California farmers are planting solar panels as water supplies dry up - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-agriculture-farmlands-solar-power-20190703-story.html <comment><USER2> What I noticed is a lack of mention of installing elevated solar panels so grasses and other plants can grow under the solar panels where the shade reduces the impact of too strong a sunlight exposure.

<comment><USER3> On my own lawn, the shaded areas stay green all summer, the full sun areas turn brown and into dust. I gave up watering the lawn years ago due to endless problems with the sprinklers. (Everything from them simply getting smashed by foot traffic to freeze damage to getting chewed to bits by coyotes.)

<comment><USER4> The idea of using water via a sprinkler system to keep a lawn green is such an alien concept to most people. Maybe California have a water problem for a reason?

<comment><USER5> I'm curious where you live. Are lawns not common?

Even in Ontario, not particularly hot or dry, people water to prevent their lawns from turning brown in August.

<comment><USER4> UK.

Using water during a water crisis so you can have a green patch next to your driveway is the most excessive American thing I've heard today (a worthy winner in such a competitive field)

<comment><USER6> Its eye-opening to see how little understanding of American living conditions are overseas despite the pervasive distribution of American media.

My 'patch' of grass here in Texas is thousands of square feet. The lot my house site on is .33 of an acre, which in metric is 1335 square meters. The house itself is ~3200 sq. feet (306 sq. meters) over 2 stories so the foundation is roughly 1/2 that so you can extrapolate that is a crap-ton of area left for our patch of grass.

This is in no way unusual or extravagant for the suburb I live in and provides lots of enjoyment for our 2 dogs and 6 kids.

<comment><USER7> Because everyone else has it doesn't stop it from being excessive and wasting water. In California we are seeing more and more people switching to drought tolerant landscaping.

<comment><USER6> Our part of Texas has overfilling dams and our particular town has enough excess water that neighboring municipalities are buying our unused rights from us.

Our Texas adapted grass goes dormant half of the year as well so the actual consumption is relatively minimal.

Our water use is fractional of a traditional manicured English garden.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Soil salinity is a serious issue in the central valley of California [1]. Converting more of that land (often currently fallow) to solar is an interesting solution to the problem.

[1] [https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/sa...](https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/salinity/)

<comment><USER9> lack of water isnt a bigger problem?

<comment><USER10> Using ground water for irrigation increases the salinity.

<comment><USER11> Specifically groundwater use with poor drainage leads to salt accumulation over time as the water evaporates and the trace amounts of salt present in the "fresh" water are left behind.

<comment><USER9> why don't they use reverse osmosis? because they move the farm when the soil is contaminated? CA is messed up when it comes to agriculture

<comment><USER12> Reverse osmosis is super expensive.

The central valley accounts for 1% of US farmland by area and 8% of US agriculture by revenue. Whatever they're doing wrong, they're also doing something right.

<comment><USER9> yeah, and they dry up Mexico in the process... thanks democrats

<comment><USER13> California agriculture uses roughly 10¹³ gallons of "applied" water a year [0]. That would cost a bit more than $200 to run RO on.

[0] [https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in- california/](https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/)

<comment><USER9> Because they don't get taxed properly for destroying the environment, it would be a lot worst.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This article made me think of the endless "solar farms" scene from Blade Runner 2049[1]

[1] [https://youtu.be/u9L0pord5jE?t=68](https://youtu.be/u9L0pord5jE?t=68)

<comment><USER15> That scene is quite plausible! People have calculated that we could supply all of Earth's (present) energy needs by covering just 1.2% of the Sahara desert in solar panels [1], and there would be positive side effects on the local climate to boot. Of course, we would never actually get _all_ our energy in one spot, since there are questions of transmission, redundancy, political instability, etc. But it does point toward a future where lots of otherwise- useless desert land (like in SoCal, where the Blade Runner movies take place) is converted into solar farms.

[1]: [https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6406/1019](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6406/1019)

<comment><USER16> I'm going to bet power consumption is like hard drive space, the more you have the more you use.

There is of course some thermodynamic limit to the amount of power we can use before over heating

<comment><USER17> Not at all! For the last few decades, reductions due to efficiency gains has far outpaced increased demand. For example, we nowadays build much more well- isolated homes which reduces the need for electrical heating in colder climates, and air conditioning in hotter ones. I don't think there is any Western country in which the per capita consumption of electricity has grown significantly over the last 20 years.

<comment><USER18> Surely electricity prices have something to do with that, I hope in future energy becomes abundant enough that we can waste it without costing a fortune or destroying the environment. I want my toilet seat warmers and aircon, I want my PC to be as fast as possible and not throttled, I don't want to feel guilty about using a clothes dryer. On the bigger scale imagine what we could do with cheap water desalination and removing dams.

<comment><USER19> The environment is being destroyed right here and right now. Are you willing to risk it being destroyed more because you want toilet seat warmers and a clothes dryer?

Sorry if this makes you feel more guilty.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Non-water consuming income stream, which also rests the land. Minor worries about erosion and soil health, but feels like a net beneficial model overall.

<comment><USER21> Seems like you're trying to give a general assessment on a matter that's quite context specific.

<comment><USER20> Same problem in Australia. Massive groundwater and surface water problems, with a power issue around coal. If we paid farmers to take land out of direct production or to reduced intensity, (income stream) and therefore reduce water consumption (groundwater restored) and rest land (reduced soil erosion) its a big upside.

And thats two economies, California and Australia. You think there are no other places facing tensions around land use, water and farmer income?

<comment><USER22> Unfortunately the Australian government is still in the pocket of the coal companies, so these efforts have to come from private donation and face government pushback. Australia has incredible solar and wind power opportunities that the current government is trying their best to ignore in favor of burning more coal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> concert-gilled I have seen many stories about large solar panel installations but I have not seen very many stories about energy storage systems. Solar energy is dependent on weather, season, and time of day so energy needs to be stored for when there is less to no sunlight. I know Tesla has done several large battery installations but has anyone seen any other stories?

<comment><USER23> [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=renewable+energy+storage](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=renewable+energy+storage)

<comment> concert-gilled I know there are ways to store renewable energy. I am asking about specific energy storage sites being built. Generally speaking, linking to search results is condescending and not an answer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Is there any reason solar installation could not be vertical like a tree with branches and leaves? Is there no angle / arrangement at which efficiency is all the same as a flat set up? Or is it just more expensive to build out that type of infrastructure?

<comment><USER25> More expensive. Do a google image search for "solar trees" and there are plenty of them where space is constrained and aesthetics are a factor.

<comment><USER24> I've seen those, they are interesting but not exactly what I had in mind in terms of form. I envision some sort of square set up at 45 degrees angles for each panel, aimed inward like a funnel, but now I'm thinking it'll probably destroy itself with all that heat generated?

<comment><USER26> Are you thinking about molten sodium power plants that use mirrors?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> awinter-py not sure of the details but heard that the chinese govt is incentivizing rice farmers to install solar aerators and convert the rice paddies to fish ponds

(and this may be as part of a hybrid fish/rice farm with nitrogen exchange)

<comment><USER27> It was probably from that stack exchange answer about China a couple weeks ago, about converting traditional fish ponds that used waste from silk worms? to a method using solar panels.

<comment><USER28> IIRC it was a Quora answer: [https://www.quora.com/How-is-China-able-to- provide-enough-fo...](https://www.quora.com/How-is-China-able-to-provide- enough-food-to-feed-its-population-of-over-1-billion-people-Do-they-import- food-or-are-they-self-sustainable)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The added benefit is that surplus electricity can make desalination practical.

</comment><comment><USER30> Albeit much smaller area, I see this a lot around Rhode Island. They are taking farms and woodlands and turning them into dusty dirt fields with just panels, its a sad state of affairs.

I would love to see laws preventing destruction of woods, or otherwise fertile land, especially when wind power seems to be the way to go around here.

<comment><USER31> I've seen a lot of solar panel installations around Massachusetts highways. It seems they got put up on otherwise unused open areas around the roads, such as clearings between the shoulder and the woods, or the area inside the clover leaf ramps. [1]

[1] [https://firstname.lastname@example.com,-71.3832247,557m/dat...](https://firstname.lastname@example.com,-71.3832247,557m/data=!3m1!1e3)

<comment><USER32> Solar Panels North of lat 42 is like building a dam on a local stream.. it does something, but not worth the cost!

<comment><USER26> I live in the bay area atmospheric river and I still get a ton of juice out of my solar panels. I definitely have down seasons and the local laws with respect to off-grid power are frustrating, but I don't regret it.

You might say, "You have not recouped the cost." This is difficult to measure; my home has power during power outages. We have them regularly around here. What is the price on having uninterrupted power in your home when no one else can deliver it? Surely quite high, by comparison, no?

<comment><USER33> I have always had very reliable electricity just from the grid. The value of additional reliability would be almost neglible for me.

<comment><USER26> Well, I'm glad things have gone your way.

<comment><USER33> Sorry I missed "We have them regularly around here." I kinda thought you were protecting against something that rarely happened for peace of mind.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Only $113B? Half of CA budget and we were like 30B under budget last 2 years. Divert more funding to this. Easily doable

</comment><comment><USER35> this is so much better than nuclear energy, which is very high risk of even competent people making disastrous mistakes like fukushima and chernobyl.

</comment><comment><USER36> So, instead of building a few reservoirs (or just covering the aqueducts!!!), California is going to convert irreplaceable crop land to solar farms that could be put on top of much less scarce / valuable land. (eg: desert in New Mexico, the Salton Sea, etc).

 _facepalm_

<comment><USER26> You have this curious idea that "a few reservoirs" are going to preserve the usability of this land for farming?

You're just wrong. Climate change is going to make certain parts of California much more expensive (in terms of energy and water) to farm. These areas are probably irreparable, not irreplaceable.

P.S., The Salton Sea is not a place we should send humans to work. It's an industrial disaster, not a resource.

<comment><USER36> Climate change will increase the variance of rainfall from season to season. California is projected to have a >15% increase in average precipitation: [https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing- climate...](https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing- climate/precipitation-change)

The increase in variance means more droughts, and more need for reservoirs.

<comment><USER26> Yes, and the maximum precipitation increase will actually decrease the amount of water that land will hold in topsoil, as has been Southern California's condition for some time.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Using Pony for Fintech [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.infoq.com/presentations/pony?utm_source=infoq&utm_medium=videos_homepage&utm_campaign=videos_row1 <comment><USER2> Based on the features presented in the talk, Pony looks like a great language:

      * Actor-model
      * Concurrency-aware type system
      * Zero-copy message queues
      * Work-stealing topology-aware scheduling
      * Fully concurrent GC with no stop the world

Since there's no such thing as a perfect language for all problems, I wonder what's "the catch" with this language - besides the obvious "not enough libraries yet"?

<comment><USER3> I use Pony a bit, and wrote some things here: [https://bluishcoder.co.nz/tags/pony/](https://bluishcoder.co.nz/tags/pony/)

My list of catches would be:

* Reference capabilities take a while to grasp. No more than Rust's borrowing or ATS viewtypes though.

* Garbage collection occurs between behaviour calls only. If you do something in a loop that allocates a lot in a single behaviour then you'll get memory issues.

* There's no blocking calls. You need to structure your code so that actors receive notifications of things occurring instead.

* Behaviours don't return anything as they are asynchronous. This requires using promises or passing callbacks.

That said, once you grasp these it's nice to program in. Fast, readable, and makes concurrent/parallel code easy to write and safe to pass data around. The C FFI is easy to use. You can package Pony code as a library callable from C too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Awesome talk - I'm about halfway through and a bunch of it is going over my head, but the presentation is spot on - the presenter is clear, passionate, not reading directly from his slides, and you can tell that he absolutely knows and is confident in his understanding of the content.

</comment><comment><USER5> I am looking into Pony to compare using it vs. Erlang/LFE/Elixir and even Rust.

Erlang grew out of a need to program telecom switches for Ericsson, but it seems Pony was designed with the various industries the author was involved in - fintech, milsims, video games, and others for 24 years. I like that it has real world roots, and has a proven type system.

I have heard good things about it, and it can run on Android, Raspberry Pi, and other small platforms too.</comment>


Kentucky using 'shocking' boats to show just how bad its Asian carp problem is - <AUTHOR> https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/31/us/asian-carp-kentucky-scn-trnd/index.html <comment><USER2> How do you make sure you affect only the carp and not all fish species?

<comment><USER3> >Stunning fish with electricity is a common practice when it comes to counting the population or tagging them, the department explained. The stunning does not kill the fish, only temporarily shocks them so they can be counted or caught.

You don't. However, you can count them afterwards.</comment></comment>


Pro-Tesla electric car bill advances in NJ Assembly - <AUTHOR> http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/pro-tesla_bill_advances_in_nj_assembly.html

<comment><USER2> The bill hasn't passed yet. It was approved by the Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee but still needs to be voted on by the legislature. According to [http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/06/tesla-resume-sales-new- je...](http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/06/tesla-resume-sales-new-jersey/) :

"The bill will need to pass a few more of New Jersey's legislative processes to become law, but things are looking up for Tesla."

Poor reporting job by TechCrunch ([http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/06/tesla- wins-back-the-right-t...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/06/tesla-wins-back- the-right-to-sell-direct-to-consumers-in-new-jersey/)). They made it seem like the bill was voted into law.

<comment><USER3> Not only has the bill not been brought to the floor, it would need to be approved by both legislative bodies and then signed by the governor. The probability that the dealer lobby will sit idly by and let this pass ... is unlikely.

Regardless, you can buy a Tesla in New York, Pennsylvania, or online. If you go to a Tesla showroom now, you'll see a huge sign that says "pay 0% sales tax", which makes sense if you buy it online. Why would I want to pay 7% more even if I had the option?

All of this is just bullshit, on both sides. The dealers already lost. They lost when buying cars over the internet became a viable option.

<comment><USER4> The pay 0% sales tax is surprising to me. At least in New York whenever you register a vehicle, you pay the sales tax; no matter what state you bought it in. Even if you didn't have to pay the tax to register, my guess is that the NJ law would be written as a sales and use tax; and you would be responsible for it anyway. It wouldn't exactly be hard for the state to figure out who has a Tesla with registration records, but who had neglected to pay the sales tax and slap them with additional fines and penalties.

<comment><USER5> Just paid 8.25% sales tax on a Tesla in NY (Long Island). OUCH. (vs. 0% in NJ!)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This seems like a 'one off' deal. Tesla can come in, zero emissions exception, but conventional competition against the franchised dealer model is still prohibited. This is solely because of embarrassment, but it doesn't right the real wrong.

<comment><USER7> If I remember correctly, a lot of deals Tesla has struck with other states are "one off" deals just for Tesla.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Question for those who understand this, why can the government force a middle man to exist in the first place? It seem to a layman to violate several other rights.

<comment><USER9> Car manufacturers created the franchise system as a way to avoid them having to carry the cost of vehicle inventories and repair facilities across the country. Having done so, the dealerships lobbied the state legislatures to formalize their status in law, so that they couldn't be disintermediated by the manufacturers later.

I believe that the argument in their favor, other than blatant self-interest, was that dealerships provide post-sales warranty service, which would otherwise not be readily available. In some states, IIRC, the statutes are written to say that vehicles can only be sold from a location that also offers warranty service.

<comment><USER10> If Tesla attempts to prevent independent service facilities from providing warranty and service work then be very worried. Laws exist to give consumers the choice for a reason.

With multiple dealers at least you can choose which one to buy from, who has better people, better service, and better pricing. Why people want Tesla only stores is beyond me, one choice means no choice.

<comment><USER11> It's not about wanting only Tesla stores. It's about wanting Tesla stores at all.

If consumers really do value dealers, then dealers will continue to exist. The reason that dealers are scared is that the dealers themselves do not believe that they provide a valued service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > _... would allow a start-up electric car maker, like Tesla, a reasonable > period of time to ramp up operations (or sales volume) before they conform > their business operations to the franchise model, " [president of the New > Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers Jim Appleton] said._

> _" Should there be some kind of time limitations within the bill or are we > setting the stage for a situation where the historic dealership model is > going to be hurt 10, 20 years up the road?" [State Sen. Brian Rumpf > (R-Ocean)] said._

Proof positive that the "captured agency" in regulatory capture[1] is actually the entire government, or at least the entire Republican Party. Government officials don't even try and hide that they're opposed to hurting established industries. The only difference is that in the 21st Century its not a railroad and oil company they're constantly trying to shield from competition.

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

</comment><comment><USER13> Sorry for being a bit off-topic but I'm fascinated by Elon's boldness in claiming that hydrogen fuel-cell tech is a dead end for automakers even though they are doubling down in it's investment.

I would love to be knowledgeable enough to have a reasonable opinion on this topic. Could anybody recommend reading material where I could learn about some of what Elon is doing, what automakers are doing and what the pros vs cons are of both without getting too intimidated by the science behind it?

</comment><comment><USER8> Why can the government force a middle man to exist in the first place, that doesn't seem in line with capitalism at all?

<comment><USER14> Any form of government intervention in the markets is out of line with pure capitalism, e.g. farm subsidies; import taxes; bailouts of the auto and finance industries; medicare; medicaid; social security... one could make an argument for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well.

That's not to say that the above are not reasonable policies for an advanced western economy, just not that they could reasonably be considered purely capitalist.

<comment><USER12> No, there is no "purely capitalist". You confuse "laissez-faire capitalism" with "capitalism". If what you say is true, "laissez-faire" would be a superfluous adjective, like calling it "capitalist capitalism".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can anyone explain to me why Telsa should get an exemption from the law and not other car manufacturers? Seems to me - that everyone should have to play by the same rules. I'm a Tesla fan, and I'm not a fan of car dealers, I just don't understand why Tesla should get an exemption just for them? Nobody seems to want to talk about this....thoughts out there other than: government should support electric cars? Should GM be able to sell the volt direct, but not other cars? Someone please explain!

<comment><USER12> Yes, that is what they're saying: GM be able to sell the volt direct, but not other cars.

Every company would be treated the same ("play by the same rules"). They can all sell zero emission vehicles direct to consumers at a maximum of four locations in NJ.

Why does Tesla get this exemption? Because corruption is only acceptable by the population is everyone is doing it. In this case, NJ is one of only a handful of states that is blatantly protectionist of this established industry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is there data in the wild regarding how much less maintenance a Tesla S needs than a comparable gas-powered luxury sedan? Logically I believe the premise, and I know Tesla has discussed this numerous times over the years, but I haven't come across any comprehensive studies covering this aspect since the S went on sale.

</comment><comment><USER17> Url changed from [http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/06/tesla-wins-back-the- right-t...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/06/tesla-wins-back-the-right-to- sell-direct-to-consumers-in-new-jersey/), which points to [http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/06/tesla-resume-sales-new- je...](http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/06/tesla-resume-sales-new-jersey/), which points to this.

<comment><AUTHOR> The original techcrunch url didnt point to engadget when I submitted it, but thanks to the mod who changed it to the nj.gov url.</comment></comment>


The Battle of Helm's Deep, Part V: Ladders Are Chaos - <AUTHOR> https://acoup.blog/2020/05/28/collections-the-battle-of-helms-deep-part-v-ladders-are-chaos/ <comment><USER2> "The slits are wider facing outward to allow a wider range of firing angles and narrow on the inside to protect the archers." That's exactly the opposite of any castle I've ever seen. That would funnel arrows into the castle. See "Arrowslit" in Wikipedia: "The interior walls behind an arrow loop are often cut away at an oblique angle so that the archer has a wide field of view and field of fire."

<comment><USER3> I think it was typo in the article. It would be physically impossible to have a wide range of firing angles if the interior part was narrow.

<comment><USER4> I had to sketch it, but it looks like the angle of view only depends on the angles of the wall, not where the narrow part is... [https://postimg.cc/ykwFjD62](https://postimg.cc/ykwFjD62)

<comment><USER5> Right, but the problem with having the narrow part on the inside is that any arrow that hits within the "cone" will be "funneled" right into the defender; whereas what you want is for attackers' arrows to hit only if they manage to get just the right place.

The wording is slightly unclear, but I can't imagine anyone this well-versed in medieval warfare wouldn't know that arrow slits would be wider inside than outside.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Instead of starting with the Helm's Deep series, I would recommend starting with the Siege of Gondor series, which was written earlier and is a little easier to follow IMO [https://acoup.blog/2019/05/10/collections-the-siege-of- gondo...](https://acoup.blog/2019/05/10/collections-the-siege-of-gondor/) It's an excellent mix of fiction, history, tactics (operations!), pop culture, and filmography. It's probably one of the best things I've ever read

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes! FWIW, at least one from that series was highly discussed on HN: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21663852](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21663852)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Just watched the LOTR movies again last week and my wife and I complained specifically about how unrealistic, or simply bad, the attack on Helms Deep seemed.

For starters, that this article pops up just days after our discussion blew my mind.

The analysis really brings to light the depth of Tolkien. What could easily be chalked up to a standard large scale mindless action-movie (or book - even if the book is more nuanced) event is actually purposefully showing Sarumans arrogance, as well as ignorance.

Finally, this qoute made me think of a few enterprise software projects I've had to deal with as well:

> This is, I must say, a common mistake of amateurs – to propose extremely > complex battle plans which could win the day on a computer or in an armchair > discussion, but which are so complex that actually implementing them in the > fog of war is nearly impossible.

<comment><USER8> There must be some formal and rigorous way to argue against such crazy complex plans. Because I've seen my share as well, almost universally disastrous.

Perhaps they are optimizing for the "best possible" outcome rather than the "most likely" outcome? And I feel like that could be illustrated with a probability distribution. There would be bulge above "bad" on the horizontal and just the thinnest tail poking rightwards towards "great".

<comment><USER9> If a plan depends on a huge number of things going just the right way, there is a high probability of something going not as desired.

Intelligent officers could find a way around some of deviations from the plan, but they might not, because they lack a complete picture of the battle, because they might be not intelligent enough to devise a creative solution at the time, and because there a limits to the possible.

The more ways plan could go wrong, the more probability it would go wrong. The more deviations from the plan, the less probability than officers will be able to overcome them.

And one more thing: at war there is an enemy who will do anything to make life of your troops more difficult. Disrupting communications, disinformation, unexpected attacs and troops placement... there are a lot of ways, so even there is just one prerequisite for a plan to work, there is a good deal of a probability than it would go wrong.

In HPMoR[1] Yudkowski mocked complex plans, and proposed a rule:

 _> That was when Father had told Draco about the Rule of Three, which was that any plot which required more than three different things to happen would never work in real life.

> Father had further explained that since only a fool would attempt a plot > that was as complicated as possible, the real limit was two._

[1] [http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/24](http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/24)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've really enjoyed this blog -- it's changed the way that I envision the past. I particularly enjoyed the lonely city series of articles where the author emphasizes how pre-modern agricultural economies used land, and that the vast majority of people and activity were tied closely to agriculture.

</comment><comment><USER11> Extremely entertaining. You might expect this kind of write-up to be dry (and it is, to be fair, incredibly long), but the author has a snappy sense of humor and an engaging style

</comment><comment><USER12> Let's start with the most jarring aspect of the movie Helm's Deep scene: the elves! So said Elrond in the Council:

> Never again shall there be any such league of Elves and Men; for Men > multiply and the Firstborn decrease, and the two kindreds are estranged. And > ever since that day the race of Numenor has decayed, and the span of their > years has lessened."

Haldir:

> we dwell now in the heart of the forest, and do not willingly have dealings > with any other folk.

It is indeed perhaps the biggest fault of the otherwise excellent movies. Replacing Glorfindel with Arwen didn't bother me at all, for example.

<comment><USER13> True, and this is emblematic of the changes in the Two Towers that easily made it the worst of the series for me. Though, I can empathize with why some of these changes were made.

The text of the Two Towers as it exists on the page has practically no elves in it. We are shown wanton destruction of the Westfold and the immense suffering in Rohan, yet we must buy they will soon ride to the aid of Gondor. The Battle of Helm's Deep is pitched as an existential fight for Rohan, and to have the Elves sit this one out would likely come across as extremely self- centered to modern audiences. Whatever the Elder Folk may have suffered in the past, they are the most organized and best equipped in Middle Earth. To have them sit out the destruction of Rohan in their literal Ivory towers would probably alienate audiences.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Are there any video games which simulate sieges like the one at Helms Deep - Kind of like Command and Conquer for sieges?

<comment><USER15> I think your best bet would be the Total War series.

[https://youtu.be/QvlSB9_NGTQ?t=521](https://youtu.be/QvlSB9_NGTQ?t=521)

<comment><USER16> Worth mentioning that Bret Devereaux, author of the piece (and blog) under discussion here, has some salt in other articles for the Total War series' effect on his students' perception of how ancient and medieval battles worked. Fun if you're into that sort of thing, but not to be taken overly seriously, is the impression I've gathered.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The series on Sparta here is worth reading.

<comment><USER18> I can second this, the Sparta articles are one of the finest debunking of a pop culture myth that I have ever encountered.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Now I have to watch the trilogy :) I probably know all the dialogues by heart now but still, it will be a good exercise to study the battles rather than just watching them. I always thought that the assault was poorly planned blindly charging the wall, the berserker etc. But I never thought of it as a strategical mistake. Rather I thought it was more about the characteristics of the Uruk. Fearless horde of savages charging without any fear.

</comment><comment><USER20> He buried the lead here. Why title it ladders and not mention them for pages?</comment>


Lifegrid - visualize your lifetime, put things in perspective - <AUTHOR> http://www.lifegrid.co

<comment><USER2> Cool, but I want to share my personal grid, not just the site!

<comment><AUTHOR> Working on some tweaks for sharing. Thanks for checking out!

<comment><AUTHOR> Some updates made - sharing now works.

<comment><USER2> cool, tweeted!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Best New Features in Bootstrap 3.0 - <AUTHOR> http://antjanus.com/blog/web-design-tips/web-design-elements/best-new-features-in-bootstrap-3-0/ <comment><USER2> My god that sidebar on mobile is awful. It takes up 1/3 of the screen.

<comment><AUTHOR> wait, left or right sidebar?

<comment><USER3> I like the left one, but the right side is just giant empty whitespace on a large monitor

<comment><AUTHOR> oy. Okay, I'll see what I can do. Thanks.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Career Change to something without computers - <AUTHOR> I know previously on HN I had read of people who had transitioned out of programming into other work.  I can't find the thread now though.
I am considering doing this.  I have some health issues and I think sitting at a computer too much is leading to it.  I've tried taking breaks from programming in the past and I usually end up missing it so I'm sure I still would continue programming as a hobby, however, I want to look into what other jobs a programmer might be good at that doesn't require sitting at a computer for so long.
Has anyone else switched from programming to another career?  What other types of jobs would be good for a programmer? <comment><USER4> I worked at a building site for a year in a remote place. That was non-profit actually (I also didn't have to spend money for being there) - building a meditation center with friends, but it was great time of my life. I got healthy and had a change to just _think_ of some ideas without rush. I returned to the business with savings somewhat reduced , but with new energy to do stuff.

I think with some courage any physical job will do (edit: the one actually curing not worsening your health problems), because as hackers we learn to not give up and not be distracted by failures. Thus, I'd choose an occupation usually done in a nice healthy environment - like carpentry.

Of course, you will start from a zero level and will earn funny small amount of bucks. But I guess it's not the point (and you will probably don't need much, assuming you don't have a family dependent on you).

I really think physical working is so underrated. It builds your constitution slowly but in a way that cannot be achieved in a gym, because it happens in a natural way, not artificially.

<comment><USER5> > It builds your constitution slowly but in a way that cannot be achieved in a > gym, because it happens in a natural way, not artificially.

That has an appealing ring to it but could you be more specific? What's a concrete physical task that could not be accomplished by a well-rounded exerciser? I'm not talking about Mr Biceps Curl and his good friend Mr Triceps Kickback but someone who does a mix of pulling sleds, carrying sandbags, flipping tires, squatting and deadlifting, snatching and clean & jerking barbells, doing muscle-ups, iron crosses, front and back levers on the bars and rings, and whatever else you might include in a varied exercise regimen.

<comment><USER6> Crossfit much? :)

I think what he's talking about is the subtle differences between working out and having a job where you're always physically moving. It's the difference between "working out" and "having a healthy lifestyle."

<comment><USER5> A bunch of the people I went to school with as a young kid are now carpenters, bricklayers, mechanics, etc. A few are quite fit but that's because they're active outside of work. Most of them have big pot bellies, eat like shit, drink too much and are overall not what you'd call healthy. The idea that having a physically-oriented job where you're working outside much of the time tends to lead to a healthy body and lifestyle is one I'd dispute. If you're some sort of mythic backwoods ascetic who hunts his own food and builds his own dwelling then sure, but that's only a viable path for the most extreme and committed.

<comment><USER4> I'm not telling about mythics, it's a real life. I don't want to make a system of beliefs here; I responded with an example of experience I lived through.

Of course all depends on the people involved, so carefully choose who you work with, what they respect, how they talk about different things, how they relate to the world, do they love what they do or not. This is important in any activity I guess :)

I was working with German carpenters. They are very disciplined. They were not extremely committed, they just knew what they like to do and they did it in a most sane way. I'm sure you have people like that in the US. It's the kind of mentality which founded US, as far as I can imagine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Do the health issues stem from being in front of a computer, or _sitting_ at the computer?

Even if you transition over to a career as a bike messenger[1], the odds are pretty good that an alternative career will require you to spend a significant amount of time sitting, either in conference rooms or in front of a computer.

Although I have yet to take the plunge, I hear nothing but good things from people who have transitioned to standing desks (one example: [http://lifehacker.com/5735528/why-and-how-i-switched-to-a- st...](http://lifehacker.com/5735528/why-and-how-i-switched-to-a-standing- desk)).

[1] I'm sure sitting on a bike is better for you than sitting on a chair, discounting potential concerns like being run over by a car.

<comment><USER8> > I'm sure sitting on a bike is better for you than sitting on a chair

Bike seats are pretty hard on penises, though. Google "penis and bike seats" for a ton of articles (including some interesting specialty bike seats to alleviate the problems).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I will let others give you health advice. Just remember that nobody else will take care of yourself except for you. That said, here are some areas I have seen ex-programmers succeed:

\- Finance - May require another degree but it's an easy transition. The math shouldn't be too hard. It can be in the treasury dept, risk, anything with modeling.

\- Marketing analysis - you would be surprised how much Math is involved in getting a tube of Crest to your cabinet.

\- Teaching - most cs folks know enough math to teach it. Many states are so desperate for math teachers that they don't require an education degree.

In the end, don't worry. Programming is one of the hardest intellectual tasks out there. Other fields will seem easy in comparison.

<comment><USER10> Both Finance and Marketing Analysis will still probably need you to sit at a desk.

Being a teacher would probably be better from a "not-sitting" point of view.

<comment><USER9> True. Very few thinking jobs don't require desk time, and based on the little we've read, thinking is one thing we can infer from the original post.

Some programmers migrate to Sales and other field support jobs, but it's a bigger stretch on skills. Or more precisely - they require certain skills at a high level that aren't as required in programming.

Anything other than superficial "Check out this field" will take more than a couple high level posts. Shoot an email address, and I'm happy to discuss more in depth.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The most obvious advice is to choose from the infinite careers that leverage a technical background: project manager, business analyst, business development, sales, and anything else further in the leadership side of a technology company.

That is actually a natural progression for a lot of people in our field. I, personally, don't want to be a developer when I am 35, and I am already being tasked with more and more of the duties of the roles I mentioned above, and I like it. Have you been tasked with of the duties of other roles that are less development-oriented? Did you like it?

If your sole reason for wanting to switch really is your health issues, find out what professions leverage your previous technical knowledge, and further refine that list depending on which roles will work with your health issues. On a side note, it seems that most professional careers these days require that you sit a computer for long periods of times: lawyers, engineers of all fields, accountants, and finance professionals, etc. So keep that in mind.

Ultimately, you get one body, so make your health your first priority. And you only get one life so make sure you're doing what you want to do. Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER10> I am adding this because it could be something you havent considered but I think you should. Do you love the outdoors?

Essentially tours/activites/travel type of jobs.

1\. Hiking tour guide. 2\. Give Kiteboarding lessons. 3\. Scuba instructor. 4\. Travel Writer who goes to different points of the earth and writes about them. 5\. Gym trainer. 6\. Heli Ski tour operator.

These might seem out there and the pay will be lousy - but I know quite a few kiteboarding instructors and they are some of the fittest and happiest people I have ever known. I'm eventually going to end up like this I think - <USER2> after I try founding a few startups. I recently quit my job to start my own startup. (Still in the cycle of customer development).

They have happiness in their soul except when theres no wind and no waves then they become painful to hang around :). But with respect to their health - <USER3> dont think I've seen a healthier bunch.

</comment><comment><USER12> Re: Health Issues

Assuming they are RSI related:

I highly recommend "Conquering Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Other Repetitive Strain Injuries" by Sharon Butler

<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1572240393>

RSI cannot be cured but it can be managed. For those of you who are fortunate to be able to take keyboard input for granted, please be wary of any soreness or minor pain. Over time, pain and soreness can become chronic. The bright side is dealing with RSI forces you to realize that you cannot take your career for granted; it gives you perspective.

Good luck! Be wary of magic solutions, something may not work for you.

Changing careers is not as black and white as most careers require significant computer work. You cannot escape computers in this modern age. Get the best help that you can, surgery is not a magic cure

<comment><USER13> OP here - my noprocast settings wouldn't have allowed me to post until tomorrow.

I have a little RSI but I have taken steps so that it doesn't bother me anymore (switching to Dvorak layout was probably the best move).

Actually, my health problems are with my skin. When I'm sitting at a computer, my skin seems to get itchy - maybe there isn't enough blood circulating or my posture is too stressful.

A couple other people mentioned standing desks. I tried a make-shift one for a couple days but didn't really like it. I might give it another try though.

<comment><USER14> My assumption is that you haven't consult any doctor yet for your problem. And if i am right, please go ahead and consult any good skin doctor and identify the root cause of your skin itching before thinking of switching the career.

<comment><USER13> I have been to doctors and a lot of them have told me "We don't know the cause" and "There is no cure for it". It leaves me a little disenfranchised at the medical system. But the keyword "good" skin doctor may be what I need to find. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's worrisome you would ask a bunch of strangers what profession you should take up. We don't know you from Moses. We don't know if you like crossword puzzles, make your own maple syrup, or have a lisp. You need to write out a list of what you love to do then explore the possibilities.

For what it's worth, here is what I suggest: switch to a stand up desk for any computing tasks. I cobbled together an ugly ad hoc one and I could never go back.

Also, while you deliberate over what your new profession will be, get a job in retail or sales. The pay will suck but you'll be on your feet and interacting with human beings.

I wish you success!

<comment><USER13> OP here.

I don't see why it's worrisome. This is just one place I am asking for advice. I don't see why people on the Internet assume you will _only_ be asking strangers. This is more of a way to get ideas. If someone says "taxi driver" I'm not going to go out and immediately become a taxi driver.

It's tough to think of jobs that don't require being in front of a computer nowadays. One time we were discussing the olden days of computers and it came up that I asked "What did people do for work before computers?" Then everyone went silent - "Yeah, how did people work before computers?" It's amazing how ubiquitous they have become in such a short time frame.

I've tried the standing desk before for a couple days but didn't really like it. I may try giving it another shot.

<comment><USER16>
      I've tried the standing desk before for a couple days but
      didn't really like it. I may try giving it another shot.

Remember to alternate between sitting and standing. If you can't get a motorized standing desk, get a tall task chair to accompany a stationary standing desk.

Also, get a footrest to use while standing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> How about personal trainer? Definitely get to stay away from the computer and it's a highly technical profession (if you choose to be highly informed about the body and nutrition) so it should still satisfy the engineer/programmer in you.

<comment><USER16> I don't think personal trainers should get into the nutrition business. That's what registered dieticians and certified nutritionists are for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've been thinking about whether photography could ever be my day job; it appeals to the same obsessive/perfectionist traits that coding uses in me. I think you'd have to be wealthy already to pull it off, though..

<comment><USER19> The problem with any "art-related" work is that it's not something practical / useful / necessary for anyone. People need programs, but no one _needs_ photos, most often they _want_ one, but could do perfectly without it. (There are some photos that people will really need done, but that's the worst kind of work, and not really profitable, so I assume you that's not what you want to do.)

If you are someone who makes stuff people want, but don't really need you'll be hit much worse by budget cuts, recessions etc. because your work is one they can do without easily.

I draw (and do some design stuff). I get _some_ money out of this once in a while, but it's not much. I know that I could get more out of it if I tried harder. But that wouldn't mean doing more of what I like doing, I'd have to take work that I enjoy much less than programming. And I'd probably have trouble making ends meet, even if I was successful It'd wouldn't be a very _dependable_ source of income.

<comment><USER18> I think international photojournalism is practical/useful, and sometimes even world-changing if you can get the right shot. Quite the opposite of a computer day job, and probably not the sort of thing you want to try and juggle with having a family..

<comment><USER19> > international photojournalism is practical/useful

True, I was looking for a right word, but couldn't find it.

What I meant was that people and businesses need programmers. For most flavors of 'programmer' the demand is quite stable, and it isn't going away because "the economy is bad!". If you are e.g. a freelance webdeveloper (at least a reasonably good one) you can be sure that in the next year demand for your work will be comparable to this year's.

On the other hand, AFAICT demand for photographs is much more volatile (at least for most kinds of photographs), and I think it's because people find it much easier to do without them than without webpages when they need to cut something. I know it works this way for artwork. I might be wrong, just sayin'.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I retrained to be a Shiatsu therapist (Japanese acupressure massage). It was a three year part time course (here in the UK) and I had every intention of quitting the IT world. Once I had finished the course though, my outlook had changed (partially because of the course - the theory behind Shiatsu is based on theory behind acupuncture and Traditional Chinese Medicine which is somewhat different to the more Western concepts I was brought up with). Anyway, now I do both - I code and I do Shiatsu.

</comment><comment><USER21> Might look into real estate and buying trustee sales at the courthouse steps and reselling for a profit. It usually takes a team of people. You could probably find some initial investors. It needs some computer work, but you'll be mostly running around seeing houses and overseeing rehabs. Money is decent.

</comment><comment><USER22> No idea, but it seems like most jobs these days require sitting in front of a computer all day. Five years ago I might have suggested going the Office Space route and taking up construction work but obviously that's not such a hot idea right now.

<comment><USER23> There was a reddit AMA a while back from a guy who went from programming to being a lumberjack.

I guess that might also be affected by real estate prices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The most common advice you will receive in my place, if this question is asked, is to become a teacher at a High School. Depending on where you are from, this may not be a bad choice.

</comment><comment><USER25> If health is your true concern, then lookinto making yourself a healthier office. Check out spolsky's offices for instance -- much healthier than typical

</comment><comment><USER26> I've been pondering similar ideas, and my sister (Masters in odd textiles- related field) has been searching for jobs recently, so we discussed this. Our ideas:

* Electrician and especially low-voltage electrician. Find someone to take you on first, then get into the apprenticeship program. You get paid while you learn. Low-voltage sounds especially interesting, since it's things like wiring up alarm system, _and_ less risk of electrocuting yourself. Wiring up alarm systems sounds more hacker-ish than any paid programming job I've had. Pretty much all electrician work involves a significant amount of problem solving.

* Welding. In particular, deep sea welding, sounds... interesting. It has potential for a very good salary, though it will involve significant risk management and probably a lot of time spent away from home and family.

* Trucking. It sounds less appealing with modern trucking organizations, but if you like driving, it might be doable. Years ago, I recall reading about a British IT guy that switched to trucking who absolutely loved it.

* Physical trainer. This one is probably great if computer-related physical issues have created a passion for fitness in you. I suspect these careers will be even harder going forward, if the economy continues to drag.

* Accounting, lawyering. These exacerbate the same physical issues. Lawyering is pretty dead now, what with way too many graduates.

* Teaching. You can try to teach English overseas to dabble in it and see if you like it.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, but I've had a few drinks. ;-)

My basic goal with an alternate career is to get exposure to new business opportunities. For example, something seemingly silly like working at a prison might allow you insight into a whole new industry, where you could write niche software and potentially earn a lot of income. Nothing will ever make me stop thinking, "aha! I could solve that with some code..."</comment>


Show HN: Simple Technique to Audit/Replay All SSH Sessions - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/cloudposse/sudosh <comment><AUTHOR> The `sudo` command that ships with most Linux distributions has the native ability to record and replay entire sessions (both interactive and non- interactive). The `sudoreplay` command can replay those sessions (even sessions inside of `vim`).

Using the `sudosh` command as a user's login shell, you can force all sessions to be recorded. This is especially useful for bastion hosts or production systems.</comment>


Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email at State Department Raises Flags - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-at-state-department-raises-flags.html <comment><USER2> It's sad and surprising how often this pattern seems to repeat itself. For another example (that's probably not well-known outside Wisconsin), Scott Walker set up a private server in the Milwaukee County office for his internal communication with staff, likely at least in part to shield himself from scrutiny as his county staff did work for his campaign for the governorship:

\- [http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/court-set-to- rele...](http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/court-set-to-release- emails-documents-tied-to-ex-aide-to-scott-walker-b99208267z1-246128301.html)

\- [http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and- politics/former-...](http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and- politics/former-county-administrator-i-helped-set-up-scott- walker-s/article_c5b51126-ef30-5ca8-a9df-7aa10fcc5981.html)

<comment><USER3> The security implications of the US Secretary of State using an un-secure email seem far more problematic.

We may very well find out that the US security services were complicit in the Clinton arrangement. It would truly be absurd for a modern diplomat to be using insecure communications when things like (war, life, death) etc are the subject of the communiques.

Clearly the entire POTUS/administration infrastructure was sending her e-mails, so it seems to beggar belief that the system was not vetted by the secret service and the NSA.

On the other hand, the internal politics of mid-level burecrats in the state house are on a whole nother level of banality. The record keeping is certainly an issue, but its really an apples and banannas comparison.

<comment><USER2> Certainly, when it happens on the federal level it is of higher significance. It remains to be seen, if after scrutiny, Clinton engaged in official misdeeds by keeping her official communications private, but from the article it appears there are serious questions that need to be answered.

But that doesn't diminish my point. Scott Walker is a front-runner for the presidency, and by any reasonable account intentionally created an alternate IT system to bypass open records laws. Likewise, the Bush administration used a similar system hosted by the RNC ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controve...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy)) for the same purpose. We should demand that all public servants operate in a manner accessible to public scrutiny, not just the party we personally tend to vote against.

<comment><USER3> Let me say I agree that there needs to be standards. Both on security and record retention.

I don't think those are inherently partisan issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't see any way this doesn't look bad-even if she turns over everything and she had nothing but the best reasons for using a personal email account exclusively (doubtful) there'll always be the suspicion that she was holding something back.

<comment><USER5> Just imagine if Clinton commingled public funds with her personal bank account...

When she started using her personal email for official purposes, she waived any claims to privacy over the contents of through that account. They should all be released, public and personal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I haven't seen this mentioned here, but the domain that she apparently used `clintonemail.com` was registered the same day her confirmation hearings started.

This most likely means that whatever she intended to do with it was premeditated. It wasn't like one day, in the middle of the Benghazi debacle, she decided to start using private email to cover her tracks.

<comment><USER7> Someone advised her to do it, for sure. I don't think you have to be so cynical as to believe that she was planning on doing something illegal, she just is smart enough (and I guess unethical) to know that anything that can't be dug up in a public records, FOIA or subpoena can't be used against her, politically or legally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why is this not a bigger deal? She's obviously concealing information from the records, keeping full control of her communications that way. No person so high up would go so far to avoid record keeping without having something very important to hide.

<comment><USER9> Because everyone wants her to be the next president.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why don't they just ask the NSA for a print-out? I bet they have it all on file!

</comment><comment><USER11> Maybe she didn't want the NSA gathering blackmail for the coming election.

<comment><USER12> I can't imagine the NSA not having something worth blackmailing her on by now - or that they could possibly dig up more mud on her than the Republicans are planning to sling anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> While I don't enjoy this fact much, I can't help but vehemently dislike the author's clear bias here.

Stuff like this doesn't just pop out of nowhere. It's very clear this is the start of a campaign against Hillary; heck, they even went so far to talk about how Jeb, the leading GOP candidate, released a "trove" of emails during his 8 years as Governor. What they failed to really dive into, however, is how State reps have been doing this for a while. They mention it in a single sentence and then immediately go onto the next thing.

<comment><USER3> _Stuff like this doesn 't just pop out of nowhere. It's very clear this is the start of a campaign against Hillary_

True, but isn't this Obama's leak? He surely was sending e-mails to his Secretary of state at the @phony adress.

What is disturbing is that both Patreaus and Hillary have been done in by stupid use of e-mail. Two people POTUS dislikes and have (had) clear presidential caliber and ambition.

This is not a good sign for democracy in America.

<comment><USER3> Today,

 _Former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton appears to have operated in violation of what the White House said Tuesday was "very specific guidance" that members of the Obama administration use government e-mail accounts to carry out official business._

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Was it an AOL account?

</comment><comment><USER15> how does an article rife with political bias make it to the front page of hacker news?</comment>


Ask: Free scifi audio books? - <AUTHOR> What free-to-listen scifi audio books do you know of and think are pretty good? Where have you found them? <comment><USER2> Not a specific recommendation, but check out Libby ([https://meet.libbyapp.com](https://meet.libbyapp.com)), you can borrow plenty of audiobooks from your local library for free.

<comment><USER3> I am listening to "The Player of Games" right now with libby, it is great. I have many other books on hold, your free library really has quite a bit available.

+1 for Libby

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Lots of free scifi here: [https://librivox.org/search?primary_key=30&search_category=g...](https://librivox.org/search?primary_key=30&search_category=genre&search_page=1&search_form=get_results)

You can find some really good classics in there. The reading is not always very good, but it's free.

</comment><comment><USER5> You can find Isaac Asimov's Foundation on youtube and I think Nemesis is still up?</comment>


Ask HN: Is the need for SPA only a question of team size? - <AUTHOR> SPA vs Django/Rails is always a hot topic on HN. A lot of people don't like SPA and try to say that Django/Rail is better.
From my experience Django/Rail doesn't scale in term of number of developers working on the frontend.
When you have 3 good developers you don't need a super good architectured front-end and a SPA framework, you can use server rendering but as soon as you start to have 5-6 developers working only the front-end that doesn't work well
I'm interested about your point of view on that <comment><USER2> It also depends on the nature of the app.

The SPA arguments often have two groups on each side.

On one hand there are people building content-heavy sites claiming traditional Django/Rails stuff is perfect.

On the other hand you have people who work on heavy web apps where the user is interacting with the application for many hours. These are more like desktop apps that happen to run in a browser.

To provide a good modern experience for a heavy web app using traditional Django/Rails stuff is basically impossible. People will eventually end up creating a half-SPA half-Django monster.

SPAs used to be harder to do 5 years ago. Now they are still not super easy but easy enough that you can more safely pick a SPA for many apps.

<comment><USER3> "To provide a good modern experience for a heavy web app using traditional Django/Rails stuff is basically impossible", Any links to that? AFAIK Github are still on pjax which is a less fancy version of turbolinks. Basecamp isn't a SPA. I don't think shopify is a SPA. etc etc...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Not really. It's more about the purpose of the site/app.

If your site is mostly content based, then you likely don't need an SPA. That's the ideal use case for a traditional website done with whatever you use (in this case Django/Rails). A wiki, a blog/news site, a business info site, etc... all those are 100% use cases for traditional sites.

You also need to ask how often a user will interact with the app and what they'll do. A forum probably doesn't need to be a SPA, since people won't (for the most part) be auto refreshing the page non stop for hours, they'll be coming back periodically to check for new content.

On the other hand, if your site needs regular updates, users are going to be using it for hours on end, it replicates a desktop program, etc... then that's a good SPA use case.

Team size is more an issue of management and splitting things into components.

</comment><comment><USER5> I am not sure what is your relation between devs and framework. If you have good devs they will know how to work with what they have. Choosing your infrastructure should not be something exclusively driven by the size and skill of your team but mostly by the business's requirements.

</comment><comment><USER6> No. For data-driven apps, it's a question of how your users interact with that data. Do you need an application that allows users to have an interactive view of some data that wouldn't be easily achieved through a traditional CRUD approach? Then consider SPAs. Otherwise, stick to traditional template driven apps.

SPAs significantly multiply the complexity of an application, particularly if you are using unopinionated frontend frameworks, where you suddenly have to make a huge number of design decisions on how your local data is stored and transmitted to your API.

<comment><USER7> This is a very good point and complex data interfaces are often needed sparingly so a web app may be completely OK with SSR except for a couple of highly interactive pages.

Unfortunately I see purely crud apps presented as SPAs for no apparent reason. A recent example is att's consumer facing site — all page loads were happening via Ajax for no apparent reason.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'd hope that SPA choice would be based on the needs of the users, as well as considering the teams skills and cost of maintaining which is likely higher in a SPA.

Other considerations are the types of browser end users might have and if you want to enforce minimum versions. Also there is internet connection speeds and bundle sizes.</comment>


Cure53 Audit of Chinese 'Police App' - <AUTHOR> https://cure53.de/#chinese-police-app <comment><USER2> This is the same app as discussed in [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20335816](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20335816)

That Motherboard article also links to a repository with the APK: [https://github.com/motherboardgithub/bxaq](https://github.com/motherboardgithub/bxaq)

<comment><USER3> If that's the case, it's worth noting (since it's often lost here, on reddit and in the news) that is app is only required at border checkpoints in Xinjiang. Putting Xinjiang on your itinerary would likely result in your visa being refused anyway. If you are traveling to China for business or pleasure, you won't need to worry about this.

Source: Was in Shenzhen within the past month. Normal customs/border control practices. Nobody asked for personal devices. Only surveillance that was obvious was biometric checkpoint at customs, and some sort of face scan (?) at the subway queue.

<comment><USER4> >Putting Xinjiang on your itinerary would likely result in your visa being refused anyway

1\. get a multiple entry visa

2\. say you're going to shanghai or whatever on the application

3\. go to Xinjiang on your second visit

<comment><USER3> Right. There's no enforcement of visa itineraries so long as your first one has valid flights & hotel. After that, you get 10 years of multiple entry with no required itineraries. I just brought it up as a point, that Xinjiang is not a place you would normally be going. People seem to assume that Xinjiang is just a normal crossing into China that has heightened security. That's not the case at all. You would never accidentally end up there on a trip to China.

<comment><USER5> Xinjiang province is 1.6 million km^2. It's larger than France and Germany put together. There are plenty of reasons to want to go there.

<comment><USER2> Most of that area is covered by mountains or desert, and there are only about 22 million people living there. The economy also isn't terribly developed (although IIRC it's the fastest-growing among all Chinese provinces) and it's not exactly popular as a tourist destination.

That doesn't mean there's no reason to ever visit, just that there aren't very many more reasons than for e.g. visiting the neighboring Kazakhstan. Most people crossing the border and getting subjected to the surveillance are probably ethnic Kazakhs living on either side, visiting relatives on the other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Direct link to the report (PDF): [https://cure53.de/analysis- report_bxaq.pdf](https://cure53.de/analysis-report_bxaq.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER7> Uncovered CCP internal document said they oppose "universal values" as a concept established by western civilizations [0][1].

So human rights violations is not a thing in China. Under the current Chinese government's rule, the people do not have rights, unless, of course, when the "rights" are beneficial to the longevity of the CCP.

[0]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document_Number_Nine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document_Number_Nine)

[1]: [https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20130820/c20document/dual/](https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20130820/c20document/dual/)

<comment> cljs-js-eval This is kind of an interesting cultural difference between Europe/America and China. While we talk about universal rights, they talk about universal duties, and this only sometimes converges on the same values.

For example:

Both the West and China believe that old people deserve care in their old age. The West would justify this by saying that the elderly have fundamental human rights, which would be neglected without care. Chinese would justify this by saying that the young have a duty of care to the old.

Both the West and China (at least superficially) believe that rulers should treat their subjects with respect. In the West, this is because each subject has human rights. In China, this is because the ruler has a duty to treat their subjects respectfully.

So I would not make the mistake of thinking that the Chinese are somehow amoral because they do not subscribe to the doctrine of human rights. It must honestly seem to them like a Western concept that clashes with their view of morality (or at least it would if I were in their shoes). But the Chinese government must have a set of duties to their people. I would love to read a document where they outline those, I'm sure it must exist somewhere.

<comment><USER8> The "Duty" vs "Right" thing is ancient. You can see the earliest form of this "duties" concept underpinning the all the abrahamic religions, even in all salvation-oriented religions. You have a duty ultimately to the "godhead", from which all other duties derive.

The concept of universal rights was the refinement of this and only fully emerged during the enlightenment era in Europe. But it was there in a less explicit, more rudimentary form in classical Greece, too.

It's a choice, really. What kind of world do you want to live in? A world where we recognize basic human rights as x-y-z (from which we can determine what duties we have toward each other, for sure) Or a world that we left behind for very good reasons.

<comment><USER9> These are not the only two choices.

For example a Buddhist might argue that the fundamental concept is realizing that there is no difference between the concept of you, and myself, that we are all one thing, and from this determine that one should not inflict suffering on other sentient beings.

<comment><USER8> Uh, covered in salvation-oriented religions. Buddhism is just another one of those.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm going to be downvoted but... Android has access to all my files and is installed on my phone even before I reach the USA. Since the US government seems to have close ties (1) with Google, this makes me a bit nervous as well.

So I'm not sure the chinese are more evil than our occidental countries...

Moreover, it seems that chinese authorities force people to install their software on the phones. But, last time I checked, I was forced to accept the EULA on my phone as soon as I turned it on (Nokia One for the record). I'm sure that I'm just as "forced" to install Android on my phone as I'm forced to install the chinese software : basically I can refuse, but it means that I have to throw the phone away...

Obviously I make a kind of caricature here, but my point is : whatever the way it is installed, the software on your phone is controlled by a powerful entity, controlled maybe by a powerful government which has, like most of them, some blood on its hands. There's nothing wrong with that, that's history; but we don't need to look to far away to see problems with privacy...

[1] [https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it- seems/](https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/)

<comment><USER11> Except, Google is accountable to shareholders and US legal code. The US government has accountability through elections and the judicial system. What accountability does the Chinese government have?

<comment><USER12> A lot of good that accountability did Kim Dotcom, or the brown-skinned people being blown up by drones, or the hundred thousand civilians killed in Iraq after America brought about regime change. Over the past century America has interfered far more in other countries' affairs than China ever has. A cynical way of putting it: China's government oppresses its own people, America's government oppresses everybody but its own people. As someone neither American nor Chinese I feel China's far less likely to come along and bother me when I'm minding my own business than America is.

<comment><USER13> >As someone neither American nor Chinese I feel China's far less likely to come along and bother me when I'm minding my own business than America is.

Well no shit, only one of these two countries has had the capability to project power globally for six decades. To say China hasn't intervened in e.g. Ireland's affairs is to say pretty much nothing about its (un)desirability as a global leader.

Within each country's sphere of influence though, I don't agree with the above statement in any sense though. China is far more active/aggressive (and amoral) in the affairs of its people domestically and in its regional sphere of influence than the US generally is.

<comment><USER12> >China is far more active/aggressive (and amoral) in the affairs of its people domestically and in its regional sphere of influence than the US generally is.

That's the point; it's aggressive in the affairs of _its people_. That being said, I'd disagree that the US generally leaves countries in its sphere of influence alone: the war on drugs for instance resulted in a massive amount of violence and suffering in Mexico, America's southern neighbour. America installed Pinochet in Chile, and also created various other banana republics in South America ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic)). America is one of the only countries in the world to tax its citizens regardless of whether they live, and imposes so much bureaucracy on dealing with them that there are even European banks that refuse to serve US customers: [https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/reaction-to- us...](https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/reaction-to-us-tax-law- european-banks-stop-serving-american-customers-a-803742.html). US intelligence agencies somehow convinced the New Zealand spy agency to illegally wiretap Kim Dotcom (NZ is a close US ally): [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/9569986/Kim-...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/9569986/Kim- Dotcom-NZ-Prime-Minister-apologises-over-unlawful-spy-operation.html). The US embargoed Cuba for decades; China trades peacefully with Taiwan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I don't quite see much difference between Chinese government surveillance and US corporate surveillance at this stage. The power structures are different, but the result is the same.

Google knows everywhere I am and reads all my email.

<comment><USER15> The difference is that Google can't throw you into a camp without trial for what they discover.

<comment><USER14> I'm guessing you're a Googler (or similar) who missed the point. Privacy has value even without the threat of being thrown into a camp, and mass surveillance is a human rights violation even without that. But just to get facts straight:

The US government can and does get data from Google through both instruments like national security letters and subpoenas. If it decides you're in need of prison:

* There may be a trial before one gets thrown into a prison camp. That's true. The Justice System is relatively fair to anyone who can afford to spend $300,000 on lawyers without worrying about the cost. That's the top-1-percenter population. If you're a Googler, you're probably at the lower-end of this.

* For most middle-class families, a criminal prosecution is guaranteed bankruptcy. Whether or not you defend yourself successfully depends on how quickly you run out of money.

* For most lower-class families, the outcome is usually a plea bargain, where you do get thrown into a prison without trial.

Before making comments like yours, you might want to read a book like "The New Jim Crow," and look up statistics on what your own power structures are doing (and specifically, both statistics on the number of people in prison and anecdotes for how they got there).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Well didn't I read somewhere that if I cross the US border I could be forced to allow a search of my electronics? Actually think I only need to be within 100miles of the border and they are allowed to do that in the name of security. My point is who cares that the Chinese are doing this when I can look to my neighbors to the south doing the exact same thing. Well I care but I am not about to look down on the Chinese because they do it too. So much "do as I say not as I do" with the US it's rediculous.

</comment><comment><USER17> >All extracted information is bundled as a ZIP file, without applying any protection like a password. The ZIP file is then sent via an HTTP POST request to [http://192.168.43.1:8080/](http://192.168.43.1:8080/). This shows that not only no transport security (e.g. [https://](https://)) is in place, but also that an internal IP address is used.

Unless they're expecting a MITM from the police network (or wherever they use this app) why is no https a problem?

>BXAQ uses the default icon for Android apps, which means there is no attempt at being covert or discreet about it.

...or maybe they didn't put an icon because it's optional and unnecessary for what essentially is an internal app.

I mean really they are not trying to be unbiased or anything about the analysis.

<comment><USER18> MITM? You don't need to MITM something that isn't even encrypted... anyone with a modicum of technical ability can use WireShark to grab these files if they're transmitted over public Wi-Fi. And probably cellular connections, too.

<comment><USER17> But they aren't transmitted over public wifi. They are transmitted inside of some kind of private network, given that they are transmitted to a server in the 192.168/24 range

<comment><USER2> You can have servers with an IP in that range available on public WiFi, no problem at all. If the network is _not_ public, whoever installs the app still needs to connect to it, so you can intercept any credentials they enter, or even run Wireshark on the device.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: where is the innovation in online conferences? - <AUTHOR> Has anything emerged as the definitive best solution for running online conferences?
What are the contenders?
A really great solution for online conferences seems to be desperately needed but where are they?
Online conferences seem to offer rich opportunity for innovation, but does it really just come down to watching a bunch of zoom videos?  Aren't there better ideas than that, better ways to involve and connect the attendees? <comment><USER2> Laracon online had a livestream video/chat or forum where speakers would join in after to answer questions before covid.

I feel like we should be using second life.

</comment><comment><USER3> Crowdcast was used successfully in Neuromatch conferences, attended by thousands</comment>


Ewww, You Use PHP? [2010] - <AUTHOR> https://blog.mailchimp.com/ewww-you-use-php/ <comment><USER2> > thinking nothing interesting could possibly be done with PHP

Sadly, a lot of incompetent developers email each other articles like this, as fodder for dev team language flamewars. This quoted sentence is likely hyperbole, but they take it seriously and strawman people.

(Naturally, language evaluation is multidimensional. You consider alternatives, foresee tradeoffs, etc. PHP can be right/wrong in your situation.)

I knew programmers (and their CTO) who trotted out such articles to defend the broken PHP framework which they used to run half the business. I'm sure the framework's own authors would be aghast they still used it. The team working on it had near-zero productivity; virtually all spent maintaining the beast. New hires were flabbergasted at how slow the webapp was, which harmed the productivity of most in the company. One maintainer had a private project to incrementally rewrite the shit in another (very popular) language; the CTO indulged him but refused to support it.

(Mercifully, the company got put out of its misery. People might counter that the PHP codebase didn't kill the company. But of course that's not how it works. Incompetence suffuses many such decisions; each of which is just a facet of the same incompetence. And each incompetent decision reinforces the others.)

</comment><comment><USER3> PHP is the duct-tape of programming languages. It might not be pretty but it gets the job done, and getting the job done is all that really matters.

With the exception of JavaScript which is also "wrong" by many puritan developers opinion, PHP is the only language that is welcome to complete novice programmers. All other languages require a lot of setting up.

Furthermore the ease at which I can combine JavaScript with CSS with HTML with PHP is one of the major reasons it ever got so popular. No other language allow me to do that.

<comment><USER4> > PHP is the only language that is welcome to complete novice > programmers. > All other languages require a lot of setting up.

One thing that is often overlooked with PHP is the fact that the deployment process if extremely easy, even for novice programmers. Simply use FTP/SFTP/SCP/whatever to copy over your files to a server, reload your browser, done. It's completely optimised for the scenario where you simply want to create a webpage.

Compare that to something like Python, which is very 'novice-friendly' as well, but needs quite some steps before you have a working website deployed on a server.

<comment><USER5> Really depend on your hosting provider. I use gandi, and deployment is as hard "git push gandi master && ssh login@host 'deploy default.git master'". If you administrate the box yourself, I haven't found setting up, say, Apache with Python particularly hard, assuming you have enough sysadmin knowledge in the first place.

<comment><USER6> > and deployment is as hard "git push gandi master && ssh login@host 'deploy > default.git master'"

That really isn't on the same level as "ftp index.php to shared webhosting provider" for most people and that's exactly the point the parent comment is trying to make.

<comment><USER5> Well, you can do that too. However, how does "ftp index.php" work once you use dependency management?

<comment><USER6> "dependency management" doesn't really come into play with the scenario we are talking about which is:

"It's completely optimised for the scenario where you simply want to create a webpage." [for a novice programmer]

I recommend you read over the parent comment again: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8709025](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8709025)

<comment><USER5> I'll gladly grant you that point: it is easier to deploy a PHP application which solely relies on the standard library. Outside of that, PHP isn't easier than more well thought-out solutions.

<comment><USER3> And for many thats enough and is one of the major reasons PHP is popular.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The article mischaracterizes the criticism agains PHP as boiling down to thinking that nothing interesting can be done with it. In doing so, it fails to respond to what criticism against PHP typically boils down to: PHP sucks.

</comment><comment><USER8> Recently I worked on a PHP project for a month. And heard same "ewwww" reactions from people. And even though I was skeptical about PHP, I must say it was fun. It wasn't the same PHP I used 6 years back. PHP has come a long way since. Frameworks like Symfony (Rails equivalent) is just amazing to work with.

In total, I think people should give PHP another try. It's worth it.

<comment><USER9> Please don't say Symphony is Rails equivalent because t's very misleading and basically not true. There may be some similarities but they're nowhere close.

<comment><USER10> I propose to call Laravel the PHP Rails equivalent, instead of Symphony

(cue the torchs and forks)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A bad developer will produce bad code in whatever language he is using. If asked, I'd tell everyone "stick to your guns". Use, whatever gets the job done most quickly and efficient.

<comment><USER12> A good developer uses the best tools available, because she/he knows the value of using them.

<comment><USER13> No. The value of knowing your system well far exceed the value of supposedly best system (of which is really arguable). Especially if it's a rush job, using tools you know well will drastically reduce time needed, because you already know in and outs of such tools, and is able to identify buggy part quickly.

Also, as we are talking about web development, what is best tools? ASP.NET? Rails? Django? Go? J2EE?

<comment><USER14> JSP is an improvement on PHP, I've heard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Most large companies with well-oiled legacy systems actually are not that bad to work with. I've seen the guts of a large PHP system, and while it was still re-inventing the wheel all over the place, they had still solved all of their problems and had established practices that encouraged stable business. Not interesting, but neither are consolidate businesses to begin with.

PHP will cease to be gross when it's not just the large implementations that are very nicely done. This is not the PHP that exists in the vast seas between these islands. PHP is not something that a rotational employee or someone who is career-conscious will choose or accept for long. They want to work at your company for a while. This can be good. PHP is a career limiter in a way and I think the cringe reaction is a natural tendency to want to open up the conversation to see if what could be a good rotational job is also a toolchain dead end. Career conscious programmers don't want dead ends.

The gripe is and always will be that PHP encourages bad practices because it includes a bunch of "features" that are undeniably prone to bad habits. It's not personal. Really, we don't want companies using PHP well to die. We don't want the programmers using PHP to go away. We want PHP to stay put because better tools are out there, and anything that perpetuates the use of PHP in _new_ products feels gross. It feels especially gross to the career-conscious young ones. Sorry.

</comment><comment><USER16> As a recovering PHP dev (I haven't touched a line in over 2 years) I'm happy I no-longer use it. It's inconsistencies drove me insane and I hate the F'ing dollar sign!

However I seem to have swapped that inconsistent, badly designed language with Javascript.

</comment><comment><USER17> _We've built a framework for developing applications in PHP specifically designed to allow for fast innovation in the high-load, high-performance environment we live in every day while still keeping the API extremely simple to deal with._

Why go with PHP and have to roll your own framework, when you can go with something else, and leverage all the great work that has been done by the Django/Rails/whatever folks? This post tells me all that they have accomplished, which is cool, but doesn't tell the most important thing: why did they choose PHP?

I have to take missions in PHP (Symfony2 and Zend Framework) from time to time, and it really makes me appreciate how much more advanced Rails is. And I don't mean advanced as giving me lots of options for doing obscure things. I mean advanced as doing for me all the repetitive stuff that I would have to do anyway, so that I have much less code to write, much less room to introduce bugs, and I can focus on what really matters. The PHP ecosystem is trying to replicate that, but so far, it's still quite far behind.

<comment><USER18> >Why go with PHP and have to roll your own framework, when you can go with something else, and leverage all the great work that has been done by the Django/Rails/whatever folks?

To be fair, no one _has_ to roll their own framework in PHP, it has frameworks aplenty. I don't know why anyone would do that.

<comment><USER19> I wrote an API at work which was originally written in Laravel because it was fast to prototype in.

I've since replaced it with my own "framework" which is mostly a very thin wrapper for several really good packages (router, DI container, events dispatcher and query builder wrapper).

I'm getting 10x performance out of it than I was with Laravel, and overall it's a very small codebase which is easy to understand and test.

So yes, no one "has to roll their own framework in PHP", but there sure are advantages to do so if you know exactly what you need and how to get there.

<comment><USER10> Do you have a public github repository with that ?

<comment><USER19> The wrapper can be found here [https://github.com/alexbilbie/proton](https://github.com/alexbilbie/proton)

<comment><USER20> It seems to me that a microframework like Silex or Slim would be appropriate as well

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I can't help but notice how virtually every PHP "proponent" is arguing how PHP is "not completely terrible", rather than arguing how PHP is "good". That's rather telling.

<comment><USER18> I don't understand the reason for the quotes around 'proponent', but it's perfectly reasonable to say that, yes, despite its flaws, PHP is adequate for its purpose. There are valid reasons to choose it, and valid reasons not to.

Of course, you could say that about every language, and many do[0].

[0][https://wiki.theory.org/YourLanguageSucks](https://wiki.theory.org/YourLanguageSucks)

<comment><USER21> I put quotes around "proponent" because it applies to pretty much all arguments I've seen in favour of PHP, not just those of people who try to actively 'promote' it. I couldn't find a more accurate word to use there, really, so I settled for quotes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I was lucky enough to meet the guys at Mailchimp a few years ago when my startup was working with them on a project.

It's a great company; super offices, wonderful people and a sustainable, profitable business. If I wasn't in England, I would consider pushing hard to try and become a part of what they're doing.

<comment><USER23> I think that since Mailchimp has grown strong enough to hold a consequent part of the email-sending software market, unsubscribing from newsletters/spam has been a lot more easy than before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I think the key problem is more that PHP is easy for developers to pick up and there is a lot of misinformation, in particular very outdated PHP 'tutorials' out there that have the whole idea quite backwards.

As it's often the first web development language picked up by people, who may not necessarily know what they're doing, it gets a bad reputation. Used correctly, however, it can be just as powerful as any other web development language.

<comment><USER21> > Used correctly, however, it can be just as powerful as any other web > development language.

That's a disputable statement (as I mentioned elsewhere, take long-running processes as an example), and even if it _were_ true, that doesn't make it the correct tool to use. You can hammer in nails with a wrench as well, but you should still probably be using a real hammer.

<comment><USER12> PHP hammer[0] made using the specification[1]

[0][https://secure.flickr.com/photos/raindrift/sets/721576294929...](https://secure.flickr.com/photos/raindrift/sets/72157629492908038) [1][http://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad- design/#a...](http://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/#an- analogy)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> While this is an old article, I agree, and PHP has only gotten better these past years. Not to mention tools like Composer, Laravel and Yii – most popular CMS systems are built in PHP too: Drupal, WordPress, TYPO3. Being an expert PHP programmer opens you up to a lot of possibilities, and while it has some idiosyncrasies, it's not like JavaScript, ASP.NET or Python doesn't have their own share, too.

<comment><USER21> > Not to mention tools like Composer, Laravel and Yii

Virtually every language commonly used for web development (Python, Node.js, Perl, Ruby, Lua, ...) has equivalent or better tools. This is in no way exclusive to PHP.

<comment><USER25> I don't believe he intended to infer that they were at all exclusive. Seems to me that he was just mentioning them as aspects of the language that have improved recently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> the post is from 4 years ago. we put rosseta on a comet meanwhile. Also, php has changed and with the new framework like laravel things look fine.

<comment><USER27> I don't think any PHP was used to put anything on a comet recently.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> PHP has come a long way in the last few years. Just like Javascript, the language has changed dramatically for the better.

</comment><comment><USER29> Not sure of this Ewww, much of the bigger sites like Facebook and Flickr, both use PHP..! This "Ewww..!" AFAIK is beginner coders perspective. Some company's are promoting this kind of things on language because they need different skill set people in the market. As an Architect, it is best to know as much languages as possible.

</comment><comment><USER30> There are 2 types of programming languages, those that people love, and those that people actually use.

<comment><USER31> I both love and use Javascript and Go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I get this all the time, started with C and Java back in university well over 10 years ago, but after doing a few projects with PHP and starting a few personal projects (one of which became rather infamous years later lol) i got hooked

In all this time there has been a huge change in the PHP world

TBH if a "developer" cringes their nose at a very capable tool, just because it is not the latest "cool" thing, It tells me a lot about them.

<comment><USER21> Speaking as somebody who has done PHP for some 8-9 years, I still cringe my nose at it.

See, the thing is, PHP _has_ gotten better. That's not in dispute. The problem is that, even after it "has gotten better", it's still _far_ behind most other options that are commonly in use, and still highly inconsistent and upredictable. It is rather telling in and of itself when you have to use "well, it has gotten better" as a crutch to argue that, _at least_ , it meets a minimum standard of viability.

Frameworks don't _really_ solve this problem. Fundamentally, you're still working with a language that does some really weird things - things that are weird enough to cause near-untraceable bugs and completely unexpected vulnerabilities. You can slap a lot of abstraction onto it, and it _does_ make it less unwieldy, but in the end you're still limited by what the language or platform has to offer you in terms of inherent consistency, predictability, and debuggability.

Just take, for example, PHP's CGI-like nature. Yes, it is _theoretically_ possible to have a long-running process, and it's _theoretically_ possible to implement real-time services with it, but it's going to be a major headache and incredibly hard to maintain. The tools are just not really there. Any solution you come up with will, in the end, be a giant hack.

Don't assume that somebody who cringes at PHP is just somebody who likes jumping on bandwagons. There are very real and rational reasons to dislike PHP, even (especially!) as an experienced PHP developer.

<comment><USER32> PHP doesn't do EVERYTHING but it is good for surprisingly a lot of cases

What happens when you have existing code in Java or python that does something you do not wish to reinvent the wheel with is you simply interface/bridge with from you PHP code.

Right now I have 5 servers running python batch jobs processing some data (for a few months now) which is called by php with results being added to datastore for later access with php

In the past I worked on an asset tracking system where we collected data from RFID readers, whole system was done in PHP with some glue Java and C code for more "to the bone" edge cases

Everything I have done in PHP i could have done in C which I first learned and still use alot of, doesn't mean I want to spend my life wasting it on 90% of cases where a quick php script does the job within reasonable time

I never claimed PHP is "awesome" or whatever you think I did, but it is a very capable language at getting things done fast, especially if you know what you are doing

Yes there are armies of noobs giving PHP a bad name, but instead of turning your nose at them one is better helping them and showing them how to do things better

<comment><USER33> The most dangerous thing about PHP is it's amiable appearance. But it's friendly appearance is like a car without seat belts. "Hey, look, there is nothing restricting your movement inside the cabin.".

The horrid (and unfixable) nature of the language does not become apparent until after you use it for a while. (How long it takes may vary, but you ll hit it eventually, if you keep yourself in good company.). So if you list features of PHP, you might get a list of nice features. But every one of them will be subtly broken when put to real use...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Well this article is over 4 years old, which is positively Paleozoic in language development terms. But I am sure that the discussion here will be equally out of date.

Can we have less of these sort of articles please, it was a waste of my time skimming it.</comment>