Unacceptable Browser HTTP Accept Headers (Yes, You Safari and Internet Explorer) - <AUTHOR> http://www.newmediacampaigns.com/page/browser-rest-http-accept-headers <comment><USER2> Being completely serious here: who cares? The Accept: header has never been useful. It's an overdesigned disaster of complexity, trying to handle in the client something that is trivially doable at the server level.

Ignoring for the moment that there are "good" and "bad" ways to specify it. Has there ever been _worthwhile_ application for this thing? In what way would a browser that simply left it off have trouble?

<comment><USER3> Perhaps you are thinking of the case where HTTP is used as a simple file- transfer protocol - where there is a 1-1 mapping between URLs and files on the server. However if you think of things at a higher level, where URLs map to generic "resources", it is plausible that a single resource could have multiple representations. Think of the Twitter API - a tweet can be represented in XML or JSON. This is the principal behind REST (granted, Twitter does not actually follow the HTTP standard, but you get the idea).

That said, for the overwhelming use-case of HTTP (web browsing), REST and the Accept header are probably overkill.

<comment><USER2> I understand what it's for; I'm dubious that it's actually used. By your own example, twitter doesn't actually do this. Does anyone, to your knowledge? This header has been there for 12+ years. If no one's used it so far, tell me again why I should care that some browser sets a bad value?

<comment><USER4> With Apache you can set the server to provide specific resources that the browser supports.

For instance serving regular GIFs or whatever to MSIE, and SVGs or transparent PNGs to Firefox. You can also use it to serve proper XHTML to all browsers except MSIE.

These are real world use cases where I know people use.

<comment><USER2> That's actually exactly the wrong thing to do. If you're serving content based on the browser, you want to be inspecting User-Agent, not Accept. And yes, people do that all the time. But they never do it based on what the browser claims to support; they do it based on what the client actually claims to be, based on what they have tested against real software.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> When I was writing some of our internal HTTP apis, I came up with a reasonable compromise -- honor the Accept header, but treat any file extension as a limitation of it. .../foo could return any supported type, but .../foo.html is, by definition, the HTML version of the resource (and will return a 406 Not Acceptable if the Accept header doesn't include text/html, text/(star), or (star)/(star) ).

EDIT: the asterisks in my MIME type notations were interpreted as markup.

</comment><comment><USER6> Firefox totally fucks up MIME types in a different way -- since version 2.0.1X it is extraordinarily anal about 'respecting' the Content-Type that the server returns. It basically means that if you want your text to be displayed in the browser, you have to declare it text/plain.

Oh, your webserver helpfully sniffs the extension in the filesystem, and serves up some example C code as 'text/x-csrc'? There's _no way_ Firefox could ever possibly display that! The default should obviously be to 'open with' an external viewer, even if that's _less_ or _vim_.

It's not very useful to open a downloaded document using a curses program, especially when stdout is not a tty!

This behavior is not configurable or reversible. I found and hacked together an ancient extension that adds 'View in Firefox' to the 'open with' list, but it's not on addons.mozilla.org

<comment><USER7> Wow. I never expected I would see someone complain about this.

Firefox is following the mime types _exactly_ the correct way.

Compare to the disaster of IE which sometimes looks at the file extension to decide how to display the document - that caused me huge problems way back.

Yes, a view as text option would be nice, but firefox is doing exactly the right thing by listening to the mime type.

If I get text/csv I don't want it showing in the browser, I want it to launch it externally. If firefox gets text/x-csrc it checks the /etc/mailcap, and does what it's told. It has no way to guess that you prefer to view it in the browser - the server said: it's a C file, and firefox listens.

How would you program it? How is it supposed to know that text/x-csrc should show in the browser, while text/csv is an external program? Both are listed in mailcap.

However, like I said, an option "View as Text" in the download box would be nice.

<comment><USER8> I'd prefer that it display all text/* content in the browser. If I want to save it, then I'll save it.

<comment><USER9> Well then tell Firefox that. You can configure what it's behaviour is in the preferences pane. The defaults are _perfect_ , it's your _preference_ that's different from the standard. Which is why they put it in _Preferences_.

<comment><USER6> "Display it in the browser" is not an option. Have you even looked?

The preference pane does not let you create new lines -- the only way to add rules as a user is to encounter the Content-Type in the wild.

<comment><USER10> Not stock. But you can get it:

<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8207>

<comment><USER6> Awesome! I was using a hacked-on 3-year-old version of that, as it was never on AMO -- I even searched for it when commenting in this thread.

Awesome little gem: I went to Tools > Add-ons > Extensions > Find updates -- and it found and downloaded the new AMO version of my hacked local copy!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Maybe there's some utility in the Accept header as a signal of the capabilities of the browser/client. There's a nice discussion [1] on using the Accept header to suss out whether to send the 'correct' but generally less- usable 'application/json' mime type or just send the blatantly wrong but working 'text/javascript' instead. Given a client with the capability, you should go ahead and send it the way the client prefers, right?

[1] <http://simonwillison.net/2009/Feb/6/json/></comment>


Ask HN: Go net/http vs. Django. What do I pick? - <AUTHOR> Hi HN,
I am fairly versatile with both Django and Go, and built web applications using both for other people, but I am permanently crippled in the decision to pick one for my own project.
Django is so easy to build something and deploy, but I am not happy with its performance on a single  box, and also all the crap it comes along with.
I love writing Go code and its performance, but I don't like the amount of time it takes to develop something in Go which can be done in a minute in Django (especially the DB related stuff. It is so easy with Django, but historically been crippled with performance problems)
I frequently see myself rewriting APIs from Django to Go and never shipping something by this handicap.
I believe this is because of not able to decide on tradeoffs. Can someone who has used both help me decide which one to pick?
TIA <comment><USER2> Try [https://gobuffalo.io/en](https://gobuffalo.io/en). This is a web app development framework for Go. May be it will give you best of both worlds.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The reason I pick Django for others is because I don't pay for the server costs. If servers are free, I would use Django myself..</comment>


Plastic Water Bottles, Which Enabled a Drinks Boom, Now Threaten Industry - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/bottled-water-americas-most-popular-drink-has-a-plastic-problem-11544627923 <comment><USER2> The solution is to stop making single use plastic and require reuse of standard bottle sizes, with tax paid on non standard bottle sizes.

<comment><USER3> The solution is to legislate bottled water companies out of existence, and keep our public water systems in good shape.

But that's not what anyone working for a company founded on laying dubious legal claims to water that should be public, and selling it for a profit, wants to hear.

<comment><USER4> The tap water in my country is one of the best in the world and scientifically proven to be better than mineral water. I still buy Evian.

<comment><USER5> The tap water at closest source were scientifically tested to be decent , but the pipes that carries it, and the pipes that is inside my building were not. Mostly with added lead and heavy metal.

I wish I didn't knew any of these. I wish I could have simply continue to drink water like I once did. But now I get to spend money buying drinking water or filters.

Fear Sells. What a world we live in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> Const-me 300 million years ago Earth had a problem with cellulose. Plants produced a lot, no one consumed it, it accumulated for millennia and later became what we call fossil fuel.

Then modern fungi evolved, and the problem went away. Just like plastic, cellulose can provide energy when oxidized, it's just tricky to break but that's what modern fungi do.

I wonder can we genetically engineer a bacteria or fungi that will consume that plastic? Ideally, before we have drunk the water from these plastic bottles.

<comment><USER6> I'd be concerned about household plastic products degrading over time. Would an original Atari still be in any fit shape today if such bacteria or fungi had been around?

<comment><USER7> This is a semi-valid concern. It would take a relatively small amount of an organism to contaminate something, and unless you're regularly cleaning everything made of those types of plastics you could have some real issues.

We fight mold and termites now in our living spaces, imagine if you had a plastic-eating organism and a little bit took up residence in a hotel, an office, your car, a bus or train, your house.

Even if it was relatively slow at breaking down it could cause considerable cosmetic damage. A little gets on your laptop display. You leave it at home and go on vacation for a week, you come back and some light etching has occurred over streaks of your monitor and the screen is now fogged and needs replaced, you wipe the exterior down as best as you can before replacing the screen and are pretty sure you got it all. Your screen gets replaced, your laptop works great again until a month later you pick it up and your spacebar falls off, the plastic switch entirely degraded, you open up the laptop only to find most of the internal plastic is structurally compromised, you unknowingly transferred some of the organism inside when you replaced your screen.

Here in Indiana, sometimes in the spring and summer, there's this fungus called 'lawn rust' that has orange spores that resemble rust and get on your lawn and will even get on vehicles (which will just wash off) but imagine something getting in the wild and landing on your car with a largely plastic body... go a week or a month without washing your car and you might get home from the car wash one day and notice your bumpers are pitted, oh darn the future plastic eating bacteria/fungi strikes again.

Even if only kept this stuff in industrial facilities, unless you go NASA level clean-room when leaving the facility it'd be damn easy for some to hitch a ride on someone headed home from work and, well, "life will find a way".

<comment><USER8> So basically like rust or rot but for plastic.

I don't think it would be that big a deal. For the longest time things were built with leather and wood instead of rubber/plastic and society survived just fine.

I think a lot of people are over-reacting to the idea of plastic rotting because they live in the Southern California filter bubble where nothing rots or rusts (because it's basically a desert) and so the idea that one wouldn't just be able to leave materials outside and expect them to be just fine is foreign to them. Having materials naturally degrade over time is just a fact of life everywhere else on the planet.

<comment><USER9> Yea. But wouldn't be great to be able to build things that would last a long time in the elements?

<comment><USER10> Sure, but if the trade-off is permanent climate change and environmental destruction, maybe a little continuous renewal would be a good thing.

<comment><USER9> Well plastic does not really contribute to climate change at the moment. Bacteria breaking down the plastic would release CO2 and thus contribute to climate change.

These discussions on the internet so rarely bring any true insight to most topics, but the few nuggets that are rarely found sure make looking for it pretty addictive.

<comment><USER11> This isn't true. A significant amount of CO2 and other waste products are emitted when producing plastics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If only there were pipes to peoples homes to provide them with safe water for bathing and drinking.

<comment><USER13> I just wonder how our ancestors did it. Not only did they survive without plastic bottles, but they even survived the last 99.99% of biological history without _plumbing_!

I drives me mad. We solved the problem over a century ago. The ancient Greeks and Romans even solved it in their time.

The problem was reinvented by marketing, and everyone fell for it, to the point that kids are told to take plastic water bottles to school (despite the existence of water taps there), and public announcements at train and tube stations warn people _not to travel_ without a plastic bottle, in case they have to survive without a sip of water for an hour. It's like we're all living in the Sahara desert. It's insane.

From a marketing PoV it must be the single most successful campaign in history. And given its success, and massive profits, they should be the ones whom foot the bill for cleaning up the godawful mess they've created.

<comment><USER14> > I just wonder how our ancestors did it. Not only did they survive without > plastic bottles, but they even survived the last 99.99% of biological > history without plumbing!

the species survived without those things. plenty of individuals didn't.

<comment><USER15> Our ancestors definitely did, at least until puberty.

<comment><USER16> Survivor bias isn't a great motivator for an individual

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What does the full analysis of what goes into bottled water look like? Because it seems to me like, at this point, the "bottle" part of bottled water could be the least worrisome bit. Even if you get rid of the bottle, what does it take just to physically ship all this water around?

It's pretty heavy stuff. I'd assume its probably much more economical to transport in pipes than in trucks. Sort of like we do with things like oil and gas, when it's feasible to do so.

<comment><USER13> The "bottle" part is pretty bad. I heard somewhere a water bottle will last 400 years. I don't know for certain that that's true, but if it is, I can only wonder just who thought it would make an ideal container for someone to use for a few minutes and then throw away?

<comment><USER17> There are so many ways to frame pollution.

Taking 400 years to biodegrade is a big problem if you're worried about litter, or microplastics. On other hand, if you're more worried about things like climate change or smog, then turning it into something you bury and forget about might actually be the least harmful thing we could be doing with all this oil we've been pumping out of the ground lately.

If it biodegrades, then it becomes a source of atmospheric CO2 just about as efficiently as if you were instead to burn it to make cars go.

<comment><USER13> Yes, I agree, and I'd go so far as to saying burning it is in one way better than it ending up in the sea, but clearly very bad in another sense. Just another example of how different facets of the "environmental" argument can be in conflict with one another.

Nuclear power vs coal/oil power is similar dilemma.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Question: Are cans much better for the environment? I've long preferred cans to bottles for things like soda (although I almost never drink it anymore), sparkling water, etc. They've always seemed to get and stay colder, although that may not be the case. I feel a little bit better about my preference when picking a canned La Croix over a bottled Arrowhead at work, but I realize now that I don't really have any idea about the environmental impact of cans v. bottles.

<comment><USER19> I believe cans are more easily recyclable, in part because they're so easy to seperate from other trash (using a big magnet).

<comment><USER20> Aluminum isn't ferromagnetic so magnets don't work with it and stripping the graphics off a soda can alone requires just as much energy and nasty chemicals as other recycled materials. That's before you even smelt anything, which usually requires a forge that spends insane amounts of energy just to keep it from shutting down and needing an even more expensive cold start.

It's not that recycling aluminum is easier than other materials, it's that making aluminum from raw bauxite is like the above process times ten. The chemicals are even more dangerous, the process management (environmental protection, regulatory compliance, etc) more expensive, and it requires even more energy. As a result, between 1/3 to 2/3 of all aluminum sold in the US comes from recycled materials because of economic reasons.

<comment> munk-a Your mention of advertising... I'd be really happy if we could start cutting down the insane effort we're putting into dyeing things and just relegate flashy marketing to the waste bin of history. The same with form advertising (clam shells and the like) where additional material is added just to make a product look more attractive.

<comment><USER21> The clam shells make shoplifting difficult, and you need to get the barcode onto the can at a minimum, at which point what difference does the rest of the label make?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> For water, get it from your tap, and carry it with you in a glass or metal container. If you have good, scientifically reasons to believe your tap water is not so hot, use a high-tech filter. In the extreme, buy water in mass from a company that purifies it, and store it at home. All these solutions will be better for the environment, and as an added benefit much cheaper.

As for soft drinks, they are bad for your health, so just stop drinking them.

<comment><USER23> If I had water that was proven to be unsafe, I wouldn't trust many "consumer grade" filters, and I'd want to do regular water testing to prove that any treatment that I do hasn't silently failed to work.

<comment><USER24> Even in that situation you can at the least buy gallon or larger jugs instead of small plastic bottles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> ajay-d 60 minutes had a segment last night on plastic reaching the most remotes parts of the ocean. Incredibly disheartening.

[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-great-pacific-garbage- patch...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-great-pacific-garbage-patch- cleaning-up-the-plastic-in-the-ocean-60-minutes/)

<comment><USER25> Are _you_ personally dumping your used plastic in the ocean?

Trash from just 10 rivers is responsible for 90 percent of ocean plastic pollution: [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the- plas...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the-plastic- tide-10-rivers-contribute-most-of-the-plastic-in-the-oceans/)

Those 10 rivers are all in the developing world and China: the Hai, Nile, Meghna, Brahmaputra, Ganges, Pearl, Amur, Niger, Mekong, Indus, Yellow, and Yangtze. In terms of countries that's: China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Thailand, Vietnam, Egypt, Nigeria.

<comment><USER26> And as the 60 Minutes documentary talks about, the US ships a huge amount of recycled plastics across the ocean to countries like Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, and until recently, China.

So the plastic you throw in the recycling bin in the US might very well end up in one of those 10 polluted rivers and in the ocean.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Ok, I'll say it.

Tap water tastes gross in every major N. American city I've lived in. I'll filter it, air it out and chill it. But out of the tap, N. American water tastes bad. A little town in Albania I've visited once has (much) tastier water than any city I've been here.

I can't blame ppl for drinking bottled water (Evian is gross though)

<comment><USER28> "But out of the tap, N. American water tastes bad."

This may be true in the cities/neighborhoods that you've lived in, but in most (not all) of the cities I've lived in, the tap water has been excellent.

To say that all North American tap water tastes bad is simply false.

<comment><USER29> It's also got trace amounts of fluoride, which is good for your teeth. Ask any Canadian or English dentist about the difference between countries like the US that flouridate the tap water and countries that don't.

<comment><USER30> Your stereotypes are about 40 years out of date.

<comment><USER29> [citation needed]

And yet, repeatedly in this thread I asked for scientific studies on the effects of tap water, and nobody provided them. Hmmm. Perhaps "steady on" should be your watchword.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Five whys seems to indicate that the main problem is bottled water companies compete on clarity, bottled water companies could/would use recycled plastic if they had to use an opaque plastic container, like what soylent uses, rather than competing on "clear". Banning sales of bottled water in clear containers would allow all bottled water companies to still compete on packaging, while removing the limitation that they all use new, super clear plastic.

<comment><USER32> Yeah, I've seen restaurants serve water in cardboard boxes (think a bigger juice box). There are options, but yeah; we like to be able to see through our water.

<comment><USER21> You mean tetrapaks? That unrecyclable mix of plastic, metal and paper?

<comment><USER33> I'd suspect more like this: [https://jet.com/product/Boxed-Water-Is-Better- Purified-Water...](https://jet.com/product/Boxed-Water-Is-Better-Purified- Water-169-Fl-Oz-Pack- of-24/9358091daa884bdfa191f27e94f0a118?jcmp=pla:ggl:everything_else_catch_all:new_p1_all_products:na:PLA_791021474_42804924682_pla-296303633664_c:na:na:na:2PLA15&pid=kenshoo_int&c=791021474&is_retargeting=true&clickid=e2299876-d07d-4edc-b16c-56057985029a&kclid=e2299876-d07d-4edc-b16c-56057985029a&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxc_dy4So3wIV0KZpCh0foQKWEAQYAiABEgLJmvD_BwE)

<comment><USER34> Yes, that's a tetrapak [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Tetra_Pa...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Tetra_Pak_packaging_portfolio_I_medium_size.jpg)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> So In my country, If you want to buy a bottle of cocacola fanta etc. You can only buy it if you come with an empty bottle of the same product. This is a way of life. The same thing can be done with bottle water. To buy bottle water, return an empty bottle of water. If you don't then you pay premium

<comment><USER36> What country?

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Seems like the most practical solution is to use it to fill up old open pit mines.

</comment><comment><USER38> I managed to completely stop buying regular water bottles in favor of using a refillable vacuum-insulated bottle at all times (except for a handful that I keep in the car for emergencies), but I've noticed the plastic bottles are starting to creep back in ever since I stopped drinking sodas and moved to sparkling water. I guess I could switch to canned Perrier or even the glass bottles, but they're harder to find.

I suppose next year I'll just bite the bullet and buy a Soda Stream (or some kind of BDS-approved equivalent).

<comment><USER39> I don't really understand why most if not all bottles don't use aluminum instead of plastic. I get that it's a marketing thing, but I see no practical reason why aluminum couldn't be used more often. That doesn't fix the littering of the ocean issue, but I guess if I had to pick one over the other I'd rather the ocean get trashed with aluminum than with plastic.

Also, do you need Perrier brand specifically? I haven't seen that come in cans, but now there are more brands than ever of sparkling water that come in cans, which is what I most often buy.

<comment><USER40> > I don't really understand why most if not all bottles don't use aluminum > instead of plastic.

Because aluminium is a lot more expensive and difficult to manufacture at scale than plastic. It's also a lot more reusable, but reusing aluminium costs energy, and reusing glass bottles requires either energy to melt it, or an extensive recycling / reusing infrastructure (like with beer bottles over here).

Re: sparkling water, there's water fountains that can produce sparkling water on the fly now. Ask your employer to get those installed.

<comment> Al-Khwarizmi Isn't aluminium supposed to be toxic? Probably the amount absorbed from drinking from aluminium bottles wouldn't be enough to cause concern, but I'm not sure I would risk drinking from them all the time.

<comment><USER41> Aluminum is one of the most abundant minerals on earth. It's probably in just about everything. You almost certainly get more from your anti-perspirant that you do from an aluminum can.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> What is the current science on the safety of drinking tap water?

</comment><comment><USER42> [https://outline.com/tDJqYE](https://outline.com/tDJqYE)

<comment><USER43> Huh, I thought you had posted this for people to get around the paywall, but it looks like it didn't really do anything?

<comment><USER42> Sorry, I didn't notice that.

This article is readable for me in an incognito window though. Seems WSJ has changed something?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Hi,

I'm the founder of Tap previously the CEO and Founder of MakeSpace. Earlier this year I began working on a new company with the goal of eliminating the single use plastic water bottle.

Earlier this year I made an observation, the first step of any scientific experiment, that launched Tap. I noticed water fountains were not on Google Maps. This puzzled me and led me to dive deeper into understanding the beverage market.

TL;DR -- The answer is going to be carrying your own bottle (Like we all did in high school / college / burning man). But the lack of knowing where to find clean, unpackaged water is the reason for the growth of single-use plastic bottles. We've set out to change that.

Here's my thoughts:

The beverage industry is ripe for disruption. There are two glaring problems plaguing the industry:

The first is that the amount of waste created is terrible for our environment. With ~9% of plastic waste actually getting recycled, we're seeing massive amounts of plastic go straight to landfills and our oceans. Now that China has recently rejected our plastic and cardboard, that problem is going to get worse...fast. As local, city, state, and even international governments ban single use plastic (ex. European Union), the opportunity has finally emerged. In these progressive cities, I think the beverage industry will respond to the local ban by moving to paper, aluminum, or glass. But any of these moves would actually INCREASE the cost of goods sold from materials and transportation as plastic has always been the cheapest option. Coca-Cola has even referenced this in its 2017 10-K. (direct quote below)

"Changes in, or failure to comply with, the laws and regulations applicable to our products or our business operations could increase our costs or reduce our net operating revenues. Changes in applicable laws or regulations or evolving interpretations thereof... to discourage the use of plastic, including regulations relating to recovery and/or disposal of plastic packaging materials due to environmental concerns... may result in increased compliance costs, capital expenditures and other financial obligations for us and our bottling partners, which could affect our profitability, or may impede the production, distribution, marketing and sale of our products, which could affect our net operating revenues."

The second is the decline of consumer preference to sugary drinks. The bottling industry, at one time, was significantly more decentralized because people cared about the taste of local water. Inventions like high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) created most of the beverages we grew up drinking and this taste became more manufactured. However, the health problems associated with HFCS have been enough to slow revenue from these products. In 2017, for the first time bottled water sales exceed those of sugary drinks.

Now we see Coke/Pepsi/Nestle pushing hard into bottled water sales. We're also seeing JUSTWater (Jaden Smith) and Boxed Water come about, in addition to Watermelon water which addresses the eco and consumer preference change.

These, in my opinion, are just a half step forward. So what's the answer? Well, think outside the bottle.

Tap is going to disrupt the beverage industry by decentralizing the bottling industry. We've created a consumer alternative to packaged beverages -- a marketplace for unpackaged beverages with a group of users, with 17,000 users in <60 days since launch, who carry their own bottles. As 65% of the cost of a beverage today goes into transportation and packaging, by the mere change that the user carries their own bottle, we can massively win on beverage options and lower prices. Water is our first product.

Furthermore, sales of reusable bottles (Contigo -- 45 million units per year, SOMA ,Swell, Klean, Yeti, Hydroflask) are skyrocketing with over 51% of new reusable bottle sales being attributed to the consumers wanting to reduce their plastic usage.

An article was published this past week in the WSJ taking aim at water bottles. Specifically, the WSJ spoke to bottled water's massive growth over the years, and how its future is suddenly uncertain because of the movement to halt the plastic crisis.

Highlights on the market:

"Bottled-water sales have boomed in recent decades amid safety fears about tap water and a shift away from sugary drinks. Between 1994 and 2017, U.S. consumption soared 284% to nearly 42 gallons a year per person, according to Beverage Marketing Corp., a consulting firm."

That is unparalleled growth… And of this boom in the U.S., 67% of all packaged water sold has come in single-serve, disposable bottles.

While the news has decreased public trust in tap water, and consumers continue to shift away from sugary drinks, something interesting is happening...Due to a massive uptick in public awareness about the plastic issue, single-use bottled-water sales are actually BEGINNING TO SLOW.

"Bottled-water volume growth is forecast to slow this year in both the U.S. and globally, according to research firm Euromonitor. Nestlé SA, the world's biggest bottled-water maker, in October said its bottled-water volumes for the first nine months of the year declined 0.2%, compared with 2.1% growth a year earlier."

Something interesting is happening here. Consumers are still BUYING water at record pace because they can't trust the tap, however, they aren't purchasing single-use plastic. Drinking water sales aren't DECLINING, they are SHIFTING… They are shifting towards bulk packaging. Consumers are shifting to bulk because bulk is the only easily available alternative.

Another staggering statistic was released showing that one in five consumers in the last twelve months have purchased a reusable water bottle. Of these consumers, 52% of them said the leading driver was to reduce their personal plastic usage. 20% of consumers in the last 12 months alone purchasing a new reusable bottle proves there is a large market of people who incorporate reusable bottles into their daily routine.

Beverage companies are working to catch up with the trend. According to the WSJ, "Pepsi also now sells reusable water bottles that come with capsules to add flavors, and is testing stations in the U.S. that dispense Aquafina- branded water in different flavors."

There are in fact other solutions, but major beverage brands find they are not favorable. "A former Nestlé executive said the company's internal research showed consumers were unlikely to take to boxed water. Glass bottles, meanwhile, break easily and are expensive to transport because they are heavy."

"Poland Spring-owner Nestlé is rolling out glass and aluminum packaging for some brands and researching ways to make all its packaging recyclable or reusable by 2025." These alternatives will all INCREASE THE COST OF GOODS SOLD, and these "solutions" are still wasteful.

So here is where we think we fit in… and it's what we're working to prove.

"It's tempting to romanticize a world without packaging," Coca-Cola Co. CEO James Quincey wrote in a blog post this year.

It's tempting because it is happening and within our reach.

Brands like Pepsi (SodaStream) and FloWater are growing rapidly due to their unique position in being able to provide UNPACKAGED and TRUSTED water. This is the only solution that caters to the needs of those who don't want the plastic bottle, but still desired premium, filtered options. Before these brands, the choices were limited for the reusable-bottle-carrying consumer: filter your own water (ex. Brita), rely on water coolers (like in offices) or simply trust the tap. And as tap water continues to be vilified, and the other solutions aren't convenient, there is a market of UNPACKAGED, TRUSTED water that is prime for explosive growth.

www.findtap.com / apps in Android and App store (Search "Tap Water").

Lastly, check out the #DrinkDifferent movement on Instagram at @FindTap. Join us with a 30 day pledge to skip plastic bottles.

Ps. We're hiring. Hit me up siruva07 at gmail dot com if wanna learn more.

<comment><USER29> Asked this in another thread, but putting here so you see it. What is the current scientific basis for the vilification of tap water? How unsafe or dangerous is it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> The headline is misleading: the 'crisis' in the headline is in the drinks industry.

If you're here for the environmental crisis rather than the drink industry crisis, cigarette filters remain the highest volume plastic waste.

<comment><USER46> Cigarette filters are cellulose acetate, which is biodegradable.

<comment><USER47> 18 months to 10 years, according to the first Google response.

I see no reason regulation to enforce like a 6-month breakdown time on a product. Seems very sensible.

They shouldn't be able to release products that are unhealthy for the environment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> I don't understand the focus specifically on water bottles when this comes up, seems like any drink bottle would be just as problematic. I understand we don't all have pipes that bring Coca-Cola to our homes, but when you're out and need something to drink that ship has sailed.

<comment><USER47> It's purly cultural, driven by consumerism. Buy a nalgene....we can do better.

People should know that they are going to get thirsty at some point.

<comment><USER49> The "everyone should change their way of life" approach to environmentalism hasn't worked and has been quite divisive, why do people continue to think it is an effective strategy?

<comment><USER50> Because the alternative is ultimately "Everyone probably won't get to stay alive". Which is a pretty big change in one's way of life.

Also, using cans instead of bottles isn't exactly a major shift in most people's life. It's infinitely recyclable (unlike plastic), something nature knows how to deal with (unlike plastic) and often better for the beverage (in the case of beer at the very least).

<comment><USER51> The alternative is the government intervening to internalize externalities. For example, a revenue neutral carbon tax or deposits on food/drink containers.

<comment><USER50> This is actually a better approach. But it's extremely hard politically. If we did this gas would be 12-20 USD a gallon, and we'd have a better world.

<comment><USER52> Easy to say from an ivory tower, but in the real world people have to get to work every day.

<comment><USER50> Which is why I realize it's a political nonstarter. I think we're in agreement.

<comment><USER52> Yeah -- in an ideal world everyone could afford to live near where they worked.

<comment><USER50> One way to encourage just that sort of city planning is, in fact, to price externalities appropriately. It's not actually cheaper to build and live in sprawl, it's fantastically expensive. But we don't charge those costs based on usage.

<comment><USER52> I can spend 400k to buy a nice four bedroom house with a garage and a basement on half an acre sixty miles from work, or 400k to buy a beat down 1 bedroom condo ten miles from work (nothing near the area where I work is under 900k)...

That's not really a city planning issue, it's just the way things are in hyper-urban areas.

I hope so much that I can pull off a remote job in the next year or so -- believe me, I'd rather never drive if I could.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Quickread – better spritz for iOS - <AUTHOR> http://quickreadapp.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> If you are interested in integration of Quickread with your app, let me know. It is only one line of code.</comment>


Show HN: tdo – keyboard driven todo list - <AUTHOR> https://tdo.cxjs.io <comment><AUTHOR> This is a new version of tdo based on Firebase which supports new features such as offline mode, realtime data sync between devices, drag & drop and touch events.</comment>


The Web began dying in 2014, here's how - <AUTHOR> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/11/01/the-web-began-dying-in-2014-heres-how/ <comment><USER2> Let's ignore the EvilMegaCorp problem for a moment and discuss how we use the web as a platform.

For years we've accessed the web through our Desktop/Laptop computers. You have a big 'ol screen, nice ergonomic keyboard — life is good.

Do you think this type of web usage is going away? Why?

Mobile has skyrocketed in the past couple of years, but will it continue to take over? Will the new generation ever again stare at the big screen?

Can desktops/laptops really be replaced by mobile? I guess they certainly could be replaced by AR/VR.</comment>


Show HN: Managing Linux server on the go with your smartphone - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/wcchoi/swell.sh <comment><USER2> Looks cool. Will try it sometime. I have been wanting to do something (auto complete) for desktop linux terminals (gnome-terminal) and such. I could not even get to compile gnome-terminal on my corporate linux box.

Now all we need is a good dev environment on smartphone for backend coding.</comment>


Using weather as a trading signal - <AUTHOR> https://www.quantopian.com/posts/using-weather-as-a-trading-signal

<comment><USER2> This comment caught my eye: "because after transaction costs it did not show enough of a gain"

I've always wondered why assumptions about transaction costs and execution speed never show up in these kinds of "studies". Anyone who has participated in markets understands they have a significant impact on results.

Also, doesn't it seem obvious that you would analyze the results based on multiple random entry & exit points rather than cherry-picked (or arbitrary) time periods?

<comment><AUTHOR> This does take into account commission, see here: [https://www.quantopian.com/help#ide- commission](https://www.quantopian.com/help#ide-commission)

I wanted to use the longest time period possible, and this was the most info I could find about forecasted cloud coverage in NYC in the past 10 years or so. It's also worth noting that this is just an example, the paper it's based off of is more in-depth. Unfortunately they concluded that transaction costs made trading based off of this strategy almost not worth it, but the main point here is that it's interesting.

<comment><USER2> "transaction costs made trading based off of this strategy almost not worth it"

Be interesting to know how it stacks up against other approaches in this regard.

"main point here is that it's interesting"

That it is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Spurious correlation.</comment>


The Imminent Dollar Collapse Explained to an 8 Year-old - <AUTHOR> http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/17/the-imminent-dollar-collaps-explained-to-an-8-year-old/

<comment><USER2> The author does know that the US has never promised to pay back debts in US dollars in anything other than US dollars, right? There never was any promise to pay back with "real" money (as if such a thing exists!)

At any rate the US is in no danger of going bankrupt. They do run a certain risk of having their purchasing power decreasing, but of course their exports will automatically become cheaper for other countries to buy, which will turn around the balance of trade.

The real risk is being run by those that are holding large balances of US dollars - they risk taking a bath if (or when) the US dollar is dramatically devalued. But then, they knew that going in, so I have limited sympathy.</comment>


Ask HN: How can airports wifi know my flight number? - <AUTHOR>

Hello,
I'm here at heathrow-airport and the wifi login knows my flight number is advance? How is this possible? I cleared the cookie from my british-airways checkin session, but the wifi-system still guess the correct flight?
edit: Worth to notice is that I have made two connecting flights from heathrow during the last two days, and the wifi-login displayed the correct flight number both times. The flightnumber field is even disabled, you can't change it... <comment><USER2> All of the "good" WiFi systems make it really easy to have information changed on the splash pages based on the Access Point (therefore the physical location, and coverage area, of the Access Point).

As @davismwfl speculated, they probably pull the flight status information from a data feed internal to the airline, or one of the third-party companies that provide this data. Then displaying it on the page is easy.

It's possible there are multiple gates served by one Access Point, and they may be listing the next flight to everyone. However, given the low cost of Access Points and cabling infrastructure in today's airports (vs. when I did this type of stuff 13 years ago), there's one Access Point at each gate (in the counter, above the ceiling tiles, etc). As long as you're not closer to a different gate, you'll always get the correct "next" flight.

Same SSID, low radio power outputs, non-overlapping channels (where possible) and most users would never know.

</comment><comment><USER3> Just a guess here. Maybe they put in the next flight out based upon the location of the Access Point? So if 4 gates are served by 1 AP, then the first flight leaving those 4 gates gets listed...

I have never heard of that before though, so I have no clue, just a guess.

</comment><comment><USER4> IIRC, doesn't Heathrow's "free" wifi want a name and/or email address before it lets you onto the net?

Perhaps it's cross-referencing your name w/boarding records for security purposes.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, but the flight number is displayed before you submit your email address.</comment></comment>


Japanese airbag protects homes from earthquakes - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/mar/06/japanese-airbag-protects-homes-from-earthquakes-video <comment><USER2> Impressive - but I think it would be simpler to just keep the air bag inflated.</comment>


Okanogan search and rescue teams use helicopter to save student from wolf pack - <AUTHOR> http://www.khq.com/story/38635612/okanogan-search-and-rescue-teams-use-helicopter-to-save-student-from-wolf-pack <comment><AUTHOR> Found this interesting as I live in this area and was literally at this campground on Saturday to start a run.</comment>


Fuzzwich: Reddit Alien 3.0 by Alexis - <AUTHOR> http://fuzzwich.com/minivid/minivid.php?vid=4700

<comment><USER2> _Warning_ : turn down your < _blood drips from ear_ > volume before you click.</comment>


Property levies would ease the robot attack on income tax - <AUTHOR> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1d1d48f0-aef1-11e5-b955-1a1d298b6250.html#axzz3wGIgTjby <comment><USER2> Broken link

<comment><USER3> Not broken, paywalled.</comment></comment>


Ie7-js  - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/ie7-js/ <comment><USER2> I've recently started using CSS3PIE (<http://www.css3pie.com>) in production and can only recommend it. It enables you to use CSS3 declarations such as box-shadow and border-radius in Internet Explorer, even under version 6!

It's trivial to use and much faster than IE7.js since it relies on the browser engine to do most of the work parsing selectors etc. The author Jason Johnston is very responsive in the forums as well. Even better, the upcoming version 0.11 of Compass (<http://beta.compass-style.org>) includes a mixin for PIE which makes adding cross-browser rounded corners a matter of two lines.

Didn't think I'd see this happen in my lifetime...

<comment><USER3> This is a great/easy solution - thanks for posting this.

I spent maybe 5 minutes adding this to my site, and I have to say I'm impressed. Copy the file to your server, add one new tag to your css wherever your radius css defs are and viola, done.

Prior to using this I was able to get IE looking nearly identical to Chrome/FF/Safar - except for drop-shadows and rounded corners. I've been pretty strict about not deviating from the open standards and this has actually caused several arguments between me and one of my biz partners (he just doesn't get why I refuse to 'fix' the issue in IE with one of the graphic hacks out there - and has been seeking advice from designers about this even!).

So yeah, huge thanks again because not only does this solution thorough rocks for what I needed and took no time to implement, but also now my biz partner is going to have one less thing to fight with me about (and probably move back on to telling clients about new features he wants that I have't started yet...).

<comment><USER4> Have you found anything adds text-shadow support to IE?

<comment><USER5> Text shadow is easy to do, just not always gonna look great:

filter: dropshadow(color=#333333, offx=1, offy=1);

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Before using this make sure you write valid HTML and valid CSS. I found this to be the best remedy for IE issues. Not that IE is particularly fond of standards, however, sometimes adding something like "position:relative" to the stylesheet will solve confusing problems.

For JS use Prototype or jQuery and voila, IE renders quite fine.

<comment><USER7> position:relative helps fix a number of overflow and box model bugs in the IEs (especially IE7)

<comment><USER8> Don't forget the even more magic cure-all: zoom: 1;

It doesn't cause z-index bugs like position relative does! :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The png fix included in this is terrible. Give me DD_BelatedPNG over this any day. It doesn't support background-position.

However, while we're talking about fixing IE6, who wants to port WebKit to Javascript with me?

<comment><USER10> I've pondered if writing your entire website in canvas/svg (a la Raphael) is the only way have it (100%) consistent across IE6-8, Chrome, and Firefox. That way you throw the html renderer of the browser out of the window and you're drawing your own vectors.

But even so, you'll probably hit some weirdness in IE6's jscript implementation.

However, excanvas was quite slow though, at least last I tried it.

<comment><USER11> Of course it's not the only way, have you seen Google's homepage?

Also, JScript is actually surprising good and is nothing like the DOM or CSS, AFAIK the only known bugs are Named Function Expressions being parsed as Function Declarations (<http://kangax.github.com/nfe/#jscript-bugs>), and a couple RegExp bugs (<http://blog.stevenlevithan.com/category/cross-browser>).

I suppose if you count DOM bugs, like the memory leak, that's a problem. That's where jQuery is amazingly helpful(and presumably other libraries like it).

Considering Raphael is as slow as excanvas in IE (but much faster in other browsers), it's probably IE's fault, not excanvases.

<comment><USER12> Another JS bug in older versions of IE (6 for sure, not sure about later ones) occurs when you end an array or hash with a comma after the last element, e.g. {foo: bar,}

<comment><USER13> IIRC, this is actually invalid Javascript syntax that Chrome/Firefox/Safari choose to ignore.

JSLint picks it up:

      Error:
      Problem at line 1 character 22: Extra comma.

      var x = { foo : "bar", };

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The last update of ie7.js was in March: <http://dean.edwards.name/weblog/2010/03/ie7js-update/> Supports up to IE9.

</comment><comment><USER7> Does it play nicely with content loaded via ajax? I would hate to have rerun it on every ajax callback.

<comment><USER12> You do have to rerun it.

It would be more useful if it were part of a toolkit like Dojo or jQuery, and would automatically happen when you use their AJAX functions.

<comment><USER15> On the other hand, how hard can it be to curry yourself a function that does so?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Wasn't this up here some time ago? What's changed since then?

</comment><comment><USER17> Anybody has tried this in a real production evironment? Does it play well with jQuery and plugins?

I'll test it at work on monday and get back with the results, this looks promising

<comment><USER18> Yes and I wouldn't recommend it if you have visitors with old computers and your HTML isn't rather simple (depth and multiple class names for an element). It will make older computers (+5 years... or even less, depends on the hardware) simply block for almost a minute (or more) when trying to run that JS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Does it fix floats and margins?</comment>


Mass Transit Optimization for Buses: The Depot Problem - <AUTHOR> https://www.optibus.com/mass-transit-optimization-for-buses-the-depot-problem/ <comment><USER2> That looks like an interesting problem!

1) What are the metrics that mass transit operators tend to optimize for? Do you think they are in line with improving the service to customers?

2) How much is "dependability" of a mass transit service a metric that operators are interested in?

Intuitively I feel that there are places (e.g. Chicago) where I know that I can get out of the house, get the bus/train, and get to my destination with little variance in arrival time.

Others (like SF), where the variance on the arrival time seems much higher: e.g., generally related to unexpected delays while waiting for train/bus.

Do you think it's possible to optimize on such factors?

<comment><USER3> I think you should take a look at the documentation behind VTA's "Next Network": [https://nextnetwork.vta.org/document- library](https://nextnetwork.vta.org/document-library)

It is planning that was done to prepare for when BART service reaches Santa Clara county, and how the bus network will need to be reorganized. In the documents, you can see how they looked at different plans, covering different levels of geography vs. population.

<comment><USER4> But why would you look at VTA when it's one of the worst-performing systems in the nation? Their ridership is in freefall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Acknowledging the cookie warning on the site has resulted in an endless 500 loop.

<comment><USER6> Sorry for being off-topic but I'm still going to use this as an opportunity to vent. This is the most pointless piece of regulation. It's unfortunate non-US users are also subjected to it. What bit of good does it really do for your average user? It's complete overregulation. If users don't want cookies they can turn them off in their browser. The average user doesn't know or care and these incessant popups help nobody.

<comment><USER7> > non-US users

It is an EU policy, not US ([http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm](http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm)).

<comment><USER8> Right, but US users see the warning too is what the parent post was getting at.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is really cool. Is it possible to express the edge coloring constraints simply via integer linear programming? This seems like the type of problem that might be NP-hard but tractable in practice with good heuristics.

<comment><USER10> You can use heuristics if/when the problem becomes ugly due to various constraints you may impose. The trick is to select heuristics depending on the problem at hand and in a way that their hyperparameter values are selected properly.

<comment><USER11> Most modern solvers like CPLEX and Gurobi have built-in heuristics [1] that are automatically selected and applied without user intervention. They typically exploit the structure of the problem or encode the experiences of the developers over large problem testsets.

The default heuristics for commercial solvers are actually pretty darned good these days and there's typically no need to hand-pick them.

In the MIP world, they are the secret sauce to fast solution times.

Hyperparameter tuning has been studied for MIPs (many papers written on this), but ultimately they are black box solutions. My experience inclines me to not even consider hyperparameters except as a last resort or unless you know something specific that a hyperparameter can exploit; there are other more high leverage things than can be done.

Random perturbations to the problem have been found to be much more fruitful for forcing a diversity of branch traversal paths and have lead to significant speedups. (M. Fischetti popularized this idea in 2010s [2])

[1] [https://resources.mpi- inf.mpg.de/conferences/adfocs-03/Slide...](https://resources.mpi- inf.mpg.de/conferences/adfocs-03/Slides/Rothberg_3.pdf) Also: [http://transp- or.epfl.ch/zinal/2017/slides/group5.pdf](http://transp- or.epfl.ch/zinal/2017/slides/group5.pdf)

[2] [https://mat.tepper.cmu.edu/blog/index.php/2012/09/25/fischet...](https://mat.tepper.cmu.edu/blog/index.php/2012/09/25/fischetti- speeds-up-optimization-with-randomness/)

<comment><USER10> Thank you for providing useful references. Hyperparameter tuning can accelarate CPLEX by 10x and more depending on problem instances (however, it it true that each new version of CPLEX is faster and faster).

What I meant is that in the case if your problem is formulated in a way that the CPLEX and Gurobi cannot treat it (e.g., stochastic and multiobjective) and is not very large-scale, then one can use heuristics. However, the efficiency of the latter will likely depend on hyperparameter settings which need to be set properly.

<comment><USER11> > What I meant is that in the case if your problem is formulated in a way that > the CPLEX and Gurobi cannot treat it (e.g., stochastic and multiobjective) > and is not very large-scale, then one can use heuristics. However, the > efficiency of the latter will likely depend on hyperparameter settings which > need to be set properly.

Ah makes sense... stochastic and multiobjective formulations have superstructures that are not exploited by MIP solvers by default, so hyperparameter tuning might be useful. Creating (exact) heuristics for these superstructures are also an active area of research.

Some solvers like CPLEX are starting to natively support higher level structures like Benders decompositions [1], but they will never support every structural variation.

[1] Benders: [https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSSA5P_12.7.0...](https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSSA5P_12.7.0/ilog.odms.cplex.help/CPLEX/ReleaseNotes/topics/releasenotes127/newBenders.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Also, busses in transit apparently follow "universality". [https://www.quantamagazine.org/in-mysterious-pattern-math- an...](https://www.quantamagazine.org/in-mysterious-pattern-math-and-nature- converge-20130205/)

<comment><USER13> Oh gosh what a mess of an article... completely undecipherable. There are many kinds of universality... this article concerns the flavor where many kinds of physical systems appear to be shockingly well-modeled as random matrices. But doesn't manage to convey a single kernel of what this __means__, it just plops information on you like a high-school math class. Tells you the name of things and some basic properties, leaves you with the misleading impression that you have come away with some better understanding...

Here's something more substantive to chew on, about universality in transitions to chaos: [1]. Turns out that many chaotic systems 'descend' into chaos in the very same way. What does that really _mean_? I have no idea, but at least this discussion rigorously explains what this universality class is, instead of dousing you with feel good science-hoodoo-voodoo quotes.

[1] [http://www.cns.gatech.edu/PHYS-4267/UFO.pdf](http://www.cns.gatech.edu/PHYS-4267/UFO.pdf)

<comment><USER14> The thing you're looking for is called Borel measure. (I think this is what you mean at least.) It is a part of advanced topology.

Explaining enough topology for a typical reader to get it is a hard task. As in really hard.

<comment><USER13> Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Anyone else have a ton of trouble understanding the example schedule and how it's represented as a graph?

I don't know if it's poorly written or if my brain is deteriorating.

<comment><USER16> Which one? I'd be glad to explain

<comment><USER16> The edges between the trips mean that one trip can be performed after the other on the same vehicle. The costs on these edges represent the distance of the idle trip - if they are far away - it would be more expensive. The depot pull outs are connected to the earlier trips,and depot pull ins to the later trips. The cost of these edges also represents the distance of the depot from this trip.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It is unclear what is the objective. Minimize deadhead costs? If so, solving it with min-cost circulation with lower-bound. It would be much cleaner.

</comment><comment><USER18> Amazing! This article was very interesting. Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER19> Awesome article - super interesting..

</comment><comment><USER20> Interesting

</comment><comment><USER21> Is this operational already?

<comment><AUTHOR> Definitely! In cities such as Las Vegas, Washington DC, Austin, and many others. See optibus.com for more info

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> interesting and educational article

</comment><comment><USER23> All: please don't post promotional comments. We ban accounts that do that.

</comment><comment><USER24> Very interesting!</comment>


Former Yahoo engineer quits to build a Flickr killer on Kickstarter - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/29/former-yahoo-engineer-quits-to-build-a-flickr-killer-on-kickstarter/

<comment><USER2> > With OpenPhoto, Mathai is transparently attempting to put the user back in > control of where their photos are stored, so the service will allow users to > freely select which cloud storage and database services meet their needs […] > for example, OpenPhoto users can select Amazon S3, Rackspace Cloudfiles, > Dropbox or any other service with a file storage API to store their photos.

I'm having a hard time seeing the practical utility of this. Professional or dedicated photographers have their stuff carefully backed up already. Ordinary users haven't ever heard of S3 or Cloud Files. There might be a couple of geeks left who would be interested in the different hosting options, but surely these wouldn't comprise enough of the user base to make that much complexity worth it.

I agree that Flickr has been unfortunately stagnant, but—at least from this article—this guy seems like he's too focused on the implementation details and not enough on the high-level features that will actually draw people to the platform.

<comment><USER3> I agree. "Choose your own storage system" is not a feature for at least 99% of the people who use a photo-sharing service. To the typical user, choosing your storage system means choosing Flickr, or Picasa, or SmugMug, or OpenPhoto, or whatever else. It doesn't mean choosing OpenPhoto+S3 vs OpenPhoto+Dropbox. That's not a real choice. You're still tied to OpenPhoto, even if your files are stored on S3.

Your files (and especially your metadata) aren't going to magically migrate from OpenPhoto+S3 to Picasa unless he's also planning on writing a tool for that, in which case I'd suggest that investing in his startup is an even worse idea than it seems at first, because he's spending time on features that only benefit non-customers.

Thus guy seems caught up in architecture astronomy, which is frankly not something that I see too many people paying money for.</comment></comment>


Why Sleep Deprivation Eases Depression - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-sleep-deprivation-eases-depression <comment><USER2> There is a long line of research on mood disorders and the ways to deal with those behaviorally and medically.

[http://www.amazon.com/Manic-Depressive-Illness-Disorders- Rec...](http://www.amazon.com/Manic-Depressive-Illness-Disorders-Recurrent- Depression/dp/0195135792)

It has been known for quite a while that if a person is in a prolonged depressed mood state, simply shortening that person's periods of sleep (usually by getting the person up earlier, to bright light) can do a lot to boost the person's mood state.

On the other hand, for the many people who have bipolar mood disorders (so that they have abnormally elevated mood as well as abnormally depressed mood not related to immediate events in the people's lives), sleep deprivation can be dangerous, as it can trigger mania. Severe sleep deprivation can result in all the psychotic symptoms of florid mania even for most people without a medical history of mood disorders, and it is particularly dangerous for people who have already been through an episode of mania. So as other people here have already commented, regularity of sleep (sleep while it's dark, and get up while it's day) is helpful for mood disorders, up or down, and sleep deprivation by itself will not be a cure-all for all cases of depression.

AFTER EDIT: I appreciate HN participant falcolas reminding all of us, in a first reply to this comment, that the submitted article is about an animal model of a proposed drug treatment that may have some of the effects of sleep deprivation without having other effects. Yes, that is what the article is about, and I acknowledged that even after reading the article, the first part of this comment's text (above) had as much to do with other comments here as it had to do with the actual article, maybe more. That said, as investigation of new drug treatments moves from animal models to human clinical trials, the thing to look for in any drug proposed to treat "depression" (depressed mood) is whether it might trigger mania (elevated mood) in the patient receiving the treatment. It's tough to develop an animal model of the psychotic symptoms of mania, which is why this is not an easy problem to solve--how to develop a drug that makes depressed patients enjoy normal mood states without breaking through to florid mania.

<comment><USER3> From TFA:

"This finding points to a promising target for new drug development because it suggests that mimicking sleep deprivation chemically may offer the antidepressant benefits without the unwanted side effects of actually skipping sleep."

So no, they aren't recommending sleep deprivation as a method to combat depression. It has, however, given them other lines of research to follow.

<comment><USER4> Nowhere does he claim that sleep deprivation is a recommended treatment. Simply that it has been found to boost depressive moods.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Anecdotally I can definitely say my depression seems to get worse when I'm sleeping more and it almost becomes a feedback loop because I want to sleep more therefore making it even worse. It might also have something to do with a sense of productivity feeding back into the depression but that's a different story. Ultimately this makes me want to do a better job of recording sleep patterns and seeing if that correlates with my depression. Anyone suggest using a tool like fitbit for this purpose?

<comment><USER6> "It might also have something to do with a sense of productivity feeding back into the depression but that's a different story."

I don't suffer from depression but FWIW I have noticed lack of productivity leading to a down mood in the same way simply accomplishing something (even getting the room cleaned up) can lead to an up mood.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Potentially pointless anecdote: I've noticed sleep deprivation narrows my capacity for attention - to make an analogy with sight, it's like tunnel vision. As long as I have something to hold what's left of my attention span (e.g, work), I can't help but live in the moment, as I can't focus on (or even perceive, really) depressive thoughts at the same time.

<comment><USER8> My theory is that before going to sleep different parts of the brain shut down not in one single moment, but at different moments. Therefore before sleep some parts of the brain is already sleeping. That would explain why so often ideas that seem good before sleep look silly when you wake up. As in this case, maybe before sleep parts of the brain that produce depression shut down sooner and "temporarily cures" the depression.

<comment><USER9> May I suggest that you measure that, even by your own definition on "parts of the brain" (perhaps a choice of unrelated cognitive functions?) in a way that allows you to make predictions?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> At face value, it seems like this flies in the face of the commonly-held wisdom that regular patterns of sleep (as well as eating and other habits) help minimize depression over time. It seems like the research is actually referring to the short-term effect of sleep deprivation on brain chemistry, which makes sense in an evolutionary sense. Maintaining alertness in the face of sleep probably has a hard-wired association at quite a deep level with self-preservation, and I can see how that would explain in some way these findings.

</comment><comment><USER11> "Although the mice continued to sleep normally, after 12 hours they showed a rapid improvement in mood and behavior, which lasted for 48 hours."

Does anyone know how we measure moods in mice? At first glance it seems like a very subjective exercise.

<comment><USER12> Checked because I remember hearing about the somewhat horrific forced swim test. Idea is mice are trapped in a container fall of water; depression is when they give up and let themselves drown.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_models_of_depression#Des...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_models_of_depression#Despair- based)

<comment><USER13> The Wikipedia article doesn't mention anything about drowning, just "an immobile posture".

/hopes that we're not torturing mice for our own benefit.

<comment><USER14> i could be mistaken, but i'm pretty sure we do all kinds of horrific tests on mice, specifically for our own benefit.

<comment><USER15> Someone I knew once explained how their lab had a machine to give mice _precisely calibrated_ amounts of brain damage through impact. The control group had their skull fractured without causing any direct injury to the brain.

This has always struck me as the ickiest thing I've heard, but I'm sure there's much worse out there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Being depressed made me sleep less, which in turns made me feel even less powerless and my depression got even worse... at least in my personal experience

<comment><USER17> I agree, I have to watch my sleep patterns because when I don't get enough sleep, it's much easier for depression to kick in.

<comment><USER18> Agreed as well. Nothing makes the day WORSE than not enough sleep; and it never feels like enough.

Edit: And, as is the style of the day, we've had links on HN/SA and others that not enough sleep hampers cognition, weight control, and stress (which are all triggers/symptoms for depression in many people). So, you need to sleep more, and less, simultaneously?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't think there's enough stuff popping up on my screen for me to fully enjoy this article.

</comment><comment><USER20> The Hines article that this article is written about is open access, and worth a read, especially because the Introduction and Discussion sections look to be fairly comprehensible for people outside the field:

<http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v3/n1/full/tp2012136a.html>

</comment><comment><USER21> I have noticed this myself - I'm unemployed and frequently go to job interviews. If I slept badly, I'm much more calm and easy going. I may not be the sharpest knife in the shed when it happens, but I no longer care.

But I avoid sleep deprivation. It can't be good in the long run.

</comment><comment><USER22> I have bought 1 year ago Zeo product and since than I have noticed that if I sleep more than 6h30 hours than I am tired and feel more depressed. With over 10 months result, I have DEEP sleep only in the first 2 hours of sleep, then I am moving between REM and light the rest of the night. I guess that, for me, too mush REM is making me more tired.

<comment><USER23> Could it be that you are not using the SmartWake feature or are waking up in the middle of a REM cycle? That does bad things to your alertness and how you feel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> This is one of the things that you know instinctively and you can relate immediately when somebody puts it out in a formal way.

Myself and a friend of mine suffer from depression and we both feel much better when we are somewhat tired late in the night.

Anecdotal evidence was there, so we both used to get things done just before sleep.

</comment><comment><USER25> From personal experience, I would say it was the opposite. Being overly tired and sleepless lead to depression.

But I guess being busy and active can move your mind off from depression and make things better for some.

</comment><comment><USER26> I've seen studies where college students were shown a series of images. The sleep deprived students were more likely to recall the negative images. Focusing on the negative appears to be a hallmark of depression.

However, a depressed person can't seem to get enough sleep. Is it a snowball effect? Maybe the balance isn't about sleep deprivation, but finding the correct amount of sleep, waking to bright light, and keeping a consistent schedule.

<comment><USER27> > However, a depressed person can't seem to get enough sleep.

This has not been my experience. If you mean that a depressed person continues to be tired after waking up from a full night's sleep, then sure, but that's not sleep deprivation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> It's important to note that the studies show that the short term effects of sleep deprivation can reduce the symptoms of depression. The long term effects are the opposite and being chronically sleep deprived can aggravate and severely worsen someone who is suffering from depression.

</comment><comment><USER29> I want to believe it yet every shorten night sends me to lengths of hellish angry letargious time.

</comment><comment><USER30> Personal experience, I'd agree. If I stay up all night and then do not go to sleep, I'm more likely to enter a manic mode and continue to get little sleep for the next few days. But things usually crash not too long after.

</comment><comment><USER31> this is complete bullshit. Lack of sleep makes (my) depression worse.

<comment><USER32> Acute sleep deprivation _can_ apparently make depression better, but the effect only lasts until you go to sleep. That's what this article is about. Chronic sleep deprivation is very different and can _cause_ depression.

This article is not describing a treatment, just progress in understanding a mental illness.

<comment><USER33> > This article is not describing a treatment, just progress in understanding a > mental illness.

If the article's thesis is correct, if depression can be modulated by way of brain chemistry, the it's not a mental illness, it's a physical illness with mental symptoms.

I say this because over time, more and more "mental" illnesses have been recategorized as physical or genetic conditions that happen to have mental symptoms, including schizophrenia and bipolar syndrome, both of which respond dramatically to neurological treatments, and not at all to psychological treatments.

This change in the status of "mental" illnesses was recently recognized by the director of the NIMH, who in Scientific American said, "In most areas of medicine, doctors have historically tried to glean something about the underlying cause of a patient's illness before figuring out a treatment that addresses the source of the problem. When it came to mental or behavioral disorders in the past, however, no physical cause was detectable so the problem was long assumed by doctors to be solely "mental," and psychological therapies followed suit. Today scientific approaches based on modern biology, neuroscience and genomics are replacing nearly a century of purely psychological theories, yielding new approaches to the treatment of mental illnesses."

Reference: [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=faulty- circ...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=faulty-circuits)

<comment><USER34> But it's trivially true that any "mental" state can at least be _modulated_ by brain chemistry. Unless you posit some kind of free-floating mind that operates magically, all mental states supervene on physical, biological processes, whether we're talking about depression or programming ability or personality or food preferences.

<comment><USER35> Not every computer problem is a hardware problem, even though the software is running on some hardware. Whether the "mind" is emergent or external, it is not particularly useful to ignore it.

Brain injuries and hormonal problems are hardware.

Post-traumatic stress disorder is a database problem.

Illogic and a tendency to over-simplify or rely on metaphors are software bugs. _grin_

Of course, the software and database are built in self-modifying firmware, so physical and mental issues do interact in interesting ways.

<comment><USER36> > Not every computer problem is a hardware problem, even though the software > is running on some hardware.

Well, there is a level on which it is, in that "software" is just hardware writ small. That is, all software that exists and actually runs on a computer exists in the form of physical configuration of states of matter, not as some non-physical entity. This was obvious in the case of some early computers where "programs" were macroscopic wiring configurations, but it is no _less_ true of modern computers.

The artificial distinction between hardware and software can be a very useful tool in thinking about computer issues, but it isn't really true in the fundamental sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Maybe during the 4-5 hours that you spend resisting sleep.

But the next day you will wake up in a bad mood from not sleeping well.

At least this is what happens to me.

So in general it's a bad idea.

On the other hand, I've found that if I sleep for too long I also get a bad mood the next day.

8 hours of sleep seems to be the sweet spot that puts me in a decent mood.

</comment><comment><USER38> It causes early death too...</comment>


ASK HN: All the VC Blogs that I read, in one place. Thoughts? - <AUTHOR> http://vcblogs.newscred.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Is this useful? For those of you who follow these blogs, how do you do it?

I just got tired of RSS readers. While a lot of news comes to me via twitter, this seems to work well for me.

EDIT: I'm the cofounder of NewsCred and we're experimenting with our consumer site. So looking for feedback in general as well.

<comment><USER3> Hey Shafqat, I'm writing an academic paper on the future of news. Would love to interview you for it and get your opinion and outlook. We've already interviewed people from Reuters/Dowjones, iReport, etc. Contact me if you're interested david.haddad at gmail

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey there - would love to help. I've been doing a bunch of these interviews recently, and it's really interesting and relevant to our core business (<http://platform.newscred.com>).

My email address is in my profile.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's great as far as it goes.

Would be better if the sum were greater than the parts, i.e. more than a static list of interesting site/blogs. There's the obvious "if you liked that, here's something else you might like." Set the WayCool to 11 and see what you come up with.

But it's a good start, done well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback - yes, that is exactly what I would like to see as the product evolve. Suggesting other sources/feeds as you mention.

But also proposing related topics that may interest you etc. There is already a bit of cool functionality if you click on one of the blog headers - <USER2> this page:

[http://vcblogs.newscred.com/feed?url=http//feeds.feedburner....](http://vcblogs.newscred.com/feed?url=http//feeds.feedburner.com/AVc)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> As a tangential question, how else can this sort of information (i.e. "blogs I read" be shared).

Not talking about twitter or delicious - looking for a platform to share a curated set of feeds in a nice, presentable style. A "shareable feedly" would be cool, but I don't think it's possible is it?

<comment><USER5> I use Netvibes.com which lets you make a public page with RSS feeds you read. Mine is <http://www.netvibes.com/webdeveloper> although it's pretty old..

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> <http://venture-capital.alltop.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for highlighting this - I actually used this for a while. But I problem was that there was simply too much information, with a lot _ABOUT_ venture capital and startups.

I wanted information and blog posts _BY_ venture capitalists.</comment></comment>


John Chen has BlackBerry back in the game - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-chen-has-blackberry-back-in-the-game/

<comment><USER2> That's quite a headline considering their phone sales were cut by 30% from last quarter?</comment>


Workflow or Ticketing  - <AUTHOR>

Does anyone know any good BPM software?  Basically i have been asked to find a cloud -based tool where i can have a form that is easily modifiable, solid reporting and good routing via email.  Ultimately the data needs to integrate into Rally and IBM ISM's platform.<p>Any tips would be amazing!  i have until Monday at 1 to give the options. <comment><AUTHOR> Right now i am looking at Zendesk, who competes with Zendesk?</comment>


Star.Me - Give People Stars - <AUTHOR> http://star.me

<comment><USER2> Great, so now I can get all those stars I missed in kindergarten :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes! :-)</comment></comment>