYG and Markdown as well). It's really nice and I've found it's something that help promotes a reading style which is more linear.

[1] <http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/> [2] <http://github.com/codeincarnate/Drupal-Footnote-Links>

<comment><USER9> I usually skip right over them unless the article is about something I'm really interested in. For example this article the inline links didn't raise enough interest for me to get distracted by them but the article was interesting enough to read through.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Not exactly new, this is one theme from Stephen Talbott's 1995 book _The Future Does Not Compute_. There are many things I disagree with in it, but I strongly agree about his description that the internet, results in a "scattering of attention" and that incoming messages (email) increases the "fragmentation in the modern office".

On a more personal note, I have noticed a distinct distraction factor to having the internet available, and a significant difficulty in concentrating for longer periods on books. In the late 1990s through 2002 I read over 100 _new_ books every year (that is books that I had not read before and that I read the entire book - I didn't keep track of re-reading and reading articles or chapters here and there). Since I have been on the internet, I have read fewer books each year - 96 in 2004 down to 44 last year. I didn't actually realize it was that bad until I just looked up the numbers for this comment.

</comment><comment><USER11> A bit off-topic. I have been using Readability on every block of text I come over on the internet. I have noticed 3 changes on my reading style over the last 6 months:

1) I read more often, instead of skimming.

2) I am less likely to click on links within articles, more so now that readability lets you configure it to show links as footnotes. If I am extremely curious I will check out the links after finishing the article.

3) I am so used to the beige background and typography of choice on my custom readability setup that I find it hard to read texts on any other typography or on any other background (esp. white background).

This leads me to believe that Nicholas Carr's hypothesis has a lot of merit in it. And even with six months worth of heavy Readability use (and I read a lot) I have essentially rewired my reading habit.

<comment><USER12> I think Readability has raised my standards of what I consider 'readable'. I find myself using it all the time now as well. I've also noticed that I skim less with it. I'll be honest though, I struggled to finish this article. I'm not sure if it was due to my attention span or because it just wasn't that engaging.

<comment><USER3> > I'm not sure if it was due to my attention span or because it just wasn't > that engaging.

…or outright sabotage by the writer. He challenges (more like, _dares_ ) the reader on a couple of occasions to remember something he wrote earlier in the article.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> FWIW, here's the author of that book on the Colbert Report a few days ago: [http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/wed- june-30-2010-...](http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/wed- june-30-2010-nicholas-carr)

(Yes, I just watched that video, and then posted about it on HN, instead of doing more productive things.)

</comment><comment><USER14> historically there has always been a cottage industry in decrying the new as dangerous. the otherwise terrible movie The Year One had a funny sequence on this where bronze is being introduced, much to the dismay of the stone knappers.</comment>


Building a product too difficult to use - <AUTHOR> https://phoenixdown.co/product-signups-not-active-users/ <comment><AUTHOR> This is the story about one of Andrew Kamphey's projects that didn't take off: Creator Growth Lab. He explains what went wrong, what were the lessons learned, and how those learnings improved the way he tackles new ventures.</comment>


Google Censorship Buries [Alternative Health Website] - <AUTHOR> https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/11/08/google-censorship-buries-mercola.aspx <comment><USER5> I'd like to see many more web sites have info about google's non-transparent censorship prominently displayed like this guy put together - <USER2> alternatives for big G's products.

Maybe there is good reason for the harsh removal of this guy's site (even ruining the site:his-site searches! ouch) - Maybe someone manually hit it for quality 'your life your money' stuff and combined with the strict algo and so it's technically following the trust rules or whatever - that's not for me to judge at the moment.

The bigger issue imho is that there are many of these de-rank and de-list things happening and it's not transparent to the end users.

So many people have come to trust google to give you what you search for, and for years they have the Gplex has been cutting up more and more pieces of the internet to remove from their index - and there is no transparency about this.

So many people think everything on the internet can be found via google, (and some thing whatever is on fbook is the internet and know nothing beyond what is / can be shown there ) - if things are censored there, they likely assume the things don't exist.

I don't mean everyone, but I'd wager most people.

There were times when I have seen google put a notice at the bottom of each page of certain searches with something like "some results are not shown here that once were shown here due to chilling effects of legally mandated takedown requests" \- click for more info..

So to me, that was snarky transparency - I think attempting to nudge people to try advocate for change with dmca forced censorship of google. Maybe I'm wrong in seeing it that way.

Anyhow - there was transparency when they were forced to remove listing for, was it movies? or movies and music and such mostly?

Yet we are not seeing transparency about removing listings such as the one this mercola place is mentioning that was shown and people visited, and many others.

I think most people don't even bookmark or otherwise save pages these days, assuming the "address bar" which has basically been hijacked by google search for most people - is going to re-find the info they had seen previously - <USER3> heard about from other people.. and now that info may have been shadow-banned essentially - and poof - that never really existed in the world.

This is the reason I think the reliance on google is more evil than fbook - <USER4> least with fbk they are more transparent about censoring many things.

The more places and people that post about the censorship and alternatives that are out there, the better I believe.

</comment><comment><USER6> Good to see pseudo science being recognised for what it is.

<comment><AUTHOR> [strike] I take it you aren't super familiar with Mercola's work. [/strike]

Yeah, its all salesy, but he also cites _most_ of his claims, and clearly marks where he is making claims that the FDA doesn't agree with.

Consider: [https://articles.mercola.com/rheumatoid- arthritis/treatment-...](https://articles.mercola.com/rheumatoid- arthritis/treatment-remedies.aspx)</comment></comment>


Team of scientists puts visible object into quantum ground state - <AUTHOR> http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html

<comment><USER2> This is quite epic for quantum mechanics. Prior to this, something 30 micrometers was usually considered _unbelievably_ massive to apply quantum principles to.

Dare I say I smell quantum-mechanic _mechanical_ experiments soon? How about gears that rotate and don't? I also wonder if this could be the basis for a relatively easy way to make a quantum computer.

edit: another article [1] and the data's original article [2] (behind a paywall). By the article's abstract, it sounds like they measure the state of the drum with a quantum bit "coupled" to its state. Don't ask me how that works, though.

[1]: [http://worldofweirdthings.com/2010/03/18/rethinking- quantum-...](http://worldofweirdthings.com/2010/03/18/rethinking-quantum- states-and-computers/)

[2]: [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/natu...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature08967.html)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> From the article.

 _A team of scientists has succeeded in putting an object large enough to be visible to the naked eye into a mixed quantum state of moving and not moving._

 _According to quantum theory, particles act as waves rather than point masses on very small scales. This has dozens of bizarre consequences: it is impossible to know a particle's exact position and velocity through space, yet it is possible for the same particle to be doing two contradictory things simultaneously. Through a phenomenon known as 'superposition' a particle can be moving and stationary at the same time — at least until an outside force acts on it. Then it instantly chooses one of the two contradictory positions._

</comment><comment><USER3> When they say they put an object big enough to see into this quantum mechanical state, thats awesome. But, it still seems like you can't _see_ it being in this state. I wonder if its possible to be able to to see something both vibrate and not vibrate.

Though as far as I know, one of the ways the environment messes with quantum mechanical phenomena is by photons hitting the objects in question, so maybe seeing these things is out of the question.

<comment><USER4> Exactly ^^ Observing the phenomena would change it's state. It's one of those complete head-f __ks about quantumn mechanics.

You just have to accept that the quantumn world concerns probabilities (wave functions) rather than finite "locations" which we are used to in the non- quantum world.

It's a hugely interesting subject.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As another commenter pointed out, the team put a visible object into a quantum ground state, but, alas, if you saw the object it's probability function would collapse.

So we've made something that's big enough to see, but nobody can look at it.

Damn I can't wait until we hackers start working quantum computers! "Well Bob, the code is actually in the box -- and it's not. In this universe? Sure it's buggy as hell. But let me assure you, there are many other universes in which the code is kicking ass, and you are very happy. Actually the code was perfectly fine here too -- until you looked at it."

(I know I'm using hyperbole. The point is that quantum effects make normal people's brain hurt)</comment>


French startup: MyBooo (webOS) - <AUTHOR> http://mybooo.com/?ll=en

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry I don't have any invite code to share. Try contact the founder using this email address email@example.com

I heard about MyBooo from the BillautShow. [url]<http://billaut.typepad.com/jm/2007/09/connaissez-vo-3.html>[/url]

This is a video podcast in French (sorry) from the Billaut show where the founder is pitching his product. It is very impressive since it has many commonly used applications.

The BillautShow is something I haven't seen in the US but that would be worth doing there too to allow people to pitch their stuff. It is thus like techcrunch but with video podcasts. Mr Billaut is retired and spend his time doing such interview when he is not traveling around the globe to visit and report on other countries hiTech developments. The videos are thus not made by a professional and not meant to be an advertisement or so. It is more like a personal interview of the founder.

Note that the founder doesn't consider his stuff to be a webOs. But this is how such type of application is called and the reason why I used this term so that people can immediately make the link.

Another interesting info I got from the interview is that this startup had no funding; it is thus bootstrapped. This is the most impressive, knowing the amount of effort required to produce such a complete system.

<comment><USER2> Thanks for the info.

I understand that WebOS is a misnomer for this type of product but it's the accepted phrase and in the end it doesn't make a whole lot of difference what we call these web service computing environments.

The video demo podcast Billaut does is a great idea, someone should start doing that for US focused companies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> See also <http://hop.inria.fr/> (especially the "Demo" page)

It's french, too and it's developed by Scheme hackers at INRIA.

</comment><comment><USER2> invite code please?

From the screenshots, it looks like they have done some decent things towards making a better interface. They still have windows though, and I think floating windows are best done away with for general use.

</comment><comment><USER4> Gosh, they really should hire a designer for their home page.</comment>


Google launches online shopping website - <AUTHOR> http://www.boutiques.com/about.py

<comment><AUTHOR> What is with ".py" web urls</comment>


Show HN: Match HN Job Seekers With Those Who Are Hiring - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/josephecombs/HN-job-matcher

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, I scored each "seeking work" post against each "hiring" ad. The scoring is based on the .similar method in the similar_text gem. If this is actually a meaningless method, please ignore this post :)

If you posted in the seeking work thread, you can look in the "spit" path for a ranked list of the jobs you ought to apply to!

EDIT: right now it looks like .similar doesn't actually work that well ([http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14136349/how-does- similar...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14136349/how-does-similar-text- work)) so I am looking for a better solution. I have switched to the amatch gem ([https://github.com/makaroni4/amatch](https://github.com/makaroni4/amatch)) and am re-running the comparison. Now I am using levenshtein distance but that still seems bad from what I am reading.

<comment><USER2> I suppose you've noticed it returns high scores for spurious replies to hiring ads, or at least it did for me. Nevertheless I adore the idea. Hang in there!</comment></comment>


Intel Real Sense Camera on Linux: 3D Camera Controls - <AUTHOR> http://solsticlipse.com/2015/02/10/intel-real-sense-on-linux-part-2-3d-camera-controls.html

<comment><USER2> An article about a LIDAR, without calling it a LIDAR. How quaint!

<comment><AUTHOR> I haven't found any definition for Lidar that isn't a speed of light based measurement. Under this definition the Kinect 2 camera is Lidar but the real sense camera isn't because uses parallax.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Intel should hire this guy to do the Linux port of RealSense SDK.

</comment><comment><USER4> This guy's doing an awesome job! Although, I know how it is when you cant afford to continue a project due to paying the bills. It stinks...</comment>


A Fascinating and Messy History of the Web and JavaScript [video] - node-bayarea https://medium.com/@rajaraodv/a-fascinating-and-messy-history-of-the-web-and-javascript-video-8978dc7bda75 <comment><AUTHOR> FYI, the JavaScript part doesn't start until 3:45-- everything up to that point is just the general history of the internet. I would have skipped there if I'd known, hopefully this helps someone else.

</comment><comment><USER2> Too soon. I lived thru it. PTSD. I'm not yet ready discuss it.

</comment><comment><USER3> JavaScript in the beginning was used only for changing widget images on mouse over.</comment>


Selfrando: Securing the Tor Browser Against De-Anonymization Exploits [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://people.torproject.org/~gk/misc/Selfrando-Tor-Browser.pdf <comment><USER2> Tor devs wrote a short Q&A about this project: [https://blog.torproject.org/blog/selfrando-q-and-georg- koppe...](https://blog.torproject.org/blog/selfrando-q-and-georg-koppen)

</comment><comment><USER3> One thing I haven't seen done is blocking attempts to fingerprint keystroke into puts from the keyboard. Easiest solution would be to sandbox field inputs from JS and bulk submit queries. Best solution would be the injection of noise real-time based on near average inputs for the same strings of characters. Make no mistake though this is being done, and very rapidly marks you as you.

<comment><USER4> Is this only search engine autocomplete fields in the browser, or also on standard input forms? Is disabling JS sufficient for input forms?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've worked on this kind of thing before. This is generally a sane-looking protection mechanism, which would ideally be combined with a lot of other protection mechanisms, but the paper makes a few silly claims. To wit:

> For these reasons we assume that in a practical scenario the attacker cannot > leak information that is not located on the heap, e.g., stack or code pages.

[..]

> Since the attackers can only disclose the virtual table pointer, but not the > virtual table itself, as it is not on the heap, they cannot disclose gadget > addresses.

[..]

> We therefore conclude that selfrando can thwart most real-world exploits. > Attackers can only succeed in rare cases where they can disclose the > complete heap and data section.

Yeah, no. It's actually not that hard to work around in most cases. You can't build a ROP chain in one step after leaking a vtable address, but typically the way you get into a ROP chain in the first place is by overwriting a vtable pointer, and often (albeit not always) you have a pretty wide selection of types of object to overwrite the vtable pointer from (because they all go in the same heap, though separated by size class). All you need is some object such that you can make a call to a native method from JavaScript and as part of its implementation, (ideally) exactly one virtual method on the object will end up being invoked, optimally with predictable parameters and with its return value carried back to JS. I only have experience with WebKit: in its case, most DOM objects are wrappers around a single C++ implementation object, and autogenerated glue code translates JavaScript calls to its methods into native calls to C++ methods with the same name, taking care of type checking and such. And many of those methods are virtual, which fits the bill very well. Firefox may be different, but I doubt it's hard to find something that works.

A C++ virtual call, for anyone who doesn't know, works like this at an assembly level: (1) load the vtable pointer from the object (this is what's being overwritten); (2) add a fixed offset to get to the right index in the vtable; (3) load a function pointer from there; and (4) call it, with 'this' as an implicit first argument.

If you can leak any object's vtable pointer, and you know its offset in the original binary from the start of the data segment, you can calculate the address of anything in that segment. So you look for a function pointer (usually part of another vtable, but could be anything) to a function that has a similar signature to the method invoked by the JavaScript call, but does something more interesting. As a simple example, if the method has the signature "int calculateSomething(int value)", where you can control 'value' and get the return value, and you're on a 32-bit platform, you could find some virtual method that just returns a field from an object passed as a parameter - on any class anywhere in the codebase. You find the function pointer's runtime address based on the leaked vtable pointer, subtract the fixed offset from the original method, and set that as your overwritten vtable pointer. Then you call the JavaScript method, passing some integer of your choice as a parameter... and execution passes to the new method, which dutifully treats the integer as a pointer, loads a value from it, and returns it to you. Voila, you can disclose whatever you want. After that, you have the whole Turing- complete JavaScript language to assist you in generating a ROP chain.

In practice it's usually somewhat more complicated than that. And this approach would be significantly mitigated if Selfrando randomized objects within the data segment rather than just functions. That wouldn't completely prevent it - for one thing you could try to find a replacement function at a different index within the original vtable, which must be kept contiguous, and there are other approaches - but it would help a lot. Considering that functions and data are pretty similar from the linker's perspective, I'm pretty curious why Selfrando doesn't do that.

Anyway, what they have implemented definitely won't "thwart most real-world exploits", unless the attackers are dumb, or reluctant to spend time adapting their exploit to the Tor Browser specifically. Personally, I usually use some sort of vtable confusion anyway just to defeat ASLR, so Selfrando probably wouldn't even affect me much...

Which is not to say it's not worth using.

Moving on:

> Based on these four observations, we examined the main TB library with > selfrando enabled (libxul.so having a size of 92MB) to find out whether an > attacker is able to disclose the address of a stack-pivot and a system call > gadget based on addresses that can be found on the heap. We focus on stack- > pivot and system call gadgets because they are less common, and therefore, > harder to disclose compared to gadgets that only load a value into a > register. In total, we found ten stack-pivot and 76 system call gadgets

If you only found 10 stack pivot gadgets in 92 MB, you _really_ didn't try very hard. I bet they didn't consider jumping into the middle of instructions on x86. Not that that's the only way to change %rsp.

> While software protected by selfrando works smoothly with unprotected > libraries (and protected libraries work smoothly with unprotected programs), > the security guarantees provided by selfrando are obviously limited to > software that was re-built with selfrando. The TB includes most needed > libraries, and hence, is not affected by this.

Does that means it statically links against _everything_ , like GTK and glibc? I don't think it does, though I could be wrong. In any case, that's fundamentally impossible on OS X and Windows. You have to deal with system libraries in your address space. Finding their address is another matter, depending on the OS… I've never had to do much along these lines so I don't know how hard/unreliable it is on different OSes to find pointers to system libraries in the heap, potentially guess an offset from the browser image itself… but anyway, the issue deserves consideration and the Tor Browser is certainly not "not affected".

> Further, we found that some assembly instructions are sensitive to > alignment, e.g., movdqa which is commonly used in the implementation of > cryptographic functions.

> Moreover, we are working on a static analysis tool that can identify > functions that contain these instructions, and mark them in the TRaP info so > RandoLib can take their alignment constrains into account.

Huh? movdqa doesn't need RIP to be aligned, it needs the operand to be aligned. The operand could be RIP-relative, but at least on OS X that means it points to the data segment, so there is a relocation for it and the reference will be rewritten appropriately. Does GNU sometimes embed constants in the text segment or something? I've never heard of that…

Anyway, you could just stick s/movdqa/movdqu before your assembler. On modern processors it's no slower.

> Future Work

> We are currently working on improving operating specific features, such as > the support for thread-local storage (TLS). TLS is heavily used in Firefox's > default heap allocator jemalloc, however, it is possible to build the TB > using the default heap allocator provided by libc instead, which does not > rely on TLS. In fact, the TB developers expressed their desire to use a > different allocator as well [56].

Any fast allocator must use some form of thread-local storage, so a "desire to use a different allocator" is fairly irrelevant. In fact, glibc's allocator uses it - I guess it must use it in a different way that doesn't cause incompatibility…

I don't have the slightest clue why Selfrando would be incompatible with thread-local storage, though.

If "operating specific" means "operating system specific", surely making this work on anything other than Linux would be a useful such feature.</comment>


How much do looks matter? Freakonomics Quorum. - <AUTHOR> http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/how-much-do-looks-matter-a-freakonomics-quorum/

<comment><USER2> Don't miss the comments:

I recall the story of a young boy who had a large wine-colored birthmark that a large part of his face. His mother, of course, was heartbroken. But she refused to be daunted. She told him that he could not change what he looked like, but he could impress people so much by what was within that they would not care about his appearance.

That young man went on to be a college president.

And from personal experience, I have found that some women, while more objectively beautiful than others, are not nearly so sexy. You would think…. But when a lady knows how to carry herself, present herself, and enjoys laughing and fellowshiping at the fullest, it is incredibly attractive.

And then, my own world. Having been a big guy all my life (I know am in the mid 400s, and hope to have gastric bypass one day), I can only say that, yes, I've experienced some weight related "bias."

There were likely girls that didn't give me a second look (and yet, I still married a total looker 13 years younger than me–going on 11 years together now). Or perhaps the truth is that I didn't even take the chance because I convinced myself that it wouldn't happen. (And it likely would not have, but still….)

I feel that I am two levels below where I should be in my career. In looks, I'd give myself a 6 (not for physical attractiveness, but for personality and so forth–so help me, several really pretty women have had crushes on me–go figure). But in intelligence, I think I likely have about as good an aptitude as anyone (of course, when it comes to physics, I'm tower like a colossus over, oh, 10% of the poopulation). So I'd give myself a 9 in intelligence (OK, and 8).

And yet, though I tend to get most of the jobs I interview for, and though I get good reviews, I am two levels down from where I think I should be–and where I KNOW I am worthy to be.

I could mark it down to being a BFM (Big Fat Man). And that may indeed be the case. But I also wonder how much of it is attributable to my rock-the-boat type thinking. I'm not afraid to write to my CEO with a great new idea (and skip everyone above me in the chain-of-command). I tend to question things and want to improve processes on a regular basis.

I don't know that I'd feel any better if that was the reason I hadn't progressed further. After all, not knowing when to leave off the maverick stuff is somewhat of a business flaw, I suppose. But I would indeed be very hurt to think that someone didn't give me a chance becuase of my size.

Of course, I do well enough. But I do notice that salespersons tend to be pretty, blonde, long-legged, big-breasted young ladies. You would think people could see through such manipulation.

Lastly, I am fortunate to work for a world class Fortune 20 company that seeks to treat me well (of course, getting rid of all those too-small chairs would be nice, too.)

— Posted by AaronS

<comment><USER3> # 14. July 10th, 2008 3:43 pm

You want above average?

<http://www.youtube.com/clintosterholz>

I'm above average. Everyone else up there is a 5 or a 6. I think Debb Thorne is the only one to assess herself most honestly.

— Posted by Clint

To be fair to him, he is above-average, but he's no less comical in his high self-rating and general cockiness than any of the interviewees.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is hilarious; the less intelligent someone actually is, they higher they rate themselves. Intelligence is knowing what you don't know.

And everyone is way off base with the attractiveness. I would say everyone pictured there is pretty normal in terms of looks. Not bad looking, not awesome looking either. I think most people are average looking (what a concept), but few people want to admit it.

I am average looking :)

</comment><comment><USER5> Attractiveness is context sensitive. Go to this page, and click on "photos" for the various women,

<http://www.fashionmodeldirectory.com/models/search/now>

Now, with rare exceptions, ALL of them are perfect 10s. And yet the votes hover around 5 or 6. None of them rate the "8" that the woman in the link gave herself. Yet, down at the wastewater treatment facility, she's probably indeed an 8. Or at the local WalMart. Or a lot of places.

</comment><comment><USER6> Talk about unintentional comedy. Maybe people do better if they think they are far more attractive than they really are.

Best quote: "Traditionally, the adult entertainment industry has been extremely image based and primarily focused on beauty, health, style, and youthfulness."

<comment><USER3> Don't forget thinking they're smarter than they are.

I think that most of the respondents were working based off of a school grading scale, where 6.0 is barely passing and 8.5 is average (mid-B), so to give oneself a 5 is to admit failure. The professor, on the other hand, seemed to be working on a (5, 2) normal distribution that, to make things even tougher, was based on her young, academic peers. Hence, the more modest ratings coming from her.

If they had asked me, I'd have given myself a 2 for both, just to be different.

<comment><USER7> Good observation; that was my initial thinking as well -- (5,2) as a normal distribution. Side note: the comment by the guy "A Sane Man" praising the PhD for her humility was pretty funny.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, that comment was pretty awesome.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's like dancing, if you can't dance but are confident and are having enjoying yourself/having fun, it's attractive.

Your overall look can be improved slightly (ignoring cosmetic surgery) with the right clothes and attitude. Confidence is dynamic and fluid and can wax (and wane).

If you have have the skills and confidence, it's a powerful combination. My friend Jason's beautiful girlfriend wasn't that confident when he met her but he has helped her build up her confidence.

Most of the most confident people I've met aren't really good looking (5 or 6s) but they make people feel good.

Reading Daniel Goleman's "Emotional Intelligence" pointed out to me that if you lack confidence the other person can intuitively sense it and emphathize [e.g. feel your fear/lack of confidence] (the classic creeping out a random person you see in public that you are attracted to)

</comment><comment><USER9> I found it funny that no matter what they rated themselves on looks they all rated themselves slightly higher on intelligence.

I take this to mean that while it can't hurt to be good looking being perceived as good looking and stupid is not.

</comment><comment><USER10> I would guess that about 3%-5% of the population is actually attractive. and that's being optimistic. the same for intelligence.

combine the two and you have anywhere from .25% to .09% of the populace as actually worthwhile :p

</comment><comment><USER11> This is why startups need "business" people.</comment>


The secret hiring of Marissa Mayer: How Yahoo kept it all under wraps. - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-18/help-us-marissa-mayer-dot-you-re-our-only-hope <comment><USER2> I was surprised she didn't have some kind of non-compete with Google, but they are illegal/unenforceable in CA, right? (I'm on the East Coast so pardon my lack of knowledge).

<comment><USER3> What if Sergei and Larry WANT her to go to Yahoo. Not to "compete" but to build it out in some other way, to build it as a service that google can then acquire.

She can go there to experiment on ideas that maybe even google had internally but couldn't risk to do with google viewers...

<comment><USER4> My thoughts ran to whether Google might want (in part) to ensure that credible competition exists/continues. There's been a lot of "monopoly" language and perhaps imminent regulation flying about.

<comment><USER3> Any way you cut this, Google seems ready to benefit from this coup.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This tagline is misleading. A single paragraph discusses "How Yahoo kept it all under wraps" while the rest of the article is an also-ran discussion about Mayer's potential success/failure at Yahoo.

</comment><comment><USER6> [http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-apple- go...](http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-apple-google- others-to-face-antitrust-suit-over-staff-poaching-20120419,0,4630280.story)

Until those companies apologize to every existing employee, I have absolutely no loyalty to them.

If they can't even let the free market decide the value of the programmer why should I have any fucking allegiance to any of them?

I can only hope she and others get the competitive salary they deserve.

<comment><USER7> In an actual free market, collusion between companies is legal and occurs regularly.

You're talking about a regulated market in which labor is protected by government intervention from collusion between companies.

<comment><USER8> That's not the way "free market" is understood by the vast majority of people. In your version of a free market murder is also a common business strategy. Google could just kill any engineer who dares to work for a competitor.

No one wants to live in a world like that. So when we say "free market", we mean a market with an agreed-upon set of rules that everyone is aware of and that are generally followed and enforced.

<comment><USER4> The problem is that a lot of people spouting "free market" demagoguery don't practice your definition. Rather, it is indeed "anything and everything they can get away with".

There is also strong correlation with people intent on telling _other people_ how to live _their lives_. (Even and all the more so when this ends up through revelations and evidence being a "do as I say, not as I do" type of message.)

One of my problems with so-called "free marketeers", is that so many of them are outright hypocrites.

Sigh. Trending too far towards the political, here on HN. But people, including many technical people, need to look at, analyze, and take apart free market arguments and statements, to see what parts are true and/or work and what parts don't.

I myself favor broadly but fairly strictly defining spaces and rules within which private enterprise can compete relatively freely. But, private enterprise does not become the final arbiter of same.

That's what studies I recall seem to have indicated. Regulation works well in broad strokes. It falls down in micro-management. But you paint those strokes strongly, and you don't let the competitors step an inch over that line without consequences. (Even if, sometimes, the consequences are a re- evaluation and adjustment of the regulation. Sometimes, the times really do change.)

If you let private enterprise loose entirely, you end up enabling the eventual establishment of quasi-states -- perhaps to eventually become de facto or real states. Autocratic states, by the nature of their structure.

I'm not sure we really want, or are willing to concede to the inevitability of, a Gibsonian near-future. Yet.

As for the regulation. It should all be open. With the world an ever shrinking place, private actions simply are no longer isolated. When company X pollutes watershed Y, it's no longer just a matter of their bottom line. Even in resulting settlements, court procedures, and arbitration, non-disclosure should not be a legal option for them. Shine the light of day on these bad actors. And shine it on government failures that enabled them.

A bit idealistic. But, IMO, better than "all hail free markets".

P.S. If you think markets are free, try following jobs across national boundaries. There is no worldwide "free market" in labor. (Something a bit less obvious to the highly skilled than to the rest of the world labor force.)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Linode Fremont Experiencing Network Outage - <AUTHOR> http://status.linode.com/2013/04/fremont-connectivity-issues.html

<comment><USER2> YC interviews today. May the odds be ever in your favor if you're using linode.

</comment><comment><USER3> Perfect timing for YC interviews.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> seems to be slowly coming back up in fits and starts, but not looking real stable.</comment>


FYI: SSH is not vulnerable to the SSL/TLS MITM attack - <AUTHOR> http://djm.net.au/2009/11/6/ssh-is-not-vulnerable-to-the-ssl-tls-mitm-attack

<comment><USER2> SSH is also mutually authenticated in the common case (virtually all cases, in fact), but client-side authentication is rarely used in SSL. There's no "anonymous" stage in the lifecycle of an SSH connection where you can send app data.</comment>


Ask HN: What are your favorite text adventure games? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> "It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue."

Zork is about the only one I have clear memories of, though I had a few others for the VIC-20 and Commodore 64.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It's the only one that I was able to finish.

Spoiler alert: Show tea and no tea to door.

</comment><comment><USER4> The Pawn and Guild of Thieves</comment>


Verizon Won't Sell Microsoft Windows Phone 7 this year - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-09-16/verizon-won-t-sell-microsoft-windows-phone-7-at-start.html

<comment><USER2> I. Razr 2. iPhone 3. WP7 The trilogy of Verizon suck. This is exactly why I switched carriers, they never have current products. (other than the Droid line)</comment>


Natural Nuclear Fission Reactor - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor <comment><AUTHOR> >"A fossil natural nuclear fission reactor is a uranium deposit where self- sustaining nuclear chain reactions have occurred. This can be examined by analysis of isotope ratios. The conditions under which a natural nuclear reactor could exist had been predicted in 1956 by Paul Kazuo Kuroda.[1] The phenomenon was discovered in 1972 in Oklo, Gabon by French physicist Francis Perrin under conditions very similar to what was predicted."</comment>


Justin.tv: having scalability issues. - <AUTHOR>

I hope founder of justin.tv's founder reads this message.
I have been trying to watch Nadal Murray match online for last half an hour. But the page never loads :((<p>http://es.justin.tv/nadal2 <comment><USER2> <http://www.justin.tv/help></comment>