Brazilian authorities suspend WhatsApp payments - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-23/brazil-s-central-bank-suspends-whatsapp-payments <comment><USER2> As a Brazilian, I'm pleased.

Our central bank is going to release a platform called PIX. Financial institutions with more than 500.000 clients are required to implement it. Finally we are going to have a standard across banks, and money transfers are going to be less complex, clunky and costly.

Of course, other apps have come before. We have apps like PicPay, PayPal and Nubank, just to name a few, that provide instant, free money transfers. Unsurprisingly, each one rolled out their own standard, but they had to register at the central bank as a financial institution. This means that, at least the popular ones, will have to provide compatibility with the central bank's platform.

This new WhatsApp feature, to me, looked like a bold attempt to kill PIX at launch. People wouldn't mind this new feature inside their banking app that already exists, for a few months, in the messaging app they're used to. If the average Brazilian user sees a QR code, is it a WhatsApp Pay QR code they see regularly? Or is it that obscure feature inside their banking app, which they didn't pay attention to? What would make more sense for businesses to adopt, for the sake of simplicity?

I'm glad Facebook will not get away with that one. If they're going to launch this feature, our central bank should make sure that it's compatible with the nationwide standard that's going to roll out. I'd rather not need Facebook to conveniently pay for my loaf of bread.

Edit: replaced "service" with "platform".

<comment><USER3> > money transfers are going to be less complex, clunky and costly.

You really think the Brazilian central bank is going to make a smooth, efficient, and cheap money transfer service? What reason do you have to expect that to work?

<comment><USER4> As a Brazilian living in the US I can tell you that the TED system is already a smooth, efficient, and cheap money transfer service compared to the solutions here in the US.

So I have total confidence that they are capable of creating a better yet version of it.

<comment><USER5> As a Brazilian living in Canada, I can say the same.

<comment><USER6> As a Brazilian living in Brazil I'm surprised that anyone would expect a service provided by the Brazilian government to be efficient, or even work at all.

This Pix thing seems to cover more than inter-bank transfers, people are expected to use it for QR code-based mobile payments for instance.

<comment><USER7> The HIV treatment program, provided by the brazilian government for free to everyone that needs it, has been very succesful and is a model to be followed. Not everything the government does is rotten, just a lot of it.

"Throughout the 1990s, when the annual cost of drugs for AIDS treatment often exceeded US$10,000 per patient, the World Bank and other development agencies discouraged developing countries from implementing treatment programs, favoring "cost-effective" prevention over costly treatment. Brazil challenged this conventional wisdom and, despite World Bank objections, has provided free universal access to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for all people living with HIV/AIDS since 1996." source: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782963/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782963/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why do services like whatsapp need support for this? We have URLs people!

Here I just send an URL to my friend via whatsapp. They click on the link. The site takes care of giving user whichever payment method they desire. User pays. That's it.

From a user's perspective to pay I just have to click a link. And to get paid I just send a link. How easier can it get?

<comment><USER9> In Canada people can pay you by having your email or phone number in their bank app.

Works really well!

<comment><USER10> That's problematic and not as good as direct bank to bank transfers.

<comment><USER11> Electronic Money Transfer (EMT)/e-transfering is a bank-to-bank transfer in Canada.

<comment><USER10> It may be convenient use other ids besides bank account numbers, but it adds another avenue for mistakes.

<comment> frosted-flakes Such as...?

To me, passing around a long unstructured numeric string is a lot more error- prone than selecting a contact from my banking app, or writing a short, structured phone number or email address. In any case, the recipient needs to know the secret one-word answer to the question set by the sender, which would prevent wrong parties from claiming money (this can be skipped if the recipient registered their phone number or email address forbauto-deposit).

<comment><USER10> They are not unstructured and have checksum digits in proper implementations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Why doesn't Facebook do it in the US? Too much opposition from the large payment processing lobby?

<comment><USER5> lack of users might be the case. WhatsApp is ridiculous popular in Brazil, but not that relevant in north america.

<comment><USER13> This. I was surprised a year ago or so when I last travel to US that Wap was not ubiquitous like in pretty much the rest of the world.

<comment><USER14> WA is not ubiquitous in some big parts of the world. It's not like it is ubiquitous in "the rest of the world". In China at least WeChat takes the crown and I don't know about other Asian countries.

Lets not make WA seem more "unavoidable" or seem more ubiquitous than it really is. It's got sufficient network effect already.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Open banking is required, please wait.

</comment><comment><USER16> original link: [https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-06-23/brazi...](https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-06-23/brazil- s-central-bank-suspends-whatsapp-payments)

</comment><comment><USER17> TIL Whatsapp had payments... Is Facebook just copying WeChat?

</comment><comment><USER18> I would expect that WhatsApp had to get an approval before the launch? Is Brazil less regulated when it comes to payment processing?

<comment><USER19> The article says they were in contact before this.

> Bloomberg reports that WhatsApp was surprised by the Brazillian Central > Bank's decision, since the company had been in regular contact with the > authority. WhatsApp had started a small test of the service in the country > around a month prior to its launch.

<comment><USER20> God, stop using code blocks to quote things.

<comment><USER21> HN needs to have a proper way to do quotes. > doesn't indent beyond the first line once word-wrapped, | looks cute but is confusing, code-blocks suck, etc.

<comment><USER22> > _this style works well, even if applied over multiple lines. Lorem ipsum > dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor > invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero > eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, > no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet. Lorem ipsum dolor > sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor > invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero > eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum.

Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet._

at least IMHO

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> WhatsApp does payments??? I never knew of this.

In fact I see no sign of it in the app whatsoever. Must be a regional thing?

</comment><comment><USER24> They should try in Spain or other European countries where Coronavirus has hit hard and has high WhatsApp usage

<comment><USER25> Europe already has easy money transfer

<comment><USER5> Brazil too.</comment></comment></comment>


GitLab 10.1 Released with Image Discussions and Rejection of Unsigned Commits - <AUTHOR> https://about.gitlab.com/2017/10/22/gitlab-10-1-released/ <comment><USER2> They should focus on seemless upgrades and HA rather that throwing in every feature they can think off.

<comment><USER3> We are trying to do both. HA PostgreSQL is a big focus of the build team. Upgrades should be seem less. What problem are you experiencing?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Image discussions are an awesome addition. Def need them enabled for issues though.</comment>


Why Is Infrastructure So Expensive to Build in New York? - <AUTHOR> http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/new-york-infrastructure-costs.html <comment><USER2> CTRL+F "debt" \- nothing. CTRL+F "interest" \- nothing.

Lets take a quick look at some numbers.

[1] "The result is a massive run-up in debt. Though the MTA spent only $848 million on debt service in 2004, according to RPA, it is projected to spend more than three times as much, $2.67 billion, in 2014. Debt alone will eat up 17.6 percent of the MTA's operating budget by 2014; worse, RPA says that an alternative calculation shows the 2014 debt load at 23.1 percent of the operating budget."

[3] "By way of comparison, Syria has $30.1 billion in debt. Cuba has $28.9 billion. Twenty-eight other countries, from Ecuador to Jordan, Jamaica to Kenya, have less debt than the M.T.A."

[1] [https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2011/09/07/where-does-your- fare-...](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2011/09/07/where-does-your-fare-go- increasingly-to-pay-off-mta-debt/) [2] [https://www.politico.com/states/new- york/albany/story/2015/0...](https://www.politico.com/states/new- york/albany/story/2015/02/report-more-than-30-countries-have-less-debt-than- the-mta-000000)

<comment><USER3> Debt is part of the financing of a project, not a 'challenge in building them'.

Comparing the debt of one group to an arbitrary other doesn't help so much, because what matters are interest rates, revenue to pay principal and interest rates, stability of tat revenue, other covenants, penalties, and of course cost of capital.

FYI Jordan, Jamaica and Kenya would carry a _lot_ more debt if they possible could.

If some agency in NYC has a huge amount of debt from credible lenders it might be a 'good sign' they they are actually worthy of it.

FYI, I think the article does a good job at it:

""People will say to me, 'Why are MTA construction costs so high?' And the answer is 'Everything,' " says Julia Vitullo-Martin, a senior fellow at the RPA and co-author of its 2018 report comparing New York's construction costs to those in peer cities. "Every factor you look at is flawed the way the MTA does business, from the first step to the end."

I love this level of candor in people who are willing to speak publicly.

<comment><USER4> I can only agree with her answer.

When I compare (software) projects amongst different locations I worked at, things vary so so much. Making those comparison somewhat misleading at best.

I don't see how comparing the costs between systems that have so different requirements, labor markets, legacy infrastructure, regulamentation agencies, can help much but I am not an expert on this subject by far.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> >"People will say to me, 'Why are MTA construction costs so high?' And the answer is 'Everything,' " says Julia Vitullo-Martin, a senior fellow at the RPA and co-author of its 2018 report comparing New York's construction costs to those in peer cities. "Every factor you look at is flawed the way the MTA does business, from the first step to the end."

>When you're doing everything wrong, the best way to fix the problem isn't usually to go through the list of things you're doing wrong and fix them one by one. It's best to step back and ask why you're so bad at everything, whether a systemic problem is causing you to make so many separate mistakes. And in the case of the MTA, the root cause of its capital-construction failures is usually diagnosed as unaccountability: Nobody knows who's in charge, so nobody has to be terrified of taking the blame for obscene costs and endless delays.

This is very similar to the explanation for the American healthcare system's turmoil given by David Goldhill (founder of [https://sesamecare.com/](https://sesamecare.com/)) in his book _Catastrophic Care_. Even for those that disagree with his recommendations, he delivers a great analysis of the perverse incentives that gave rise to the broken healthcare system.

</comment><comment> barry-cotter Why American Costs Are So High (Work-in-Progress)

1\. Engineering part 1: station construction methods

2\. Engineering part 2: mezzanines

3\. Management part 1: procurement

4\. Management part 2: conflict resolution

5\. Management part 3: project management

6\. Management part 4: agency turf battles

7\. Institutions part 1: political lading with irrelevant priorities

8\. Institutions part 2: political incentives

9\. Institutions part 3: global incuriosity

> Canada is not much better than the US. Americans' world is flat, with its > corners in Boston, Seattle, San Diego, and Miami. Canadians' world includes > the United States and Canada, making it flat with the northern ends of the > quadrilateral stretched a few hundred kilometers to the north. A study of a > long-overdue extension of Vancouver's Millennium Line to UBC has four case > studies for best practices, all from within North America. This is despite > the fact that in the developed world the system most similar to Vancouver's > SkyTrain in technology and age is the Copenhagen Metro, whose construction > costs are one half as high as those of Vancouver despite cost and schedule > overruns.

[https://pedestrianobservations.com/2019/03/03/why- american-c...](https://pedestrianobservations.com/2019/03/03/why-american- costs-are-so-high-work-in-progress/)

<comment><USER3> Surely, but why don't those problems exist elsewhere?

<comment><USER4> That's what I ask myself. I'D guess all those challenges exist elsewhere too but at different scales?

<comment> barry-cotter The administrative state in the US isn't as trusted, powerful or competent as in other developed countries. This is partly because of the structure of government in the US, all the checks and balances making getting anything done harder, the US tendency for regulation by judicial settlement instead of legislation and the much more democratic decision making process. There are far more political appointees in the US system, and elected posts, than in other developed countries. The civil service just isn't as powerful. All of these are self reinforcing. The US is just very different from other places.

The ignorance of international best practices is just imperial disease, a special case of not invented here. I honestly struggle to think of a technology or industry the US has lost leadership in and then recovered but it's not like Germany is doing well in electrical vehicles. Sometimes your time is past, like the US and semiconductors.

The political and administrative sclerosis is unlikely to get better fast without the kind of pressing need that results in a new constitutional settlement. It could get better slowly I suppose. The inward looking self regard will get better when the US sees itself as an excellent country rather than assuming they're the best at everything.

<comment><USER6> _the US tendency for regulation by judicial settlement instead of legislation and the much more democratic decision making process_

I'd wager that the democratic decision process in Switzerland is far more stringent and the public is far more involved.

On every level, be it a local tram line, a canton wide, or intra-cantonal rail system, or projects of national importance and great expense, like [1], the public is virtually always consulted via referendum and has to green light the project.

This is also a huge strength of the system. Because once a project is approved, the funds are secured and politicians can't pull shenanigans to pull, or divert funding.

I'd wager that a high democratic involvment into major (and expensive) projects is rather an asset, than a liability.

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

<comment><USER4> We have the chance to participate in the US too, now to what extend it is effective, I don't know.

For example, even in big cities like NYC, there are public meetings about the projects, etc. Yet, I still believe that past certain point, people just stop either caring or not having the energy to follow thru the whole process.

Just a side note, it might sound pedantic but after living in Scandinavia, one thing I noticed that the expectation of "participation" during the decision making is not same even here. I bring this up because somewhat it contributes for more or less polarization and inefficient processes, I'd say.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm curious why I never see these kinds of articles going into how unions are bleeding the city dry. Union laborers wages are like 5 times more than other equivalent workers and they do 5 times less work because they know it's basically impossible to fire them. A good amount of the transit union workers I know will be quite proud to tell you how they get paid a full day for doing 2 hours of work and then going home while their foreman will clock them out for a full 8 hours.

<comment><USER8> The politics around unions in NYC are pretty fascinating.

Many of the trades and at least some of the public sector workers are making enough money to be upper middle class (or higher) by any reasonable definition. Much more so certainly than many professions requiring college or even graduate degrees--for example publishing is still fairly big in NYC but pays terribly. However the rhetoric coming out of these unions still hits the themes of poor, underdog working class pretty hard. Meanwhile the actual working class is hit the hardest by inflated costs of virtually everything.

You end up with tragicomic situations like the infamous inflated rat protests being manned by poorly paid temp workers because the actual union members can't be bothered.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Trying to summarize the parts I read:

Why? Everything. No one (or group) is in charge, no one (or group) has the power to wave a wand and get satisfaction, and no one (or group) seems to actually be doing diligence on figuring out why. Anyone that does have the power has no accountability, but does get to milk the process for political points and defer the costs as externalities from them to the system.

If only politics was about enabling better living and good stuff happening, rather than being a popularity contest.

<comment><USER10> ^this. some things are better done by career bureaucrats. democracy is not a universal tool

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> > By building this project [CrossRail], London is just catching up to its > peers. Paris has had a similar system, the five-line RER, since the 1970s. > Berlin's S-Bahn predates World War II.

I think I lived in London when CrossRail a just an expensive glint in the government's eye. I didn't know that it was an S-Bahn thing. I guess it makes sense, as London always was the city with the most famous of U-Bahns but no real S-Bahn.

Now I live in Sydney, a city that has always had an S-Bahn (of course we don't call it that) but know U-Bahn. But just a few days ago the Sydney Metro ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro)) was opened.

So it seems like the combined approach is what big cities converge on. Although the Sydney metro doesn't even go into the centre of the city, so it's not really equivalent.

Or that S-Bahns were some kind of new technology.

I find it interesting that

<comment><USER12> Sydney metro will go right under the CBD and through Central station [1]. The next stage planned is Parramatta to the CBD.

[1] - [https://www.sydneymetro.info/map/sydney-metro-interactive- tr...](https://www.sydneymetro.info/map/sydney-metro-interactive-train-map)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> From this article: [http://gothamist.com/2019/01/22/subway_speeds_signal_timers....](http://gothamist.com/2019/01/22/subway_speeds_signal_timers.php)

 _" I have directed my team to identify and resolve every root cause of delay; in doing so, we can then implement the right fix, often for little or no cost," NYC Transit President Andy Byford said in a statement. "The SPEED Unit continues to examine hundreds of miles of track to find areas where we can safely increase speeds. Their work is absolutely essential and demonstrates that New York City Transit employees are fully committed to making tangible changes that will improve service for our customers."_

Which reminds me of a story from this book: [https://www.amazon.com/Its-Your- Ship-Management-Anniversary/...](https://www.amazon.com/Its-Your-Ship- Management-Anniversary/dp/145552302X)

Paraphrasing: _" As captain, I kept asking why we had no time for training. I was told because painting the ship took up a huge amount of time. So I asked 'Why do we need to paint the ship?'. I was told because the bolts used on the hull are not stainless so they rust and the ship looks bad so we paint it. 'Can't we use stainless bolts?' I asked. 'No', I was told because the Navy stores didn't have stainless bolts. So I gave my credit card to the supply officer and told him to go buy some stainless bolts. Hundreds of hours saved and now available for training."_

EVERY SINGLE PROJECT I have ever worked on could apply this story and I would bet that there are similar examples of this on the MTA. The "speed team" from the article here is a perfect example of how sometimes lots of small fixes in the same direction can have enormous impacts.

</comment><comment><USER14> It's nasty to say, but the main over-arching problem is that the public sector just doesn't attract very productive Americans, and this situation is amplified in New York. Nothing gets done, wages are uncorrelated with productivity, bureaucracy is crushing, and advancement is nearly 100% political. Someone with the talent and drive to actually get a new subway line built could earn $200K trying to, knowing they're nearly guaranteed to get nothing done, or earn $1M down the street in finance. Easy choice. So instead the subway-building bureaucracy is staffed with people who are indifferent to actually getting things done and often couldn't get the job done if they had to, and are mostly ok with that.

This is reversed in much of the rich world, where the private sector doesn't pay that well, and it's hard to get fired, and there's great prestige in working in the public space.

<comment><USER15> That's not been my experience at all in Maryland the DC Metro area.

Every time I deal with the public sector, I am pleasantly surprised by the passion and dedication of people working there. I've very recently dealt with the judicial, MVA, MTA, and some WMATA and most everyone has been extremely helpful and efficient.

I cannot say the same for the private sector, whose business model seems to be "provide the minimum amount of service for the highest price you can squeeze out of the customer"

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Poor management.

With poor being used in both senses.

Looking at the management salaries (the link is a bit outdated, but should give an overall idea) head of MNRR makes around 300k. That sounds a lot until we realize that a Google engineer makes about the same. A head of a small team in the bank makes about the same.

Your engineers, who (putting my hard hat on) in most cases could've been replaced with an automated system earn about the same if they're willing to do some overtime.

Do we want somebody earning less than a Google engineer fight tooth and close for taxpayers money? Do we want them to take risk for huge infrastructure projects? That all while being engaged in political battles about poor-people- diversity-community-unions? I don't see it happening.

[https://www.newsday.com/long-island/transportation/table- of-...](https://www.newsday.com/long-island/transportation/table-of-top-mta- salaries-1.1973752)

</comment><comment> W-Stool The Montreal subway is my favorite in North America. Anyone have any recent numbers on how much it cost to build it and run it, per mile?

</comment><comment><USER17> Because of the Joe Pesci observation?

Everyone that can scrambles to take their "commission" from every project they're able to block.

I call it the Joe Pesci observation because of a quote from, I think, the movie Goodfellas.

"Your business burned down and you have no income?" "Fuck you, pay me!"

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I submitted this mostly to see how Rayiner would react, since this is one of his beats.

<comment><USER18> This is a great article! This part really hit home:

> But New York's transit stations are still overdesigned. All recent stations > have full-length mezzanines, which require larger station caverns and > therefore more expense. (Why must all these new stations look like the > Batcave?)

In DC, you've got these cavernous underground stations, a testament to brutalist architecture. In Chicago, you've got a wooden platform on some steel girders. Which is more expensive to build and refurbish? Chicago rebuilt 10 miles of the red line in five months for half a billion. DC has spent years just trying to get the tracks to stop catching fire.

The new stuff is just so overdesigned. The silver line has these giant stations high in the air over freeway medians, with air bridges to connect them to the entrances. Many METRA stations are just a wood platform on an embankment.

And the article really hits the point. It's not just the inefficiency. It's about imagining how much more transit you could build if our costs were lower.

<comment><USER19> I think subway stations in US are rather spartan by international standards. Whatever the reasons for the high cost, opulence is not one of them.

<comment><USER20> I guess you haven't been to the Oculus in NYC...

<comment><USER21> The oculus is a shopping mall, not a subway station.

<comment><USER22> By definition that would exclude most train stations in Japan and Hong Kong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Tort law. Because everyone has to carry huge liability insurance, everyone needs to go through tons of CYA process, which drives up cost and slows down work at every single transactional point in the entire economy. Hence the success of mega corporations like Amazon, Walmart, Exxon, etc. who don't need to hedge that stupidly small risk for internal transactions. Same reasons why colleges now have deans of intersectional classism and now charge $60,000 a year.

<comment><USER24> Tort law is why colleges have "deans of intersectional classism" and charge $60,000 a year?

None of the universities in my states have those or charged near that, but, let's assume they had and did. How does that mitigate the liability insurance and why isn't that showing up in the budgets of state and local governments? Which companies selling that insurance should I invest in, if it is so profitable a buck to make?</comment></comment>


AdTech Sucks: This Time It's Personal IDs - <AUTHOR> https://lockwood.dev/advertising/2019/06/14/adtech-sucks-this-time-its-personal-ids.html <comment><USER2> We need to fix this issue. This data and these tracking methods will be used to hurt people in the future. It's imperative we fix these issues

<comment><USER3> But not just for adtech. Holding personal data needs to be so dangerous that most companies won't do it unless they _absolutely_ must. That goes for credit card companies, "loyalty card" programs, magazines selling your contact info when you sign up so you get junk-mailed for 100 other magazines a week later, credit agencies. Make a major leak trigger such a large fine it's a death sentence for most companies, and give those harmed first dibs on company assets. Watch the market take care of the problem as insurers, creditors, and investors do their stuff in response to that change.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Some system has an option like "show personalized ads", it will show ADs based on your data, but for normal user who don't take notice of any AD, is there any advantage to enable it?

</comment><comment><USER5> Going to keep saying it under every post that is relevant. The ad industry is evil. Both in its current form and by definition. The sooner it dies, the better we are all off.

<comment><USER6> Hi -- ad industry member here -- am not evil, I am trying to do my job as ethically as I can. I understand you don't want to see ads. I don't care for them myself at times, but when we do show them, we make sure they are as relevant, appropriate, and most importantly valuable. I understand that the HN crowd is more sensitive to being enraged by ads, but we actually get quite a bit of user feedback saying they are appreciative of the money we were able to save them by using our service. So, like anything in life, it isn't black or white, there is a whole lot of gray.

<comment><USER7> One ad is not a problem. Constant bombardment of ads telling people that they are inadequate without a product is emotional abuse on, literally, an industrial scale. And when people try to escape it, the practices in TFA make the whole scenario worse. Not only can you not escape it, but it's obvious that ads are being crafted to get into our individual brains and abuse us in the most effective manner possible.

No snowflake feels responsible for the avalanche. But one couldn't reasonably say 'children love catching snowflakes landing on their tongues so it's not black or white whether avalanches are a bad thing.' That's not your position, I know, but there's not nearly as much gray as you seem to suggest.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh snap, author here. I completely forgot to mention how two factor authentication can be a ploy to get more ids for the cross-device graph, and you just reminded me. Next post maybe!

<comment><USER7> Ha! I meant The Fine Article. Glad it sparked something. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is creepy: Adblock engine stops me from loading this post and the entry seems to have vanished from HN.

<comment><USER9> Yeah- it says 59 comments but somehow they are all hidden...

<comment><AUTHOR> A few people said on the last article that the URL was blocked, perhaps something to do with "advertising" being in the URL. Also, no conspiracy on the disappearing comments, an ad industry person showed up in defence and got immediately flamed, which is why the post dropped pages. Cheers.

<comment><USER9> Got it- thanks. It really fell several pages but things do when the discussions become less constructive.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Troubles of Korea's Influential Economic Pundit - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/mf_minerva/all/1

<comment><USER2> It's too bad he had to pay such a heavy price for speaking his mind. It's understandable, since he embarrassed some fairly powerful figures by being right; but that doesn't excuse it.

In the US the way we would defuse someone like this is make them into a celebrity.</comment>


Facebook data found on publicly accessible Amazon servers - <AUTHOR> https://www.axios.com/facebook-data-found-publicly-available-amazon-servers-0f82bc1f-0b24-422f-a26d-bf6e91fbd828.html <comment><USER2> The article's title, while maybe technically correct, appears to be a bit sensational. This is about a third-party app storing user data on a publicly accessible AWS server. Not FB themselves.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ongoing discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19565408](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19565408).

</comment><comment><USER4> Basically any platform is going to have this sort of problem. If you have thousands of third-party developers, and users are willing to share data with them, some of them are going to accidentally leak it. iOS, Android, Twitter, I guarantee all of those platforms will have at least two applications leaking data. This only gets to be news because it superficially sounds like Facebook is doing something bad again.</comment>


Standard Treasury's Series A Pitch Deck - <AUTHOR> http://blog.zactownsend.com/standard-treasurys-series-a-pitch-deck <comment><USER2> I've seen far worse, but if anything, this demonstrates just how far the Series A has fallen in today's market. A couple of examples:

"Series A Financials" (slide 14) shows a lot of money going out, but doesn't detail how the founders think about money coming in.

"Risk & Mitigations" (slide 16) is really lacking for a $10 million Series A raise, particularly one that involves setting up a new bank. "It takes longer to ship our software"/"speed up engineering hiring" is particularly amusing if you've been in software development for any length of time. "If we can't find the right people"/"work with headhunters and use contractors, as needed" will be equally amusing to anyone who has had to hire in today's market.

<comment><USER3> I agree. It seemed more like an angel round deck. A startup asking for $10M series A should already product validation, meaningful traction, and starting their growth phase. This had none of that. The only thing they had going for them was YC and a strong brand of previous investors.

<comment><USER2> To be fair to Standard Treasury, the pitch ("we're building a new kind of bank") is an unusual one for traditional technology investors, so product validation, traction, etc. are probably going to be less important to the investors who are interested in evaluating this further.

But even so, the detail is quite lacking and there's not a lot that instills confidence that this company has what it takes break into a highly-regulated market dominated by institutions with billions of dollars in capital and more and better technology resources than the founders would like to believe. Building a viable new bank is not a $10 million proposition, so as an investor my first question would be: how much are you going to need to raise in the next several years for this to even have a shot?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> When I try to find the Standard Treasury homepage to get a better idea of what it's trying to accomplish (by following the link from OP's blog), all I see is an empty blog site. Is this because they are trying to keep a low web profile? It seems a little odd to me.

<comment><USER5> I get a certificate error. That's pretty egregious for banking software.

<comment><USER6> My understanding is that Standard Treasury's Series A raise was unsuccessful and the team was acqui-hired by SVB.

<comment><USER5> Shouldn't that be disclosed in this post?

If that's true, this deck is more an example of what not to do than what to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I found this fascinating, particularly the discussion about why the US market is so unfriendly that they decided to start in the UK. The way the team shared their full thought process going through all the alternatives I found very compelling.

Thanks for sharing, Zach

</comment><comment><USER8> I'd like to thank zt for posting this and wish him and his team the best of luck in whatever is happening. Hopefully this helps offset the negativity regarding the deck itself and the uncertainly about the upcoming announcement being reflected elsewhere in this thread.

This type of release, especially if it accompanies either a retrospective or a post-mortem (as appropriate), can be very helpful for the rest of us in the community and should be encouraged.

</comment><comment><USER9> It's a shame there aren't any forward-enough-thinking US banks that would make a reasonable partner for this type of effort. In the long run, owning the bank is a better asset but I wonder if a more prudent strategy would be proving out the value first. Maybe like a Tesla or PayPal strategy.</comment>


Silicon Valley Wants to Be Destroyed by Aliens - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/silicon-valley-monument-sign-techs-weakness/584560/ <comment><USER2> Recently just seeing how history repeat(1). You can draw the parallel between Florence and silicon Valley. Florence changed how art looks, Galileo changed paradigm with Copernican principle. Math, sculpture, construction and architecture built just in 15th century with great marble.

It was there a chicken and egg problem too: Florence was the heart of Italy which was the heart of the Roman Empire. Half of the world painting and achievements in peak of human creative comes from Italy, and half of those come from Florence.

Like the counter-culture in the 60's (because of war). The same happened in Florence because of the plague people created their counterculture:[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death)

Same with silicon Valley , it's the heart of The united state (today Roman Empire). Silicon Valley is filled with smart people and rich people. Florence was rich with wealthy people and great artist: Dante, Michaelangelo etc. Who were also even burried there. We can conclude that Silicon Valley will be remember for its contemporaries: wozniak-steve jobs, Hewlett-Packard etc.

(1)[http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> 'That's why the San Jose City Council will consider a proposal this month to launch a design competition for a landmark "that symbolizes its power and reach..."'

They _already bought one_ , in 1994, paying the present equivalent of $860,000 for it: the cast stone statue of Queztcoatl[0] that looks like a dogpile, which now resides at the edge of the Plaza... and even displaced the Firefighters' Memorial in the process.

[0] [https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/quetzalcoatl- sculpture-p...](https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/quetzalcoatl-sculpture- park-god)</comment>


POLYBIUS – The Video Game That Doesn't Exist - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7X6Yeydgyg <comment><AUTHOR> Trust me, you should watch this if you're even remotely interested in the game or urban legends. Because unlike many articles and videos on the subject, Stuart Brown/Ahoy really goes into depth about the history of the urban legend, how it originated on coin-op.org in the early 00s, who Steven Roach really is and how an article in a retro gaming magazine ended up propelling it into the spotlight.

It's gaming journalism done right, at least in my opinion.</comment>


Godot gets a brand new animation editor with cinematic support - <AUTHOR> https://godotengine.org/article/godot-gets-brand-new-animation-editor-cinematic-support <comment><USER2> Godot is one of those open source projects where all the pieces fall into place. The developers are doing an amazing job, the lead is sensible to the wishes of the community. The community in return gets involved deep enough that substantial funding and a lively ecosystem emerge. Everyone involved in this project should be really proud, Godot, much like Blender, is a true gem of OSS.

<comment><USER3> Not to mention they have a pretty strong sustainability story: Massive success on Patreon combined with core developers who are able to sustain themselves with Godot contracting work.

It's shaping up to be quite the open source success story!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Godot has consistently impressed me. I tried something with it a year ago, but I got stalled because the only supported language (then) was a custom language called GDScript. Support for C# was added in October [0], and there are a bunch of other exciting changes in 3.0 [1] that have happened. I can't wait to give Godot another try. (If anyone is wondering how all this development is funded, Godot appears to get a lot of funding on Patreon, and the C# support was funded by Microsoft.)

[0]: [https://godotengine.org/article/introducing-csharp- godot](https://godotengine.org/article/introducing-csharp-godot)

[1]: [https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-0-released](https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-0-released)

<comment><USER5> GDScript really is just a subset of Python and works really well. Remember Moonscript for Unity? Well GDScript is much better.

GoDot FAQ:

The short answer is, we'd rather a programmer does the small effort to learn GDScript so he or she later has a seamless experience, than attracting him or her with a familiar programming language that results in a worse experience. We are OK if you would rather not give Godot a chance because of this, but we strongly encourage you to try it and see the benefits yourself.

The official [languages] for Godot are GDScript and C++.

GDScript is designed to integrate from the ground to the way Godot works, more than any other language, and is very simple and easy to learn. Takes at much a day or two to get comfortable and it's very easy to see the benefits once you do. Please do the effort to learn GDScript, you will not regret it.

Godot C++ API is also efficient and easy to use (the entire Godot editor is made with this API), and an excellent tool to optimize parts of a project, but trying to use it instead of GDScript for an entire game is, in most cases, a waste of time.

<comment><USER6> >The short answer is, we'd rather a programmer does the small effort to learn GDScript so he or she later has a seamless experience, than attracting him or her with a familiar programming language that results in a worse experience.

The implication here being that all other programming languages used in game development are bound to be worse than GDScript?

I'm learning Godot and while I'm not an expert at either yet, by any means, GDScript has yet to live up to that degree of hype for me. The only advantage it has over other languages is its status as the default for the engine, but I don't see it as an objectively _better_ language than, say, C, C++, C# or Lua.

<comment><USER7> I think they mean that GDScript is the best language for Godot. And at that time of writing it was, they tried several scripting languages(Lua, Python, Squirrel iirc) and none gave the 'seamless experience' that GDScript. Hell even the C# support at the beginning of Godot 3.0 was wonky.

But they listened to the community and added support for adding your own scripting language and Mono support. Which is still a big positive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I am h̶a̶l̶f̶ ̶w̶a̶y̶, q̶u̶a̶r̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶w̶a̶y̶ I am part way through a game in UE4 after having switched from Unity, and every bone in my body wants to switch to Godot because it's so consistently impressive as a project. I will stick to my guns for now, else I will never release, but I am definitely giving it a go next project.

<comment><USER9> I switched to Godot from Unity. Ya I lasted about 2 months and now I am back to Unity. Really depends on what you are doing but Godot has tons of bugs and it just gets old real fast, assuming you actually want to build a game. And trying to fix those bugs is not so easy in a lot of cases. Obviously depends on what you are doing though.

Switching from Unity to Unreal or vice versa is a wash imo as both those engines have proven themselves. Godot hasn't and still has a much longer way to go than the fanboys will have you believe. Maybe someday for some types of projects but I just don't see it ever having all the conveniences of Unity or Unreal.

<comment><USER10> What sorts of bugs did you encounter? (Not looking for full bug reports, just a flavor...) I've only toyed with each of them so far so I haven't really found all the gotchas but Godot's the only one I want to spend more time with. It also seemed to fit my mental model of how I want to build a game better than Unity did. But as I said, I just toyed with them, so I'm interested in hearing critical feedback.

<comment><USER11> I got unstable FPS when I used a KinematicBody2D and ran the game in-editor. This bug has tens of reports over 2 years, and needless to say, renders the engine impossible to work with. To be fair, it got fixed in master a month ago, but there's no reason to believe that this would be a one-off. In my opinion, the project is trying too hard to add fancy features instead of stabilizing and bugfixing core features. Not a fan of the contribution model as well, in which they basically accept all PRs and then fix the bugs later. They claim that it's faster than using regression tests or using a more thorough reviewing process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The one thing I hope Godot can push towards is just a huge pass in usability, smoothing out UI bugs and just generally improving the look and feel of the entire engine and all of it's UI - stuff like the 'inspector' panel just doesn't feel as nice or as usable as something like Unity's - it has great features but in my opinion just doesn't "feel" quite as polished as it could be, but I really do hope for this engine to keep improving and getting better

<comment><USER13> They are actually going to be shipping a new inspector with the 3.1 release.

[https://godotengine.org/article/godot-gets-new- inspector](https://godotengine.org/article/godot-gets-new-inspector)

<comment><USER12> I actually missed this, and the thing with Vector3s and such not being all in one was one of my main gripes, I'm super happy to see stuff like this

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Been playing with Godot since version 3 came out this year. It is a massive update but it is worth being aware that it doesn't feel complete. It was released because it is good enough to get people started on projects and the port them to 3.1 (which is what this editor is for)

3.1 seems more like the real release: * Massive cleanup of the UI (as people other people here complained about) * Full C# support * GLES v2 support (more hardware support)

I'm developing with 3 and looking forward to 3.1

</comment><comment><USER15> Godot has a patreon page, in case you would like to help the project with money: [https://www.patreon.com/godotengine](https://www.patreon.com/godotengine)

</comment><comment><USER16> SimulaVR (a project to bring Linux Desktop to standalone VR headsets) is using Godot for its next version.

You can see our almost-finished Haskell bindings to Godot here: [https://github.com/SimulaVR/godot-haskell](https://github.com/SimulaVR/godot- haskell)

</comment><comment><USER17> Does anyone know if godot can be used as a 3d engine from c# too? Specifically as part of an existing application instead of a game?

<comment><USER18> Godot is not a library. It's more like a development environment. You can use scripts and modules inside Godot (including c#). You can't use it as a library.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Been playing around since 3.0 added a bunch of features that piqued my interest. Very cool tech, the fact that it's open source is just icing.

</comment><comment><USER20> Anyone using it for commercial games? I am really interested to use it for interactive 3D applications in Engineering.

</comment><comment><USER21> I've been waiting for this....</comment>


iOS 8.0.1 released, broken on iPhone 6 models, withdrawn - <AUTHOR> http://sixcolors.com/post/2014/09/ios-801-released/ <comment><USER2> Ouch, I feel for whoever let this slip.

Experiencing some small scale analogs to this is what taught me to really appreciate the sort of simple, manual rigor that I often see from (much) older engineers.

That's not to say that such things weren't done here - who knows. It's more a thought on what I sometimes perceive to be over dependence / confidence in automated testing.

Now...

Is there a term for the sort of "If X was Y then..." conjecture we have dotting this thread?

Here, in relation to Apple it's "If Steve Jobs was alive...". In boxing it was "If Cus D'Amato was alive..."

</comment><comment><USER3> For those who upgraded, no need to do a restore. You can just option-click "Update" and downgrade the OS back to 8.0.0.

Instructions: [https://gist.github.com/locriani/f0f5f4f71a28945c3750](https://gist.github.com/locriani/f0f5f4f71a28945c3750)

<comment> k-mcgrady I'm guessing the fact that they've seriously messed up people's phones means they will have to have a fix for this within hours. If you can I would suggest waiting.

<comment> k-mcgrady ...maybe not. They're promising a fix within 'days' and recommending downgrading [1]

[1] [http://9to5mac.com/2014/09/24/apple-ios-8-downgrade- instruct...](http://9to5mac.com/2014/09/24/apple-ios-8-downgrade- instructions/#more-343468)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is why I never upgrade my phone or OS as soon as possible. I don't think I'm missing anything by waiting.

<comment><USER5> I think a good strategy is to not upgrade unless necessary

<comment><USER6> In today's world of common exploits, sadly that is not good advice. Almost every update contains security patches, making them "necessary".

<comment><USER5> security updates don't always mean upgrading

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have a very conservative rule: No updates for 60 to 120 days. This applies to PC, Mac, phones, tablets, routers, embedded devices, appliances, firmware in general. This has served me well for quite some time. I fully appreciate the time and effort put forth by those who have the time to deal wih the range of inevitable "oh shit's" that almost invariably come with every software release. Not something I have time for or interest in any more.

The only times I have violated this rule was when somthing was already so broken that a new version would still be considered an improvement even with warts.

Just one of those more conservative engineers.

<comment><USER8> 60-120 days? Your equipment will all be fully compromised by then. I can understand not updating for feature/bug fix updates, but for security updates, you should be patching as soon as possible.

<comment><USER7> Did you actually read my entire post? What did I say about breaking this rule?

Also, there's a huge, HUGE, difference between critical well-vetted security updates and a whole host of other updates that have no material value and can potentially cost you a bundle.

I'll give you an even more extreme example: Some of our engineering workstations are still running Vista. Why? Because upgrading to 7 or 8 offers nothing of value and will trigger a few weeks of upgrading major applications and software dependencies. We will finally be forced to make the update this year because Solidwork, Solidworks FEA Simulation, the associated CAM and other software require 7 as a minimum. We are far more likely to build new machines from scratch than to upgrade the existing machines. Part of the reasoning is backup during the transition.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Has this release been pulled? It's not available in the iOS dev center and the one device I tried updating (before seeing this message) has been downloading it forever (well, 45 min so far).

<comment><USER10> The update was pulled.

Problem is, if you were quick on the draw and updated as soon as it came out, there's no ipsw for the iPhone 6/\+ on the dev center. Though the solution is to restore to last known good, LKG is not available through the usual channels.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, made that same discovery. I'm going to guess that Apple ops has a "big red button" to pull a release with problems, and that doesn't discriminate between distribution methods. Unfortunate, but makes sense until they can fully triage the problem.

My heart goes out to those unknown folks at Apple who are now having a really bad day. I doubt we'll get it, but I'd _love_ to read a post-mortem of this event. I suspect it'd be educational, as I have a hard time imagining how an org like Apple could ship a release this obviously broken.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> FYI, this is/was a problem affecting the OTA release for the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus. iOS 8.0.1 was in the dev center, but was pulled along with the OTA release.

</comment><comment><USER12> My phone has been blowing up with my friends and family asking me how to fix their broken phones. It's been a very interesting morning.

<comment><USER13> Your friends and family all have iPhone 6s and updated a point release in the first hour?

<comment><USER14> They all have phones that are:

      Crashing often now (buggy iOS 8)
      Bent (bentghazi)
      Broken because of this

I'm sure there are other reasons, but those three are running rounds. Not hard to believe Apple people are unhappy atm.

<comment><USER15> > Bent (bentghazi)

Thank god we aren't using --gate or --geddon for this one.

<comment><USER16> Bendghazi would be more alliterative though...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> No idea how this patch passed QA Testing internally.

<comment><USER10> Though I've pointed out before that I don't think formal testing is a big part of Apple culture, I'm at a loss to come up with how this passed the most basic smoke testing. Or to flip it around, what random variable wasn't accounted for that allowed the devices in the test matrix to pass? Sure, it seems obvious that Apple just didn't test it. But c'mon, we know that can't be true. They must have loaded on some iPhone 6s. So what's the missing piece?

<comment><USER18> The update works fine if updated via iTunes. Only OTA updates are broken. Maybe they didn't test the OTA update process? It sounds absurd but it's the only viable option in my mind.

<comment><USER19> It's surprising to me that those would even differ in the first place. You'd think that you'd have a single deliverable which is delivered and signed, and the installer does the same thing regardless of where it gets the package. What makes OTA different from iTunes?

<comment><USER18> The iTunes update is the entire OS patched, so it's like a 2GB download. The OTA update is a delta update, which is only 75MB or so.

<comment><USER19> Ah, got it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I think they were under a lot of pressure on the HealthKit front. That was one of their big flagship iOS 8 features, they got all these app developers to integrate it, then iOS 8 shipped and they had a showstopper bug and wouldn't release any apps using HealthKit.

<comment><USER21> iOS 8 is the buggiest pice of Apple release software I've used, maybe, ever. (I've been a Mac user since the late 80's.) It's not just Healthkit.

<comment><USER15> > iOS 8 is the buggiest pice of Apple release software I've used, maybe, ever.

Whenever I see a sentence like this I usually write it off to hyperbole, but my experience with iOS 8 has been similar to yours.

<comment><USER22> I haven't even updated my 5S as I need 5GB on a 16GB device for an OTA update. Is it even worth the update at this point? I really don't care much for HealthKit or any new messaging features.

<comment> k-mcgrady Can you not just plug into iTunes and install it through that? I believe that's how I did it and it didn't need 5GB free then. I think there's a lot more than just messaging and HealthKit. Keyboards are a huge update. Extensions, which are already available in lots of apps, are going to make your device a lot more useful. Most of the big things were for developers so you will see the biggest things in apps, not the OS IMO. Another reason I would update is that it won't take long before a lot of devs drop iOS 7 support. There are tons of new APIs in iOS 8, coupled with the fact that it'll probably hit over 80% install base in a couple of months that it's best for the small devs to just drop older OS support. It happened with iOS 7.

<comment><USER22> No, Entirely possible (Although last time I tried that download times were 48hours+)! I was just wondering if at this point the positives outweighed the reduced battery life, and the apparent bugs. Seemed like it might not have been worth it at this point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Upgraded shortly after it was released and suffered the consequences. Just was able to restore back down to 8.0

I had to turn iMessage off and back on again in order for Apple to re-register my number... until then I was unable to send to any existing contacts.

</comment><comment><USER24> I'm still waiting for them to stabilize wifi on the iPad sith iOS 8. Their quality has really started to slip for me since 10.9 on Mac.

</comment><comment><USER25> Fix for those who already updated: [http://www.imore.com/ios-801-kill-touch- id-and-cell-service-...](http://www.imore.com/ios-801-kill-touch-id-and-cell- service-your-iphone-6-or-iphone-6-plus-heres-how-to-fix)

</comment><comment><USER26> Apple just pulled out the update.

</comment><comment><USER27> I feel that the iPhone 6 and 6+ launch has been an unmitigated disaster. Almost everything about the phone leaked ahead of time. Major shortage of + phones out of the gate. Keynote stream crashed. Website crashed for the first hour of sales. I personally reserved my 6+ to pick up at a store about an hour away, received an email that it would be ready (keep in mind this was 48 hours after the official launch, so some time Saturday night), drove all the way there to meet a 'reservation' line with like 20 people in it. It took 2 hours to get to the front of this line and when I did they informed me that they did not have my phone. Finally received it in the mail on Tuesday. And now this.

What a terrible position to put your customers and retail employees in.

<comment><USER28> Oh, the first world problems!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Will Apple backport these dozens of security fixes for iOS7 exploits, [http://support.apple.com/kb/HT6441](http://support.apple.com/kb/HT6441)?

<comment><USER30> I think the only device that can't update to iOS 8 is the iPhone 4, which is a bit long in the tooth.

I'm guessing Apple isn't going to throw a bone to people who won't update their phones. I doubt they'll help the iPhone 4 users, but that would be nice.

<comment><USER29> Someone should tell iPhone 4 paying customers that it's no longer safe to use the web.

Edit: would this disclosure be the responsibility of Apple or the wireless carrier? Apple may not have contact info for the customer, which would mean carriers worldwide need to notify customers of the risk to their personal data (e.g. financial passwords), as soon as they open a web site or an app that displays network-origin data, e.g. an email with an image.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> If Jobs was here heads would be rolling as we speak.

<comment><USER32> I doubt he would have put out a "bending" phone... how did that make it past the production testing people...

<comment><USER33> Wasn't he alive for the iPhone4 and its flawed antenna?</comment></comment></comment>


Mercedes-Benz manager arrested under Alabama's new immigration law - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/mercedes-benz-manager-from-germany-arrested-under-alabamas-strict-new-immigration-law/2011/11/18/gIQADDmYZN_story.html?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost

<comment><USER2> I don't recall Alabama being a major international hub and they certainly don't need any laws that appear xenophobic. Can't see how this will encourage diversity in a state where residents offered $50k for Jewish families to move in, [http://articles.cnn.com/2008-09-24/us/jews.dothan_1_jewish-f...](http://articles.cnn.com/2008-09-24/us/jews.dothan_1_jewish- families-web-site-larry-blumberg?_s=PM:US).

<comment><AUTHOR> I had never heard about anything like the programme described in that article. That's bizarre.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> He didnt have his drivers license, so they arrested him, an associate went to his hotel and got his passport and he was released.

It's a crappy law, but the headline makes you think it was the part where he hired illegals for his factory or something.</comment>


Facebook now offers Pirate English - <AUTHOR> http://i.imgur.com/kgm3q0m.jpg

<comment><USER2> Hasn't that been available for years?

<comment><USER3> Yup. Regardless of that, why is this newsworthy for HN?</comment></comment>


Zupiter: A Web-Based Modular Synthesizer - <AUTHOR> https://pointersgonewild.com/2019/10/06/zupiter-a-web-based-modular-synthesizer/ <comment><USER2> Really nice for quick things, otherwise there is also VCV Rack ([https://vcvrack.com/](https://vcvrack.com/)) that is a open source virtual rack with modular synthesizers. It doesn't have the graph UI that Zupiter seems to have, but a more of a skeuomorphic UI.

<comment><USER3> VCV rack is pretty awesome, and you can do a lot of things with it that you couldn't with Zupiter. It's much more of a professional tool and as far as I know it's very well-regarded in the modular synth community, and a good way to pick out modules before spending hundreds or even thousands on physical hardware.

However, I think Zupiter is a nice way to get people who've never played with sound synthesis interested, and the sharing feature is one thing that differentiates it from most browser-based music apps out there. You can easily show your friends what you've made, or modify what other people made.

<comment><USER4> > it's very well-regarded in the modular synth community

Maybe. All but one of the modular synth guys I know are hardware purists. They look down on VCV and even semi-modular synths like the Behringer Neutron. You'd think some of these modular guys were in a cult, heh. (I've always just seen modular synths as just another tool.)

<comment><USER3> That does sound pretty cultish. I kind of get how VCV takes some of the fun out of modular for them. There's definitely something fun about playing with physical hardware and connecting it together. It's also a way to do something technical that doesn't involve computers. Another angle is that if VCV rack does a good job at emulation, it kind of highlights the foolishness of spending thousands on hardware. That being said, I might be biased. I actually own a Behringer Neutron :O

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> OP here. Feedback and questions welcome! Feel free to reply to this comment.

I also created a little subreddit to discuss Zupiter: [https://www.reddit.com/r/musictools/](https://www.reddit.com/r/musictools/)

<comment><USER5> It doesn't seem your oscillators are behaving correctly when you vary their frequency input. You seem to be doing something like phase = freq * time, which will break horribly when freq changes. Instead, you need to accumulate the phase over time based on whatever freq happens to be, like phase += freq * timeOfSingleSample.

<comment><USER3> So you think the oscillators should essentially be stateful? That might explain why I can't seem to implement 303-style slide correctly.

<comment><USER6> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerically- controlled_oscilla...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerically- controlled_oscillator)

The more advanced version without aliasing: [http://www.martin- finke.de/blog/articles/audio-plugins-018-p...](http://www.martin- finke.de/blog/articles/audio-plugins-018-polyblep-oscillator/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Love the simple step sequencer with scale selection. Wish this was part of a "creative scratch pad" in every DAW (It usually is possible but it's often cumbersome to set up). I first saw one in the lovely [http://www.tones.fm](http://www.tones.fm)

</comment><comment><USER8> This is great! Another favorite modular synth is the one that comes with Caustic.

<comment><USER9> I second this. Caustic 3 is awesome (and free for desktop use). I'm a bit sad that it hasn't seen any updates recently, since I would love to have it play better with other iOS apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's totally awesome and so easy to use!!

<comment><USER3> Thanks a lot :)

The only thing I find a bit unfortunate is that despite many people trying it (wordpress shows over 5000 hits), very few people are using the share feature to share what they've created. I'll have to investigate what stops people. I'm wondering if it's just having to create an account, or if I've done some major UI design error.

<comment><USER11> I think people are just too afraid too share, as they are effectively doing fun things but... really they then think that it is just crap. We are too much in a society that is telling us that if we made it in less than an hour, it can only be crap. This is one thing the the near futur of the earth must fix ;)

If sharing IS important for you, change you design in the way that it becomes the default option.

<comment><USER3> I myself feel a little embarrassed when I realize how much is missing from Zupiter. There are still bugs, and people are asking for so many extra features, my TODO list is already pages long.

> If sharing IS important for you, change you design in the way that it > becomes the default option.

How would you implement that, making it the default option?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Amazing app!!</comment>


Is Polite Disagreement Becoming Grounds For Removal From A Flight? - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmcquaid/2013/04/07/at-united-airlines-is-polite-disagreement-becoming-grounds-for-removal-from-a-flight/ <comment><USER2> Here's a tip for travelers. Once you go to the airport, you become a prisoner of the system until they "release you" at your final destination. You have no expectation of privacy, security in your person or belongings, and they can and will do ugly things to you if you piss them off. Even if you don't piss them off.

That's why I hate commercial air travel.

I exaggerate, but for a reason. If you have this attitude, you will not be surprised at the random hassles you have to go through. If, however, you expect some kind of "fair deal", you're guaranteed to be disappointed.

So yes, they can remove you from a flight for polite disagreement. They can remove you for just about any reason they choose -- especially once you're in the air.

<comment><USER3> I don't think you're exaggerating at all.

If you do _anything_ that _anyone_ employed by an airline, airport, or relevant Federal agency doesn't like, you're gonna have a bad time. They can and will irritate, inconvenience and humiliate you. Flying in a plane or being in an airport is not a right and they can pretty much do whatever they want to whomever they want.

This is why if it's less than 12-14 hours, I'll just drive.

<comment><USER4> Driving is substantially more dangerous to your physical person than the various infringements upon your rights to privacy and such incurred by dealing with the TSA. While abhorrent, they are generally not physically harmful (unless you're sufficiently attractive to warrant sexual assault at the hands of the TSA piglets).

Furthermore, this assumes that you can burn a day or two to make a meeting a few states over. I'm not sure if you have that sort of time to spare, but I don't.

You could always just remove yourself from the TSA's jurisdiction. They're doing checkpoint stops to search vehicles without probable cause or warrants on the highways now, too. Bonus points for not paying the TSA salaries through contribution to US federal tax income and add-on ticket fees, too.

<comment><USER5> The safety assumption isn't exactly a given. The statistics cited represent passenger miles, not events. The formula is basically (passengers * trip miles)/deaths

Comparing automobile-related fatalities is challenging.

The standard comparisons given do not distinguish between passenger deaths and automobile-related deaths. 15-20% of all auto-related deaths are pedestrians and bicyclists. It also doesn't differentiate between trip types. Is there a difference between 24 hours driving from NYC to Miami via I-95 and 24 hours of driving within NYC? The published statistics do not speak to that.

I would conjecture if you were able to compare the relative dangers of inter- city interstate/freeway driving to a similar flight (including getting to/from the airport), you'd find that the safety gap was far narrower.

<comment><USER6> Also, lots of automobile fatalities are due to intoxicated drivers driving off the road, so if you don't drink and drive your odds get a whole lot better than the quoted statistics. And if I remember correctly, a large percentage of fatalities occur at intersections (especially left turns), so if you drive on highways you avoid those too.

<comment><USER5> The intoxication thing is another real issue with the stats.

Deaths get labeled as "alcohol related" and double counted all of the time. If I'm walking down the street drunk or riding in a cab drunk, that is tallied as an "alcohol related" crash.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The reason these abuses go un-checked is because only the "little people" have to put up with it. Anyone who is anybody flies in their own chartered jet. In the GA terminal there is no TSA in sight and your pilot also acts as a concierge, booking a car service to take you to a restaurant reservation he also made for you while in flight.

<comment><USER8> I don't know where we're drawing the above little people, but didn't Alec Baldwin famously almost get kicked off for playing video games at the wrong time on a public flight?

<comment><USER9> Arnold Schwartzenegger just did an AMA from a plane that stopped because the wifi cuts out at 10k feet, which I presume also places him on a commercial flight.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This _sounds_ outrageous, but one should remain skeptical. Most people, in retrospect, will describe themselves as being "polite" or "calm." "No, I didn't raise my voice at all!" But these sorts of self-reports are prone to all sorts of subjectivity or bias, and I wouldn't simply take them at face value. My "calm and reasoned" could be another's "aggressive and threatening."

Not saying that the stories are necessarily inaccurate, rather, how can we really know for sure without some sort of independent confirmation? I file these under "troubling anecdotes in need of more data."

<comment><USER11> While that's true, you can equally say that the FA saw any objections as acts of aggression and in the cold light of day, the FA's had panicked for no reason.

It's certainly quite believable that FA's would behave this way: their lives are at risk and they have the power to be "cautious" (read: chuck their aggressors off the plain). They also work long hours and tiredness doesn't help with anxiety. Plus there might even be a little of the Stanford Prison Experiment at play here (they have absolute control so are psychological motivated to enforce it).

But even if you're right and those accounts are hugely biased, one question still remains: just how far are you allowed to push a complaint before you're considered a terrorist? Even in the worst case of scenarios, I couldn't see a father of 2 saying anything along the lines of _"I'm going to blow this plane up"_ in front of his own kids when the whole reason for the disagreement was about wanting to shield them from a violent movie. So even with raised voices, why were they considered a threat.

<comment><USER12> > So even with raised voices, why were they considered a threat.

They asked to get near the pilot.. and if you think there aren't parents crazy enough to pull that in front of their kids you probably haven't heard of the westboro baptist church

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "They asked if the captain might be consulted."

Wait, they were in the air, and they want to talk to the captain? The person responsible for everyone's safety? Because they couldn't cover their children's eyes during a few minutes of a PG-13 movie?

By all means, ask the flight attendant if they can do anything. But, when they say no, its time to wait until the flight lands and talk to someone. Asking to see a pilot mid flight is very obnoxious and goes way beyond a polite disagreement.

Obviously they shouldn't have diverted, but when someone is demanding to see the pilot, they have escalated to the point where a miscomunication between crew members can cause problems.

Flight attendant: "Someone back here is demanding to see you". Pilot: "I'm not leaving the cockpit." Pilot to Pilot 2: "Lets divert, this is strange"

Obviously he should have clarified whether it was a threat, but when you are overworked, and you have everyone's safety in mind, it makes sense to be extra safe. That is what they are paid for.

<comment><USER14> "That is what they are paid for."

I have no doubt that he's been given a strong talking to for diverting a plane and costing the airline no small expense on such a ridiculous over-reaction. They're paid to be sensible risk-evaluators and decision-makers, and this one is clearly rubbish at it.

<comment><USER15> This sounds to me like a case of fundamental attribution bias. We have no idea what was going through his head at the time. We're all human, and we all make mistakes sometimes. It's easy to just assume that the pilot is an incompetent decision maker, but it's way more likely that he or she just overreacted (or maybe wasn't given all the data needed to make a good decision)

<comment><USER14> "It's easy to just assume that the pilot is an incompetent decision maker, but it's way more likely that he or she just overreacted"

Overreaction _is_ incompetent decision making.

<comment><USER16> While I agree, and I think the treatment of the passengers in question was idiotic, keep in mind that he did not talk to the passenger in question directly.

He was forwarded the request by a flight attendant or possibly the purser. The purser might have been forwarded part of what he said indirectly as well, from the flight attendant, and both might very well have exaggerated the story in part to explain why they haven't just dealt with it, but are coming to the captain with it.

It's perfectly possible that what the pilot hear from the purser was: "Some passengers are getting irate [he got others to speak up in support] because of the movie choice and has been pestering the flight attendants about it and won't give up. He's getting angry, and wanted to talk to you."

Might still be an overreaction, but a very different scenario than what the passenger claims (whether or not the passengers description is correct).

I'm sure the airline have "had a chat", but I also think they'd rather take the occasional cost of a diversion like this than risk having a captain be too cautious in a situation where there's a genuine risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't think it was a coincidence that this is a United flight.

I generally avoid United because of the older planes and bad service. However, my flight to Ithaca was delayed and I would have been stranded in Detroit, so I rebooked on the redeye on United last Wednesday.

I have never seen such a rude flight crew. It was unreal. Besides just regular rudeness in how they addressed people in order to get them to put their seats forward, put away phones, etc, there was one incident that really takes the cake.

After boarding had started, a woman ran to the restroom in the far rear of the plane. She was in there for several minutes, but this shouldn't have been an issue since she boarded early and people were still in the aisles trying to get bags put away. The plane didn't leave for at least 10 minutes after this.

So a crewmember knocked on the door to the bathroom, and told the woman that she needed to hurry up. She replied that it would just be a moment, and apologized. The crewmember then yelled that she was delaying the plane from departure (obviously a lie, but she couldn't tell from inside the bathroom). So a few seconds later she finally comes out looking embarassed, and the crewmember asked her, very loudly, "What's the matter? Are you sick or something?". The woman looked like she was going to die of embarrassment. She quietly replied that she was 2 months pregnant, and having morning sickness. Then she pushed her way to her seat trying not to make eye contact with anyone.

The other passengers in the rear of the plane with me were looking at each other in amazement. One gentleman said, fairly loudly, "what the fuck".

So now not only will I avoid United because they are a shitty airline, I will refuse to fly on their planes because they are incredible assholes. It is worth a few dollars to fly another airline and not reward United's unbelievably abusive behavior.

<comment><USER18> My one experience with United were two intercontinental flights and I have to say that, except for the bad food on the return flight from the US, it wasn't terribly different from what I'm used to on European and Japanese flights (and if you know Japanese service standards that means something). It might be just a matter of luck after all - or domestic US flights are another story.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Well, when you give pilots the unilateral power to remove someone from a flight and there are 75,000 flights every day there are bound to be some abuses. Not sure this is surprisingly or that it _necessarily_ even indicates that the system isn't working.

<comment><USER20> The pilot is responsible for the safety of everyone on board.

The question is, was the behavior of the passengers a credible threat? My guess is that the TSA & the airline (the pilots employer) have told him to put anyone off if there is even a hint of noncompliance.

One of my favorite "hidden" quotes from the movie Brazil may be applicable: "Suspicion Breeds Confidence"

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> There are many ways you can "politely disagree", and depending on how you do so, the results for _any_ human transaction (regardless of whether it's at the airport) will be drastically different. You need to observe the person you're dealing with before making a move, and see what their perception of their own power is, how they balance emotion with logic, and take a guess as to the most effective form of getting your point across.

Here's a personal story (and sure, it _could_ be an exception): I love martial-arts-weapons. I'm trained with the rope dart, meteor hammer, chain whip, twin hooks, etc. Anyway, I've been trying to learn the butterfly knife/balisong. Since they're illegal in Canada, I bought a practice balisong, which looks like a real knife, but just has a dull blade with holes in it so it can't be sharpened. I completely forgot I had it in my carry-on bag.

Security stopped me, several officers (airport security and police, if I'm not mistaken) gathered around after they closed off the line. I could easily have been polite here, and got myself kicked out or arrested. I could've said, "Sir, I know you're just doing your job, but this is perfectly legal and I have every right to keep it. As you can see, it isn't sharp." I could've gone on to quote my civil liberties, and explain how no one could mistake it for a real knife because it has holes. It'd be hard to argue that this wasn't polite --but really, where would it have gotten me?

Instead, I took deep exaggerated sigh, put my hands over my face and said "I'm so sorry--I completely forgot!" I explained exactly what it was for, and added on, "it's for tricks only". After showing them how to open it and proving it was blunt, I asked for it, and showed them a few tricks. Again, I apologized and explained how I never meant to bring it. A few well-placed smiles later, the security offered to mail it to my home address, and let me pass without any issues.

So once again, being "polite" isn't the whole story. Playing to the people you're dealing with is the key to getting things done.

<comment><USER22> Yep.

In addition to being polite, you have to kiss a little ass.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I have a close friend who is in the cockpit for a major American airline. Although most of the people he flies with are normal, nice folks - he tells me that there are some really bizarre little Napolean complexes in the Captain's seat for some flights. You're better off not knowing that some of these people are in charge of your life sometimes.

This story doesn't so much tell us about all this power they have to kick you off the plane. It should illuminate the craziness of the people to whom that power has been given.

</comment><comment><USER24> This is the first I had heard of this particular story although I am aware similar stories like this exist. This follows on from another story on HN (can't find the HN link) about a UK armed forces member being denied boarding on a Virgin flight because she was wearing her uniform [1]. It seems to me that any form on questioning is now being taken as non-compliance, leaving customers with little choice, - comply or prepare to be inconvenienced when you are denied permission to fly.

Of all the flights I have personally been on the only time there has been a real issue of passenger safety is when the drunk who wont sit down or or demands to get off the plane mid-flight and yet they continue to make alcohol available on flights.

[1][http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290462/What-way- tre...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290462/What-way-treat- heroine-Royal-Navy-girl-fought-Afghanistan-told-cover-uniform-Virgin-flight- case-offended-passengers.html)

<comment><USER25> Doesn't wearing an uniform imply (or could be thought so by other passengers) she was on duty? Being seen as military personnel on duty in a commercial flight doesn't just sound really good, but of course this is mostly due to the general atmosphere of flight fear

<comment><USER26> You didn't read the link, did you? I don't blame you. I freaking hate the Daily Mail too.

> _Armed Forces rules state that a serviceman or woman can wear their uniforms > voluntarily from their 'residence to place of duty, irrespective of whether > they travel by public or private transport, or on foot.'_

EDIT: The article has a nice blurb about the difference between US and UK views of personnel in uniform.

<comment><USER25> No, I didn't read the link for that reason :) I'm from Spain, so I didn't know e rules, but was more thinking about the passenger impressions on the aircraft.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> There's no such thing as "polite disagreement" as far as airlines are concerned these days. If you disagree, you're taken off. That said, there are plenty of legitimate reasons for removing a passenger, and I'm grateful they do remove unruly ones when they need to.

However...

This level of power is why people just keep their head down and get through their lousy flight so they to their destination. Since air-travel, by its very nature, is monopolistic (until I get my damn flying car!) the airlines will do whatever they please until we all stop flying (won't happen) or other airlines gets started by entrepreneurs who're also sick and tired of this nonsense (won't say it can't happen, but highly unlikely).

At least if there were more choices, it would democratize air-travel. Alas, the recent merging of airlines just go to show, they have us at our weakest and will exercise any level of control they want in the name of safety. After all, nothing shows "Safety" like "Silence".

<comment><USER28> "Since air-travel, by its very nature, is monopolistic"

Would you care to name the single entity that has the monopoly in question?

(I do not think that word means what you think it means.)

<comment><USER13> Yeah, airlines have the inverse problem.

They are in a perfectly competitive environment which has driven industry profits extremely low which forces them to do everything as cheaply as possible.

The airline industry is the furthest you can be from a monopoly.

[added] of course there are other industries who are more commodity like real commodities, but air lines are the text book example (literally, not figuratively) for non-monopolistic competition. While the barriers appear high, they really aren't if you have the capital. If the airlines were profitable, almost anyone could get the capital to start one. In fact, upstart airlines appear consistently even though almost none of them make any money.

<comment><USER29> My economics is rusty, but I can think of few industries with higher barriers to entry than airlines.

<comment><USER16> I like Richard Branson's claim (paraphrased) that the way to become a millionaire is to become a billionaire and start an airline.

But that's a bit glib.

It's not actually that bad if your ambitions are not massive scale. There are any number of niche local airlines that have started with a couple of small/old leased planes even relatively recently. There are well established leasing mechanisms, and passenger planes have an extremely long expected lifetime but larger airlines are often under constant pressure to upgrade to bigger and more cost effective planes, and so there's a lot of supply.

In fact, there are websites where you can enquire about quotes for leasing full size passenger planes.

<comment><USER5> That business model for scheduled service is usually built around Federal government subsides to service infrequently visited airports. "Cape Air" is an example such airline that flies to places like Nantucket, MA and Lake Placid, NY. The airports often coincidentally happen to be where prominent congressmen live or have summer homes.

The other variant for that niche airline model is charter flights -- get a few hundred people from a city to go to Jamaica or something.

The delusion that some have that airlines represent "perfect competition" is amusing. It's an industry held up by direct subsidy, indirect subsidy via the Postal Service & military, and other bizarre compromises.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The more "secure" a nation tries to become the more tyrannical it becomes. It seems most people fail to forget that governments are made up of people, who like all their predecessors throughout history, will behave in a very predictable fashion if given power where there is no counter balance to their actions.

<comment><USER31> It's not just tyrannical. Also violent.

The (in my long experience) most common reason given by gun-owning Americans for their need to be gun-owning Americans is that they have to be able to defend themselves against someone breaking into their house and wanting to kill them and their family.

Yet somehow, this is not a scenario that most Europeans feel any need to worry about.

<comment><USER32> It's not a scenario that most Americans feel any need to worry about, either. The home defense crazies are crazy, and in no way representative of Americans, or even of gun owners.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Is there actually any evidence that people get removed from flights more nowadays? With 100s of millions of domestic people-flights a year we're bound to see a small number of absurd events, like airline employees in a bad mood (not uncommon) pushed over the edge by virtually nothing. Of course I'm not defending the ridiculous removals, but I'm trying to put it into perspective.

I flew a lot as a child in the 80s, and every now and then I'd see someone kicked off a flight. It was usually for drunkedness, but my point is the right to remove a passenger at the airline employee's discretion has existed for decades. I know Seinfeld is fiction, but there's a pretty funny episode from 1995 where the pilot kicks seinfeld off a flight because seinfeld had kicked him out of his comedy show earlier that weekend.

</comment><comment><USER34> To answer the question posed by the headline, no.

Certainly there is neither a statute nor a regulation that says that polite disagreement is a general ground for removal from a flight. Millions of people are flying each week, and they may have a variety of opinions, but removing passengers is very rare. A few anecdotes here and there do not change the general statistics that plenty of people are flying. It's okay (as here) to ask a question. Maybe you will not be satisfied with the answer, but the flight can go on with you on board.

<comment><USER35> > It's okay (as here) to ask a question. Maybe you will not be satisfied with > the answer, but the flight can go on with you on board.

The article discusses several incidents where this seems to not be the case. Are you implying these incidents didn't happen?

The problem seems to be that no violation of any rule or statute is necessary for removal, it is entirely arbitrary and devoid of common sense at more than one level.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Recently I was offered a free flight for a weekend trip. I declined, citing the myriad displeasures of flying.

Now, should we initiate a behavior recall? Take the number of McDonalds-level staff in the air (A), multiply by the probable rate of power tripping (B), multiply by the average loss of tickets sold (C). A times B times C = X. If X is less than the cost of some basic decency training, we won't do any. _Which airline do you work for?_ A major one.

</comment><comment><USER37> United Airlines are already on my 'no-fly' list ;-)

</comment><comment><USER38> If Virgin America doesn't fly somewhere, I try not to go there. That's my solution to this problem.

</comment><comment><USER12> United airlines is like a greyhound bus with wings. It attracts all sorts of crazy people who complain if they get kicked out.

</comment><comment><USER39> Wasn't right to throw them off the plane, but what were they hoping to accomplish oversheltering their kids like that?

<comment><USER40> I'm not a parent yet, but if you take the plane out of the situation, is telling your kid "no, that movie's too violent for you, you're 4 years old" now considered "oversheltering"?

<comment><USER39> I thought it said 8 and 10 for some reason. Maybe it was inappropriate for the 4 year old.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Can't even see the page...

</comment><comment><USER42> The Committee for Public Safety says: Yes.

</comment><comment><USER43> _And it should be noted that most frequent flyers have, since 9/11, severely moderated their personalities WHEN ONBOARD THE FLIGHT. I had routinely seen passengers chastising flight attendants and even arguing with them prior to 9/11. After? Pilots and flight attendants have clearly formed a "pact" where the pilots are used (willingly and unwillingly) to "get square" with passengers. As a result passengers have become meek as sheep onboard. And I would anecdotally opine that the ground agents are getting more abuse than before, because of this and other capacity-related issues._

Classic fascism at work here. These thugs think they can get away with anything after 9/11.</comment>