List of languages by time of extinction - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_time_of_extinction <comment><USER2> I (sort of) agree that having many languages encourages diversity and coexistence of different cultures. However, I think that apparent drawbacks outweigh any potential benefits.

As a native Russian speaker, I know just how excruciating learning English can get. I have been learning it for 12 years, and most of the time it was no fun. For example, I once literally memorised 1500 words over a few months. Still, I cannot say that I speak as well as native speakers do. Most Russians never make it past learning to say "I don't speak English" with a funny accent. By the way, if you are an English speaker, you probably don't realise what it means not to know English. Let me assure you: it's horrible.

<comment><USER3> I'm a native English speaker who learned Russian. It has to be harder to learn English, though Russian was no picnic.

Though I was once maybe 75% fluent speaking (and could understand 90% of what Gorbachev said - he speaks pretty fast), I haven't used it for 25 years and so have forgotten most of it. I do remember that it was easy to spell, especially compared to English. I also remember that Russian verbs of motion were hard to get right, and declining numbers and certain adjectives correctly was tough.

English has become the new lingua franca (still cracks me up to pause and consider that literally), for better or worse. For all its faults, English is very flexible and can be precise, despite the fact that it's not often used for that feature. Most native speakers I know would be surprised to learn how many verb tenses English there are, and even more surprised at their proper use. The MLA and AP styles haven't helped that cause any.

<comment><USER4> >English has become the new lingua franca (still cracks me up to pause and consider that literally), for better or worse.

On a completely pedantic note, _lingua franca_ doesn't actually refer to what I think most people associate it with (the use of French as the diplomatic language of the 18th and 19th centuries in particular). It actually means the language of the _franj_ , the "Franks," or Western Europeans. The original lingua franca was a pidgin Italian with a lot of Arabic and Turkish loanwords, the result of the Venetian dominance of the Levantine sea trade. Of course, in a purely literal sense, using it in phrases like, "Gulf media Arabic is the lingua franca of the Middle East" is itself wrong.

Tiresome pedantry complete, please carry on.

<comment><USER5> I think 'lingua franca' is never used in a purely literal sense, so probably nobody even thought about what you mention (which is definitely true)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Languages are tools for communication. Online, we have a much larger community to communicate with, so network effects apply for languages as well.

I don't think it's troubling that languages rise and fall, and many die out. Rather, it's the intangible heritage of humanity and particular cultures in danger that should attract our attention. Language is an element of this, but more important is the substance of their stories, their oral and written traditions, their values, and their way of live. We should work on preserving this heritage possibly at the expense of their language, if that's our only viable method.

(disclaimer: previously posted by me here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904129#11904318](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904129#11904318))

<comment><USER3> The biggest problems with this are 1) that some things are untranslatable, and 2) the substance of the stories is best communicated with the words originally used. Translation takes something away every time. Although some translations become classics in their own right, such things are very rare.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Sustenance is done by utility.

The organic evolution of languages at the word level is determined by word choice, and every time we utter anything, by exercising choice we're contributing to the sustenance of the expressions we just used.

It's the same at the language level. I could choose to speak English or Japanese, but I can never speak both simultaneously at any moment. Choice is mandatory.

People choosing to speak English is the force that corresponds to the greater sustenance of English, or any language X.

From experience, I know that I do not prefer English at home or with family. So I will speak Japanese until I die. And I see this often. Most bilingual families speak non-English at home (privately), but speak English outside of home (publicly). This works extremely well, and we have no problem speaking multiple languages as long as there are enough natural and practical use cases throughout our lives.

But had I been born speaking only one language, then this choice does not exist. And since languages are really hard, unless you're immersed in language usage, transferring a language in its entirety through plain education is impossible. That's why languages die off with their communities and their cultures, and last just a while longer academically until the last speaking person dies. Or, in the case of second and third generation immigrants, they don't bring the culture with them, so family usage doesn't entail everything that language entails. You can't suddenly speak Japanese in a professional setting if all you've done is speak it with mom. So this limits usage, and is the beginning of the end. With less usage, there is less sustenance.

<comment><USER3> Both my parents spoke their grandparents' native languages at home (Swedish and Plattdeutsch) when they were very young, but stopped when their grandparents' generation passed. They passed on very little of that to me, so by third generation it seems to die out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sooner or later we will end up with only one language on Earth - it's very likely I think. (if we survive long enough)

<comment><USER9> Not a chance. For any globalisation / unification force there is an equal and opposite force pulling towards autonomy / authenticity / diversity. Language is a very core component of human identity.

<comment><USER10> thats why it's best to have both. one de facto universal language, and people can still maintain their local language.

that way everyone in the world only has to learn two languages and people dont have to waste their time learning 3-6 languages

<comment><USER11> Who does that? Most people learn only their own language. A substantial number learn one other language, generally English. My own experience (bi-lingual Brit living in Norway working with people from 17 different countries) suggests that a very small proportion go beyond that. I'm excluding those who have a smattering of another language such as most Brits like me who had to take French and Latin at school but never got beyond being able to ask for a beer in a bar. Some of my Polish colleagues can get by in Russian as well as English but not many of those under 30.

<comment><USER10> anecdotally I know several europeans where they know at least their language + english + at least one of (french, german, spanish, italian)

brasilians I know typically know english and portuguese and they dont want to admit it but usually they know spanish. they just prefer brasilian or english.

overall if we just all agreed on english as the universal language (imperfect as it is) then it would save so many smart people so much time from needing to learn and translate between so many languages.

just from an efficiency perspective alone, humanity would see a major benefit, I believe.

<comment><USER12> > overall if we just all agreed on english as the universal language > (imperfect as it is) then it would save so many smart people so much time > from needing to learn and translate between so many languages.

> just from an efficiency perspective alone, humanity would see a major > benefit, I believe.

I'm always surprised to see people accustomed to the world of computers say this kind of things. We know computer languages have different strengths, and we're often advised to learn some languages, not for the professional impact, but for the abstractions they teach.

In this context, I can't explain how people miss the fact that learning multiple languages is an enriching experience. And it is not only an abstract theory, considering the loan words every language has.

It is not only a matter of opening your thought framework, but also a matter of what ressource you have access to : the english language as we know it is very recent, and as a consequence, most of the world's intellectual output has been written in foreign languages. A world that switches to a single language as fast as we do is inevitably burning bridges with most of its knowledge.

Don't try to save smart people from diversifying their views, it's a bad idea.

<comment><USER2> I would like to point out that learning a computer language usually takes between a week and a month, while learning a natural one takes about a decade. I agree that knowing a natural language broadens the mind to some extent, but spending so much time to get such little reward seems a bit wasteful.

<comment><USER13> Exactly, that's why engineered auxiliary languages have always seemed like such a great idea to me (like esperanto or Novial). But, none of the offerings ever appealed to a critical mass of people. And, if I understand the history correctly, not-invented-here syndrome caused most moderate successes to splinter when people decided they could come up with something better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Funny to see that 'Latin' is not in the list. Sure there are plant names with names in 'latin' but not the same Latin as the Romans used. Does anyone actually converse in Latin outside of the classroom?

Until the Industrial Revolution came along most people identified themselves as from the town or county where they lived rather than a given nation. People rarely travelled further than the next village and language was extremely regional. Same in France, until Napoleon came along France had hundreds of languages/dialects rather than an identifiable 'French' that everyone knew. In the UK, before television, it really was not that easy to be understood in places like Liverpool if you were from a place like Bristol - accents were too different to make that easy in everyday conversation even if written words were the same everywhere. The railways were the start of this process of making English universally understood amongst the English, before that there really wasn't much need to bother to read unless you were a book-reading academic type.

I am pleased that English is lingua-franca(!) for planet earth when it comes to computer stuff, science and little things like air traffic control. English may not be 'strongly typed Esperanto' but it does not have to be. It is considered courtesy to try and speak in native languages for Brits abroad, however, beyond 'please and thankyou' I think it is much better to stick to English and, in the process, help others that want to learn English. Just speak s-l-o-w-l-y and remember that something like 90% of communication is body language when face-to-face.

I do a fair amount of translation in the day job, and, amongst the foreign- language speakers that I pester for words 'n' phrases, I frequently find people preferring English as they can express so much more in it than their native tongue. As far as my Italian friends are concerned, Italian might as well be FORTRAN or COBOL, i.e. not as good. Consequently I look forward to a world that speaks English, that English being British English, of course!!!

<comment><USER15> I have had many a conversation with non-native English speakers on this topic and one theme that crops up often is the idea that it is easier to think "advanced" thoughts in English than in their native language.

But digging a little deeper, I think what is really happening is that these people learned "advanced" topics from English-language textbooks, papers, seminars, etc. and so they only have English vocabulary, phraseology, idioms and context for that topic.

<comment><USER16> > I have had many a conversation with non-native English speakers on this > topic and one theme that crops up often is the idea that it is easier to > think "advanced" thoughts in English than in their native language.

I personally find it much easier to develop "advanced" thoughts in German than in English, since for example in German building compound words is a very natural thing while in English it is rather clumsy. The same holds for nominalization of verbs.

Compare it with using a programming language that allows one to express complicated concepts in a very logical way (say, higher-order functions in Haskell). So when I try to write my thoughts down (say, for a scientific text) I find it much more clumsy to express them in English than in German, since I often feel that English lacks features that would make expressing them a lot more easy.

<comment><USER17> your last sentence would definitely look better if expressed in German:)

<comment><USER16> In German my sentences are sometimes even more interlaced. :-)

<comment><USER17> I don't doubt that! Memories of pluskvamerfekt are still haunting me at night. A beautiful language. Rather structured.

<comment><USER16> > Memories of pluskvamerfekt are still haunting me at night.

Plusquamperfekt in German is about the same as past perfect in English in the way it is formed and used (OK, in German it depends on the verb whether Perfekt and Plusquamperfekt are formed using "haben" or "sein" \- this is ugly, accepted). So I don't really understand why you feel haunted by the Plusquamperfekt.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Save languages near extinction by building a machine translation model for them?

<comment><USER19> For purely historical interest, a simple dictionary and grammar might be more useful than an inaccurate machine translation.</comment></comment>


Yandex Mail - <AUTHOR> http://mail.yandex.com/ <comment><USER2> Actually you laugh, but being spied on by someone with no jurisdiction over you is better than being spied on by someone who can name you an enemy combatant because they misunderstand your e-mails that contain a plot synopsis for a book you're working on or that can label you a child pornographer because you have naked photos of your grandkids playing in your yard.

<comment><USER3> So that's happened when, in American history?

<comment><USER4> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5825087](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5825087)

<comment><USER3> Pretty sure that's not America.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I actually think Yandex is a good alternative. Assume that all countries have similar projects like PRISM. Which one would you rather have: your country spying on you or a foreign country?

If your country is spying on you, it can use the data it gathers against you in a court, etc. If it's a foreign country, what could they possibly do?

<comment><USER3> Technically, the FISA law being used by the NSA to capture phone records doesn't generate evidence that is easily used in court. If you're not a legitimate foreign target, you can suppress evidence that originates from FISA, and the NSA is obligated to destroy evidence it inadvertently collects on citizens.

<comment><USER6> In theory. In practice, they spy on you for a week, and _then_ obtain a warrant because they have "probable cause", taken from all the spying.

<comment><USER3> Is that how it happens in practice? Interesting. Where can I read more about how data from FISA warrants are used to build probable cause for domestic criminal cases?

<comment><USER7> [http://uncrunched.com/2013/06/11/connecting-the-prism- dots-m...](http://uncrunched.com/2013/06/11/connecting-the-prism-dots-my-new- theory)

See links to primary sources, including David Kravets:

[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/05/spy-court- stats/](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/05/spy-court-stats/)

<comment><USER3> I read the Kravets piece at your recommendation only to find that there was no mention in it of anyone using data obtained through FISA to build domestic criminal cases of any sort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> KGB is much better than NSA: they simply don't have money for data processing on that scale.

Yandex Mail is a great competitor to gmail, some things even work better -- you've got a separate list of thread's attachments, ability to unsubscribe from whole spam categories in one click, SMS (maybe only in russia) and so on

<comment><USER8> That's a dangerous assumption to make, many world governments may have purchased intelligence from the NSA and now they'll have to re-allocate funds for locally-sourced intelligence.

<comment><USER9> Outsource your domestic spying to the NSA cloud!

EDIT: How do we do it? By saving money on counter-intelligence! it's a win- win!

<comment><USER10> Only until patio11 convince them to increase the monthly price 10-fold.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm russian. I've left Russia for good because of weather and politics. Now I'm laughing out loud.

All jokes aside it's interesting to observe politics and technology interplay. But I'm not too excited I have to take part in some of the events.

<comment><USER12> What about the low taxes you would have had there?

<comment><USER13> For that low taxes you get: 1\. Awful state clinics 2\. Corrupt police 3\. Poor public infrastructure 4\. Irresponsible government So, you have to pay separately for security, for medicine etc.

<comment><USER12> 1\. Many countries with good care are on the verge of bankruptcy.

2\. Sad to hear.

3\. From what I gather, the corruption in the construction industry extremely bad there.

4\. Are they really worse than any other country? Starting off of the base of the previous regime, there's obviously going to be a lot of work to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Didn't east germany have warehouses of piles of paper of records of everyone spying on each other?

It bothers me as a progressive that many liberals don't see how we are a hop, skip and jump away from that mentality.

From birth to death there is going to be a record of your child's phone calls, friends, dates, etc. It will never be deleted.

<comment><USER15> Aye, and we're still at it deciphering shreddered papers :)

[http://www.goethe.de/ges/pok/ddg/en2491168.htm](http://www.goethe.de/ges/pok/ddg/en2491168.htm)

<comment><USER14> This quote from that article gives me chills because it's what they are saying now:

 _Erich Mielke 's mania for information: the long-time head of the Stasi, Mielke believed that "you have to know everything in order to be completely safe"_

<comment><USER15> That's a really good quote in the light of the NSA drama.. i still don't understand how people can defend this..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> In case you hadn't heard, the KGB no longer exists. They've been replaced by the FSB and SVR.

<comment><USER17> The FSB is still colloquially referred to as the KGB.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> So is this post just an excuse to make snarky comments or is there a point you're trying to make?

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm sure the FSB and SVR are only looking at the metadata.

</comment><comment><USER19> If you are that worried about FSB spying on you, make sure you are not running a Kaspersky product: [http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/ff_kaspersky/all/](http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/ff_kaspersky/all/)

But in all seriousness... it seems to be a rather unfortunate reality of using FREE email service, that the actual level of privacy afforded to you is minimal. Russia has a very stringent set of anti-extremism laws that curb free speech big time. If your content is labeled extremist, it has to be taken down by an ISP via a swift court order. Note that the "court" is either a single judge or a small panel of judges making the decision. Under that set of laws.

The hosted paid services like Google Apps is another matter all together. There the privacy expectation should be extremely high... but who knows if that's really true.

<comment><USER20> If you are that worried about NSA spying on you, make sure you are not running Windows.

Because, you know, routine software updates is just what the doctor ordered for on-demand installation of backdoors.

<comment><USER21> I know very little about how Linux works internally, and I use proprietary video card drivers in Ubuntu. Given Linux's internal handling of driver binaries, how much damage would these be able to cause if they contained malicious code?

<comment><USER22> Quite a bit - not total kernel access, given the GPL symbol table export restrictions, but at least as much as a process running as root in user space.

That said, it's quite likely that such malicious behavior would be detected by somebody.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Wasn't the KGB dissolved in 1991?

<comment> workhere-io Yes - it was superseded by FSB: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Security_Service_(Russi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Security_Service_\(Russia\))

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I imagine the NSA will still find a way to read your mail.

Remember how Google complained loudly about Chinese hackers breaking into a few Chinese dissidents' gmail accounts?

How pedestrian of them. The NSA is apparently far more efficient at that game.

</comment><comment><USER25> Slightly off-topic, but how do people here think Yandex search stacks up against Google? I mostly use DuckDuckGo at this point, but I like to have several alternatives and Google is not going to be one of them anymore.

<comment><USER26> It's pretty ok. It definitely crawls a different part of the web than G and DDG, so that's always refreshing.

I used to like it because it still had a lean, plain HTML no-frills interface, but I see they've added some JS interactivity to it (not much, though).

I thought they had an English version, but I can't find the link :) So all I'm seeing is Russian, which I cannot read.

<comment><USER27> > I thought they had an English version, but I can't find the link :)

[http://www.yandex.com/](http://www.yandex.com/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> At least they still have an RSS reader. It seems more like a valid replacement for most Google Reader alternatives that have passed around here before.

</comment><comment><USER29> I don't think this would be a crazy thing to do.

Russia doesn't drone 'suspected' terrorists based on their meta data.

<comment><USER30> Is this a really subtle joke...? The FSB will very definitely kill you: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Anna_Politkovs...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Anna_Politkovskaya)

<comment><USER31> Somehow that is better. It gets people who are involved in it to get their hands bloody. That is necessary when taking lives. It should be damaging to ones psyche and it should be difficult and stressful to kill. It should not be a push of a button. Go blow up kids herding goats all day, then pick up your own kids for soccer practice in Langley at night, that's what we are up to now.

<comment><USER32> I agree

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> "Trust KGB to read your mail ([http://www.russianpost.ru/](http://www.russianpost.ru/)) "

<comment><USER34> Nah, you're more likely to never receive your snail mail due to incompetence of the goddamn service.

These are not photoshopped:

[http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_01.jpg](http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_01.jpg)

[http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_02.jpg](http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_02.jpg)

[http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_03.jpg](http://cdn.trinixy.ru/pics5/20121123/mail_03.jpg)

<comment><USER35> What's the problem? This is in Russia where it gets REALLY cold in winter and never thaws for several months. Or did you think that they would haul the parcels into a heated building for sorting? Nope. As any Canadian knows, that kind of snow falls off as soon as you shake the parcel and the paper (at freezing temperatures) is so slick that it is as if it was lubricated. Most of that snow will fall off from the vibration of the ride inside the sorting building. And the recipients will never know that it happened.

Plus, it is a Russian tradition to wrap things in plastic before putting them in the parcel postal boxes.

<comment><USER34> > What's the problem?

The problem is that processing centers are overloaded. As a result, more and more boxes and parcels pile up. Sometimes it gets even more ridiculous, like recently in Moscow, when some boxes caught fire.

Besides, the whole processing system is so ineffective, that you could send a box from China to Far Eastern Russia (relatively small distance), which would first land to be processed in Moscow (great distance) and then be sent back to Far East.

Also, there is a queueing problem in the goddamn post offices, I won't even get started on that, it is so infuriating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> We're going from "companies launching social networks so they can get your data to do better advertising" to "governments launching social web services so they can get your data do better 'threat monitoring'"

</comment><comment><USER37> In Soviet Russia, your mail reads the KGB.

<comment><USER38> Reddit in-jokes will get you downvoted here, just a heads up.

<comment><USER9> It's a Slashdot in-joke, actually.

<comment><USER18> It's actually a Yakov Smirnoff joke, but either way it doesn't really advance the conversation very much.

<comment><USER39> Yup, the original was:

"In America, you can always find a party.

In Soviet Russia, Party always finds you!"

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Smirnoff#Russian_reversa...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Smirnoff#Russian_reversal)

<comment><USER40> I have always thought it was all his pun on: "Under capitalism, a man exploits a man. Under socialism, it's the other way around!" But I may have been mistaken.

<comment><USER39> That's a real possibility, as that Russian (or Polish, depending on who you ask) joke had been making the rounds for almost 30 years when Smirnoff moved to the US in 1977.

[http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/unde...](http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/under_capitalism_man_exploits_man_under_communism_it_is_the_other_way_aroun/)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Best web host for a startup? - <AUTHOR>

What do you think? <comment><USER2> Take a look at [http://uberspace.de](http://uberspace.de) !</comment>


The World's Highest-Paid YouTube Stars - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/maddieberg/2015/10/14/the-worlds-highest-paid-youtube-stars-2015/ <comment><USER2> It's not clear in the article but do they earn their money from Youtube ads or by featuring specific products in their videos ?</comment>


LastPass Disclosure Shows Why We Can't Have Nice Things - <AUTHOR> http://throwingfire.com/lastpass-disclosure-shows-why-we-cant-have-nice-things/ <comment><USER2> This is to be expected when you have ignorant people reporting on things that they are not willing to educate themselves about. Anyone who wrote sensational garbage about the LastPass event didn't bother to understand how LastPass works and what the real potential of any breach could be.

Frankly, it leaves me exhausted in the same way the regular stream of sensational ignorant responses to violent video games, boobs in video games, or explicit lyrics in music leave me exhausted. It's extremely difficult to fight an ignorant public being exploited by a willfully ignorant and sensationalistic media.

The likes of Tech Crunch et al who should be in a position to counter such mainstream media reactions and behavior are all too often, unfortunately, jumping right into the fray and showing that they can be just as counter- productive as any big old-media outlets.

<comment> wh-uws Exactly that. I really want to do an HN post asking people to curb all of the sensationalist headlines (especially if you haven't fully researched the situation).

I just feel like it will get lost in the noise though

<comment><USER3> At least headlines on HN are frequently edited to make them true.

That was always one of the things that drove me batshit crazy about slashdot -- nominally it has editors, but they let straight up flame-bait submissions go through.

<comment><USER2> Slashdot's discussion of the Lastpass situation was titled _LastPass Password Service Hacked_ and linked to an article at Kaspersky where their title said _LastPass Probably Breached_.

 _sigh_

<comment><USER4> I use lastpass and 1password. FWIW, I the guys at AgileBits did a pretty reasonable job of not gaming lastpass's bad day. They did a blog post about a relevant detail of their own security, which really seems like a reasonable thing to do on a day like that.

[http://blog.agile.ws/2011/05/defending-against-crackers- pean...](http://blog.agile.ws/2011/05/defending-against-crackers-peanut- butter-keeps-dogs-friendly-too/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is the only sane post I've read about this incident. All the major tech sites blew it way out of proportion. LastPass did everything right, and yet every headline was along the lines of "LastPass has been hacked, panic!".

They deserve better, especially seeing as how transparent they were about the whole situation and how they handled it.

<comment><USER6> Actually, I think that LastPass overreacted. Seeing the possibility of a breach, and alerting customers is definitely the right thing. But they went so far as to lock customers out of their own data -- it was two full days before my wife was able to get into our bank account.

<comment><USER7> Was that their failing or yours?

I'd tend to look at these types of services as a convenience, nothing more. If you allow yourself to become reliant on them for access to your personal data, like banking, etc., then I'd say that you put too much faith/trust in them. Shit happens, all the time, despite the best intentions of people working hard to make sure it doesn't.

<comment><USER8> > I'd tend to look at these types of services as a convenience, nothing more.

How do you go about keeping all of your usernames and passwords secure, then?

<comment><USER7> Call me crazy, but I use my memory. I also use RSA fobs for the important/big stuff.

<comment><USER8> Your memory must be much better than mine. Recommended procedure is to use a different and secure password for every site you care about, right? That's three bank accounts, several work-related accounts, a couple of social media sites, etc. I'd have to remember at least 20 difficult passwords on a daily basis.

<comment><USER7> Maybe it is... who knows.

It's a hell of a lot easier to do if you don't make it about straight random memorization though.

I have a little memory association I do with every site I need an account/pass for, based on various characters out of books I've read.

Every site has a character I've associated with it, to make it easier to remember, and I have a simple (to me) algorithm I use to generate the password that includes various capitalization and special characters.

Sure, it might take a bit of work early on to remember stuff, but if you learn how to memorize things effectively, it makes it much easier.

Mind you, I also know all my CC numbers, passport number, drivers license, etc., as well, so maybe I'm just weird.

<comment><USER8> Maybe not weird, but definitely better than me. I remember my driver's license, my phone number, my girlfriend's, and my parents'. That's about it.

The mnemonic is a good idea. I've thought about doing that - but then I fear that I'd forget the mnemonic :)

<comment><USER9> I have to look at my phone every time someone asks me for my phone number. I don't know if this means that my brain is dying or that I don't bother remembering information that I can easily look up...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This reminds me of the recent story of an Applebee's (an American chain restaurant) employee that accidentally served alcohol to a toddler. All the commentary I read on the story said that the employee should be fired. But as long as it was an honest mistake, that's a terrible idea. No employee will ever be as careful with drinks as that guy will now. You shouldn't ask for experience when looking for employees and then fire them for getting it.

You have to be careful though because sometimes a mistake like that is not an honest mistake, but carelessness. To bring it back to the topic at hand, LastPass (possibly) made an honest mistake somewhere. Sony is careless. Fire Sony, run to LastPass because now they will be even more paranoid.

</comment><comment><USER11> Wait a second. I mean it's nice and all that LastPass was being overly cautious. But how reassuring is it that they noticed an anomaly but weren't able to figure out what it was?

And this is a serious question, as I'm no expert in the field, but it seemed strange to me that they couldn't explain what actually happened with any certainty.

<comment><USER12> Here is an attempt to answer your serious question.

When was the last time that you "could have sworn" that you left your keys on the desk, but they're on the counter instead. Suppose that happened; it almost certainly means you just misremembered where you left your keys, but there is a TINY chance that someone might have stolen the keys, copied them, and put them back in the wrong place.

Just to be 100% certain, you immediately call a locksmith, and get your locks changed. And all the neighbors start talking about how poor you are at security for having allowed a burglar into your house.

THAT would be a reasonable analogy for what LastPass did.

<comment><USER11> Yes, I didn't need an analogy. I wanted to know why, in a secure house which presumably had cameras and sign in sheets, why couldn't they review the video tapes to see if someone had actually taken the keys or not. (to extend your analogy)

<comment><USER13> And they do - and the cameras and sign sheets didn't explain the mysterious key movement. So they're replacing the locks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Don't know if there would have been a way for LastPass to disclose this information without getting the response they did, but in addition to the stupid the coverage they got, they pulled me in as a customer after seeing _how_ goot they were at what they did. So I think there were good fallout from the coverage as well.

<comment><USER15> Agreed - I recently started using LastPass based on various recommendations around the web. Knowing they are paying this much attention to things increases my confidence rather than decreasing it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I love this reaction. Signing up for an account with them now after seeing how seriously they monitor security.

</comment><comment><USER17> Does LastPass know my passwords? If so, why it needs to know my passwords?

I thought that my passwords are encrypted on my computer with master password known only to me, but same master password leaves my computer every time I log in to LastPass site via their website.

Could someone point me to where it is detailed how they manage without knowing my password or where it is explained why they need to know it?

<comment><USER18> Nope they don't know your password, they just have the salted hash.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hopefully people using the service and those interested in it will read past sensationalist articles, and actually check out the service.

<comment><AUTHOR> The sad thing is that most people who were previously unfamiliar with LastPass probably won't dare to try it out now. That's the kind of press LastPass just didn't deserve.

<comment><USER20> Actually I've decided to give LastPass a shot DUE to how well they've handled this, and knowing that they will probably have a sufficiently paranoid response to situations in the future, as well as knowing they have an excellent hash algorithm in place.

Unfortunately you are right for the overwhelming majority of users who will see "LastPass Hacked!" then note "Don't use LastPass".

<comment><USER21> They are good at what they do. But they might become more careful about disclosing the problems next time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> mike-cardwell I hope that LastPass realised that they would receive this negative publicity by handling this event so publicly, and that they went ahead and did it anyway. That would show great integrity. If something similar happens again and they sweep it under the carpet to avoid a repeat of this bad publicity, then they're the same as every other company.

</comment><comment><USER22> It would be interesting to see statistics on how much the negative press actually affected LastPass. It seems likely that the sort of people who would use LastPass is also the sort of people capable of deciding for themselves how safe their data are.

</comment><comment><USER23> I agree on the overall subject but I'm still shocked that LastPass hasn't got anything better than "spike in the traffic" IDS, better logging etc? If you are in a business with this kind of data you have to expect to get hacked everyday and you have to be ready for it. Even your business plan should include this stuff.

Unless they have a really awkward reason not having proper idea about possible hack is not a good sign.

</comment><comment><USER24> A security breach is never OK. Disclosure helps but does not absolve anyone. We cannot accept that these things just happen.

Besides, it's a _password manager_. Of course it's going to be held to a higher standard of security. It failed at the one and only thing it is supposed to do.

</comment><comment><USER25> The explanation given (slight chance others may have accessed encrypted password data) and the action taken (locking user accounts) don't go together and led to the media frenzy.</comment>


Nissan LEAF Wins European Car of the Year - <AUTHOR> http://earthandindustry.com/2010/11/nissan-leaf-wins-european-car-of-the-year/

<comment><USER2> Sold out in the U.S. before they even went on sale? Damn.</comment>


Ask HN: Any recommended books on how to use Twitter? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Deep Work by Calvin Newport

<comment><AUTHOR> I have read his book, I agree with him on a lot of things. But , his life scenario isn't everyone's. Some have to use social media to get visibility.

<comment><USER2> I agree but the premise of my comment was to take a deep hard look at reasons to use Twitter and then use it judiciously and with a purpose. Something similar to keep some time aside for just Twitter.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> For real?</comment>


Do I have enough experience to be hired as a remote software developer? - <AUTHOR>

Do you think I have enough experience to be hired as a remote developer for a company? I'm just tired of driving into work everyday AND trying to do grad school. I don't see myself continuing to do what I did last semester. I live in Texas and I own a car, but I'd really like to just sell it and ride my bike to campus.
I got my bachelors degree in physics and I started a Computer Science minor, but I never finished the minor.
Every job that I've had since graduating from college has been as some sort of developer role.
-Most of my experience has been in programming with Java.
-I like to use JUnit and Mockito for testing.I've used RestEasy before to make a few apis.
-Even after using it a few times, I'm still not completely sure how Spring works or why IOC is useful.
-My front end skills suck. If you need someone to write any type of css or complicated javascript app I can get something done...but it will be bad.
-I'm using BuildHive as the CI server for a personal project that I have on Github.
-I know how to use git. For more advanced things like cherry picking and rebasing I've started playing around with source tree.
So...what would I need to do to be hired as a mid level dev remotely? <comment><USER2> Self confidence, for one. Don't focus on negatives; sell your strengths.</comment>


Twitter Shows You What Other People's Streams Look Like (ex: Dick Costolo) - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/#!/dickc/following

<comment><USER2> It took me 10 seconds to figure it ;) Yes indeed.</comment>


Do computers have a constitutional right to free speech? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/opinion/free-speech-for-computers.html <comment><USER2> I think the author is placing too much emphasis on the moral/ethical interpretation of free speech, and not enough on the legal implications, which are the only ones that really matter here. That concluding statement, that we are elevating machines above humans by "allowing" them free speech, seems to be intended to incite fears of some sort of AI robots demanding rights and liberties. In fact, the only reason questions of free speech for machines arise (at least until the singularity) is for reasons like the one in the Google case, in which it made perfect sense to classify the search results as free speech.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is like asking if your telephone has freedom of speech. Or your sign. Or your printing press. Or your corporation.

These are tools belonging to and used by people who have rights. A new tool is covered by those same rights.

</comment><comment><USER4> Rebuttal: [http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/were-not-censoring-you- just-y...](http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/were-not-censoring-you-just-your- computer/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Since nobody is arguing that the computer is a person (yet), the answer is no. The computer does not have a right to free speech.

Obviously the corporation is responsible for the acts or speeches of its tools. The question is, to what extent does a corporation have a right to free speech?

Lots of laws, lawyers and judges have and will continue to have words about that.

<comment><USER6> _Obviously the corporation is responsible for the acts or speeches of its tools. The question is, to what extent does a corporation have a right to free speech?_

Is it? Or is the _programmer_ responsible for the speeches of the computer, and hence does the computer's right to free speech extend from the unquestionable free speech rights of its programmer rather than the more questionable free speech rights of the company?

<comment><USER7> > of its programmer rather than the more questionable free speech rights of > the company?

How does a group of people (a "company") have fewer free speech rights than an individual? Is it that the people who make up companies have fewer free speech rights than other people?

<comment><USER8> Groups tend to have fewer free speech rights than individuals. A person can usually shout whatever he wants from a street corner; 100 people will probably need a permit and relatively few people see this as problematic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> First prove that a computer is capable of 'free speech' and forming opinions. And if, in the very unlikely case that a computer could form an opinion even slightly related to the human world, then the issue may become relevant.

However, it is extremely likely that a computer will never genuinely form its own opinion about human issues such as birth control or racism.

But what about animals? Just because we lack the ability to understand their communication (computers 'trick us' because they appear to communicate in human dialect) doesn't mean they aren't harbouring controversial or illegal views - should animals be condemned for theft and tax evasion?

<comment><USER6> _> First prove that a computer is capable of 'free speech' and forming opinions_

Alright, let's try some plausible examples with present-day technology. Let's suppose I think people who use prostitutes are filthy perverts. I can say "People who use prostitutes are filthy perverts" with no fear. On the other hand, if I accuse a particular individual of being a filthy pervert, I may be liable for slander. Suppose I set up a computer outside a brothel using face- identification technology to determine who is going in and out of the brothel, and then program my computer to automatically publish a list of pronouncements: "Phil is a filthy pervert, James is a filthy pervert", and so on. Are those my slanderous opinions, or those of the computer?

Similarly I can imagine all _sorts_ of fun you could have with a computer programmed to automatically look through all available data for the correlation between race and IQ, identify whatever the lowest-IQ race may be, and then start sending racist letters to the editor of every major newspaper, saying "Man, _[RACE P]_ is so stupid".

A computer may not have opinions, _but_ potentially objectionable speech can be algorithmically generated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> No. People do.

Neeext!</comment>


Taking on Big Telecom: A Trip to the CRTC's UBB Hearings - <AUTHOR> http://torontoist.com/2011/07/mark_coatsworth_at_the_crtc_public_hearings_on_ubb.php

<comment><AUTHOR> Lesson learned: the public can (and must) stop big telecom putting Canada in a digital ghetto.</comment>


Why Your Startup Shouldn't Build A Mobile App Yet - <AUTHOR> http://nickoneill.com/startup-shouldnt-mobile-app-2012-01/

<comment><USER2> Thanks for the article. I launched a web app first, no regrets, many people access the web app on their mobiles.

An extra tip could be: Design the web app to be usable on mobile devices, i.e. no scrolling, no flashy things, nothing super small, etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> Not to mention web apps are easier to monetize. Mobile apps are high hassle, little value. Web apps - Less hassle for more value.</comment>


Ask HN: Sublime Text setup for web dev? - <AUTHOR> What packages do you use? <comment><USER2> My favourite package is Emmet [1].

1: [https://emmet.io/](https://emmet.io/)</comment>


Design mistakes that cost me tens of thousands of dollars - <AUTHOR> http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2012/10/3-critical-design-mistakes-that-cost-me-tens-of-thousands-of-dollars/

<comment><USER2> What was the reasoning for including pagination in the layout? I understand how that would work for news articles (more pages == more ads) but for a catalog I don't see the positives.</comment>


Ask HN: Does the newest Financial Regulation bill hurt startups? - <AUTHOR>

Independent programmers and consultants dodged a bullet last week when the "Tax Extenders" bill fell to a filibuster by only two votes.  It contained a 15% tax increase on S corporations that many consultants use.
But now we have a new version of the Financial Regulation bill out of the conference committee.  This week with the death of Senator Byrd (D-VA) and doubts from Senators Collins (R-ME), Snowe (R-ME), and Brown (R-MA!) this bill may go down to a similarly narrow filibuster with 41 or 42 senators against it.
The previous versions of the Financial Regulation bill included six month waiting periods to raise angel funds, multiplied disclosure requirements, authorization for duplicate and burdensome state re-regulation on top of federal regulations, increased minimum income limits for angels and venture capital investors, and other stabs at startups.
News outlets are still deciphering the new bill so I haven't seen much about the new version.  Does it still try to stymie startups? <comment><USER2> It would be foolish to assume otherwise.</comment>


Comeback: Why the US Sits at the Brink of a New Boom - <AUTHOR> http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/06/comeback-why-the-us-sits-at-th-1.html

<comment><USER2> Gasland economy here we come!</comment>


More housing near the Expo Line and other California transit stations - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-transit-bill-20180104-story.html <comment><USER2> It feels like every time I hear something about Wiener, he's doing stuff that needs to get done. I'm tempted to send him some money even though I'm not in his district.

<comment><USER3> do it!

the good people need money to keep up!

I just started political donations this year!

Any amount, however small, helps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> An interesting feature of this bill, and SB35 before, is that it makes operations of local bus agencies far more relevant. As written, I could build a 55-foot-tall building without parking on my land in Oakland. But if AC Transit moves the bus stop a little bit, cancels my local bus line, or increases the headway above 15 minutes, then I'm right back to 25 feet with two car parking minimum.

Edit: actually 85 feet under this proposed bill.

</comment><comment><USER5> > Koretz said the bill would lead to an increase in new home building that > would snarl traffic and go against what his constituents want in their > neighborhoods.

> Better ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would be eliminating > gasoline-powered cars and even gas stations in the city over time, he said.

Statements like this drive me crazy. While EVs can help in reduction of greenhouse gas, it will not do as much as allowing people to move less on a daily basis.

Regardless of the source, moving less stuff (only yourself vs. yourself and a car) and doing it for a shorter distance will result in the use of less energy which leads to fewer emissions of greenhouse gases.

<comment><USER6> I suspect there is a mutual understanding with his constituents that his job is to prevent big new development projects. It explains to me the half-assed talking point, since almost anything is more palatable than 'the wealth of my constituents depends on restricted housing'.

<comment><USER7> I hate to always be siding with NIMBYs but it's not always about wealthy people's wealth. Can't it also be about families simply not wanting to be stacked and packed into dense urban sardine can housing? As amazing as it sounds, some people like suburban life and not everyone wants their neighborhood to transform into a big city.

<comment><USER8> Sustaining that charmed suburban life in booming metros requires making everyone _else_ mega-commute or stay underemployed in more stagnant areas. People who have already "made it" are not the only ones whose well-being matters. A mid-rise next door is not going to hurt you anything like a 2-hour commute or turning down a dream job hurts someone else.

<comment><USER7> When you choose to move somewhere, you're not just moving into an isolated square on the map. You're moving into a lifestyle and a neighborhood with attributes you desire. Those desirable attributes can include "no mid-rise apartments next door".

Apartments springing up next door hurt, if one of the primary reasons you move somewhere is that there are no apartments next door.

<comment><USER9> Lots of things hurt. It's not the government's job to make all of those things illegal.

<comment><USER7> Where I live, the government's job is to support the will of the people electing them, within constitutional limits.

<comment><USER10> The government's job is to balance the will of the people with the rights of minorities.

If 51% of people voted to outlaw single family houses would that be acceptable? Of course not. People should be able to build the type of housing that they want to on their own property.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If you support these bills, please call your California State Assemblymember and State Senator and ask them to vote yes. This is probably going to lead to a really big fight and these will need lots of support.

You can find them here: [https://sankarravi.github.io/yimbyscorecard](https://sankarravi.github.io/yimbyscorecard)

<comment><USER12> I think YIMBY related issues are one of those issues where directly contacting your rep. does the most good. It's a locally decided issue that can reap huge benefits. So go call your rep!

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Nice. I didn't like the part where it said "allowing single family homes near transit". Moves like this are about allowing _more_ things, not taking away any options. Anyone with a house near transit is allowed to continue living there. It's just that, when confronted with new economic options, many of their neighbors will sell their houses, which will be torn down and redeveloped. But you can stay in your house as long as you want.

<comment><USER14> It meant "allowing single family zoning near transit".

<comment><USER13> Thanks, that's better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Whats to stop municipalities that don't want to play along from simply cutting public transit? I wouldn't put this past Marin or Atherton.

<comment><USER16> I'm reminded that Atherton has a Caltrain stop that trains only stop at on weekends.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> My one worry about this is that it will intensify opposition to new transit projects and transit improvements. Otherwise, great job Senator Wiener. Please call your Assembly member and State Senator and support. Find them here:

[https://whoaremyrepresentatives.org/](https://whoaremyrepresentatives.org/)

<comment><USER18> In that case the opponents have to be explicit in why they fight against any kind of dense transit-near development, which would be an improvement over the current situation where in my opinion many opponents are not honest about why they oppose it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> What's in the actual bill?

<comment><USER20> SB 827 upzones for apartments half a mile around every major transit stop [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB827)

SB 828 would double the amount of zoning capacity that each city is required to provide in the Housing Element report (currently each city must provide zoning capacity for only 100% of estimated RHNA population growth; this would increase it to 200%) and carry over approval deficits (currently if a city does not approve any housing, the deficit is forgiven every 8 years and the city can reuse the unbuilt parcels in the next Housing Element report). [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB828)

SB 829 would allow farmers to build farmworker housing [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB829)

All of these bills have just been announced by Senator Wiener ([https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/california-needs-a- housing-...](https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/california-needs-a-housing- first-agenda-my-2018-housing-package-1b6fe95e41da)) and may be watered down, heavily amended, or dropped over the next year.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> LA slowly transforms into an actual city.

</comment><comment> oh-kumudo About time. Good move.

</comment><comment><USER22> This is well-intentioned, but I predict will very often result in development of superificially attractive high-density housing with inadequate parking near transit lines with inadequate capacity and existing connected services.

Development limits and parking requirements are often abused, to be sure, but they _do_ have real purposes, and the mere presence of a transit station doesn't eliminate the development externalities they legitimately exist to address.

<comment><USER4> This bill is saying that cities can't take state money to build transit and then sabotage it with sparse housing and cars. Cars in the vicinity of transit unquestionably reduce the utility of transit projects.

This is also a big middle finger to Berkeley which for decades has refused to put residential zoning around its incredibly expensive subway stations. Berkeley's BART parking lots are zoned "unclassified" and can't be developed without a giant NIMBY hissy fit. This bill short-circuits the hissy fit and allows BART to build 85-foot apartment buildings without parking at Ashby and N. Berkeley stations. This will provide way, way more riders for BART than a handful of parking spaces provide.

<comment><USER8> 822 parking spaces at N. Berkeley. Are they really going to build "way more" housing units?

Not that many people live in reasonable walking distance of the suburban commuter stations; building on the parking won't really change that. I would love it, though, if we could radically upzone the whole area for a mile around.

Walking for half an hour to work is great. Walking for half an hour just to get to your train is no way to live.

<comment><USER23> Look at the map. Six city blocks at North Berkeley and 2-3 at Ashby. You could easily put 2000+ new units there if you get past the NIMBYs. Most other stations in the East Bay already have all adjacent lots spoken for with (relatively) high density development (Lafayette and Orinda being the notable, also NIMBY driven exceptions).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Overall, this seems like a good policy to me.

However, I'm not sure I like the means used to achieve it. Do we really want to set a precedent where the state government comes in and overrides local regulations about things like zoning which are usually purely the responsibility of the local governments?

I'm not necessarily saying I don't like this either... just thinking through the implications of living in a federal system. You want people to have maximum voice in the things that affect the places where they live, but you also don't want those people to abuse the privilege with NIMBY policies.

<comment><USER3> > "Do we really want to set a precedent where the state government comes in > and overrides local regulations about things like zoning which are usually > purely the responsibility of the local governments?"

Yes, yes we do. Local control of land use is the reason we are in this mess. Local control of land use is the reason why our neighborhoods are still de facto segregated by race even though de jure segregation ended 50 years ago. Local control constricts the policy influencers to a circle that is too small, because it exlcudes from the discourse people who: 1) work in the locale in question, but cannot afford to live there, 2) people who commute through the locale in question, 3) people who live in a community that is not in the locale, but is impacted by the locale's land use decisions (ex: brisbane building 8m square feet of office and expecting SF to build housing for the workers).

<comment><USER25> _" Yes, yes we do. Local control of land use is the reason we are in this mess."_

No, no we don't. I don't usually side with conservatives, but this is comically bad policy. It's a state power-grab for supply side controls -- planned economy thinking -- justified by Adam Smith rhetoric, because some folks in San Francisco have decided that they know what's wrong with the local planning of every other city in the state.

It's especially irritating, because the transit corridors that this legislation targets -- BART, Caltrain, etc. -- _suck_ , and the sheer vacuum of their suckage probably has more to do with local housing density than any particular zoning rule. I cracked up at your Brisbane example...people choose not to live in Brisbane because _it 's inconvenient to everywhere_, not because Brisbane has zoning restrictions. You could let developers build skyscrapers right next to the single Caltrain station (you know...the one _next to the city dump?_ ), and they still won't do it, because the _demand_ doesn't exist. People aren't clamoring to live in Brisbane, and office parks are probably the only thing that sells.

Make it quick and painless to commute to Brisbane (or any other city) by something other than car, and you won't have to tell the local lawmakers how to set their rules. The flow of money will do it for you. This is just silly grandstanding, not practical legislation.

<comment><USER18> > ... It's a state power-grab for supply side controls -- planned economy > thinking -- justified by Adam Smith rhetoric, because some folks in San > Francisco have decided that they know what's wrong with the local planning > of every other city in the state.

How is this planned economy thinking? It seems to loosen regulation in local markets to allow developers to more readily meet demand.

Quite to the contrary the current city zoning rules seem like planned economy thinking, because it makes a zoning plan that is rarely changed over even a decade-long timeline to match housing supply with the current demand.

> people choose not to live in Brisbane because it's inconvenient to > everywhere, not because Brisbane has zoning restrictions.

Your argument seem to assume that the state will force developers to build where there is no demand. This law says nothing about that and the state has no such power, and this law to the contrary seek to ease regulation where there _is_ demand for developers to build.

Contrary to what you say Brisbane is served by public transit by both Muni and Caltrain. There is also a developer that wants to build a lot of new housing in Brisbane, so the market clearly think there is demand for new housing in Brisbane. The largest obstacle for the market to meet this demand is local zoning and the planning process in Brisbane.

<comment><USER25> _" How is this planned economy thinking? It seems to loosen regulation in local markets to allow developers to more readily meet demand."_

It's state government trying to override local economic (zoning) decisions. It's the very _definition_ of a centrally planned economy.

 _" Contrary to what you say Brisbane is served by public transit by both Muni and Caltrain."_

There's one Caltrain stop. It's a 30-minute walk from the residential part of Brisbane, across the freeway and around the dump. MUNI bus service to the area is irregular and unreliable. The only practical commute option is car.

<comment><USER18> > It's state government trying to override local economic (zoning) decisions. > It's the very definition of a centrally planned economy.

You are mischaracterizing the law and what zoning is. Zoning does not produce any housing and is instead an artificial constraint on housing supply. The planning after this law is still done at the city level, but the city is constrained in what planning it can do.

> There's one Caltrain stop. It's a 30-minute walk from the residential part > of Brisbane, across the freeway and around the dump. MUNI bus service to the > area is irregular and unreliable. The only practical commute option is car.

The developer is proposing to build upon the landfill just next to the caltrain stop, so for the new development this won't be a concern.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google Removes More Than 11 Million .co.cc Domains From Search Results - <AUTHOR> http://digitizor.com/2011/07/06/google-removes-cc-domains/ <comment><USER2> The Google search results are still extremely spammy. For anything with commercial potential and especially anything which could lead to an immediate purchase, the noise is just overwhelming. I recently looked into getting a VPN provider; it is simply impossible to research them without being showered in pages that are either outright spam or merely search-engine-optimized out the wazoo (pardon my French). They've learned to imitate user participation, reviews, blogs, anything that you care to name that you used to look for to ferret out the really good pages.

I'll be more specific: about a century ago, in internet years that is, it was a good idea to add "review" to the search terms to see what actual users were saying about a product. This has become an extremely _bad_ idea now, since SEO specialists (I am using neutral language here) noticed this, and have registered 1.5 quintillion domains along the line of best-barbecue-reviews.com and reliable-handbag-reviews.com and what have you; and these domains are the last places to contain actual reliable reviews of anything, being paid advertising in disguise, instead. And Google _loves_ to find search terms in domain names.

And that's just a tiny, tiny part of it.

P.S. Please don't turn this into a thread of recommendations for VPN providers - it will probably get flagged as off-topic.

<comment><USER3> Google's search results are extremely... crap. There I said it.

It used to be that I could search for something, say this:

word1 word2

and Google would give me the results for pages which contain both those words.

Then Google decided I didn't mean what I searched for, so I had to prefix my searches with plus signs, like this:

+word1 +word2

And now this week I find out that even that doesn't work any more.

It's crap. Maybe duckduckgo does it right. I'll give it a go.

<comment><USER4> Duckduckgo's innovations are pretty cool, especially bang-commands (to search on google maps, add "!m" to your query).

But the underlying search is Bing.

Perhaps Google is personalized and Bing doesn't, or perhaps DDG doesn't pass a uid token to Bing, but it's just not as good actual results, which matter to me about 10% of the time. (Luckily, the query parameters to google.com/search are the same as to duckduckgo.com/ so a simple massage of the URL works well.)

<comment><USER5> "a simple massage of the URL works well"

As does prefixing your search with "!g".

<comment><USER4> Well, I'll be jiggered.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Dang ... there goes traffic to the First State Tourism Board's <http://www.visit-delaware.co.cc>

<comment><USER7> Wouldn't it make sense for them to be using .us anyway?

<comment><USER8> The page says Delaware's new slogan is "Delaware: boring on purpose" which seems to suggest it is a parody site.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Seems like a cop out to me. It kind of says, our technology can't weed these results out so we are just going to not deal with it. I am sure it is difficult problem; don't get me wrong. However, I'd rather see Google say that some fancy algorithm determined co.cc domains are junk and has relegated them appropriately.

<comment><USER10> I'd rather they fixed the results now and worried about the algorithm later (and you know they're working on the algorithm) than make us suffer unnecessarily until the algorithm was suitably improved.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> One thing that irks me is Google News. It's hard to get your site listed on Google News but when you see some of the sites that are listed, you have to wonder why Google makes it so difficult. Some search terms bring up "news sites" that are essentially devoted to spamming health remedies and playing them off as though they were real news articles.

<comment><USER2> I don't know, Google News actually doesn't seem very spammy to me. I just searched for "diabetes" - this is usually a good one to check if an index is spammed - and while it brings up some sensationalist garbage (that's life for you), it doesn't seem to find anything which wants my credit card number right now. Even a spam-king search like "weight loss", while it finds nothing interesting, doesn't seem like pure spam.

<comment><USER11> Do a search for RezVera. I research digestive health news & this has been coming up a lot over the last few weeks. Either copycat sites or PR sites that link back to another site with an iframe containing a short form promo offering the supplement for $60 bucks. Blah.

<comment><USER2> I checked it out. RezVera is obviously a commercial name, not a generic name, and its entire internet presence consists of a few PR sites. Google News finds them all, and puts them on one page. It's not like they are crowding out better RezVera news. There is maybe something to be done here about delisting these sites altogether, but I don't see a huge problem for this particular search. Or is there some legitimate review of it, which gets crowded out?

<comment><USER11> I am not searching for RezVera. I am searching "gastritis" "irritable bowel syndrome", etc... RezVera is just a quick way to see the sites that get listed on Google, I assure you those sites come up for legit searches too.

If you do a search for "Irritable Bowel Syndrome" & then sort by date 3 of the top 4 choices are: "Manuka Honey Capsules Announced", "New Supplement [RezVera] Shows Great Promise for Gastritis", "CSIRO cereal a real superfood". Spammy McSpam Spam.

Sometimes press releases blur the lines between advertising & news, I get that, but these sites aren't really that useful & look almost like they're gaming Google News to advertise. Rarely do they actually have any authoritative links backing up their claims, which is something Google supposedly wants from sites joining Google News.

<comment><USER2> This is the problem with the customization of Google - for me, these are not in the top 4 results even sorted by date, although 2 of your titles show up further down. But yes, I see your point now, someone spammed Google News as well. Scum. I think it's still less spammy than the Web search, since some kind of human attention is required to get in there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Domains ending in .co.cc are subdomains, just like domains ending in .example.com or .uk.com. When people buy a subdomain then their purchase is not regulated in the same way as a domain (eg ending in .cc or .com) is.

</comment><comment><USER13> 5000 phishing sites cause Google to block 11,000,000 domains? That's less than 0.5%.

First, is that really "a significant fraction?"

Second, when did collective punishment become less evil than innocent until proven guilty?

<comment><USER2> You must somehow have avoided running into it, but .co.cc was a fever swamp and a nightmare. For any popular search terms you can think of, it contained "popular-search-terms.co.cc" and "my-popular-search-terms.co.cc" and "best- popular-search-terms.co.cc" and so on ad freaking nauseam. And it got spammed all over your screen, because Google likes to find search terms in the domain name.

What do you think was there? Do you think 11 million people woke up one day and decided ".co.cc would be a great domain for my business"?

They should have nuked it from orbit a long time ago.

EDIT: I just realized .co.cc is not actually down, but it's blocked by my provider now and no longer indexed by Google, so it's pretty much gone for me. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

<comment><USER13> It's an ugly cheap kludge. Furthermore it is a kludge which raises a question about how good Google's new singing dancing search results filtering algorithm really is, if it can't separate the wheat from the chaff at /co.cc/.

<Google directed cynicism>The cynic in me sees the timing of this as the first salvo in an effort toward the monetization of the coming proliferation of new commoditized top-level domains. When search results are nothing more than an advertising platform, why should a search engine return your results unless you are paying for the screen space? Perhaps, /co.cc/ was not encouraging the use of Google Analytics or promoting Adwords sufficiently.</Google directed cynicism>

<comment><USER14> You're confusing cynicism with paranoia. A cynic would think that Google has lost faith in its algorithm and is taking to manually blocking spammy sites; a paranoid would think that Google plans to have websites pay to be included in search, and is retaliating against hosts that don't use Google Analytics or Adwords.

<comment><USER13> Not really having a dog in the hunt for Google page ranks, it's not really paranoia for me. It's not really cynicism either given that it is a natural extension of Google's basic revenue model, i.e. showing links to pages in exchange for payment. I just added the tag to keep the post consistent with implicit HN style guidelines.

There is nothing sacred about the blue text links, and with "personalization" they don't reflect an objective page ranking, but a subjective ranking based on speculation about what one is most likely to click.

It is only in the minds of consumers of Google's search services that a wall between search results and advertising exists. With personalization, the same algorithms are applied to both.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I love how Google have the balls to do things like this, this can only be considered a good thing.

</comment><comment><USER16> And just as they blocked the .co.cc, the attackers are now using the .co.tv:

[http://blog.sucuri.net/2011/07/google-blocks-co-cc- attackers...](http://blog.sucuri.net/2011/07/google-blocks-co-cc-attackers- are-now-using-co-tv.html)

Never ending battle...

</comment><comment><USER17> This is a really good thing, even though the people using these domains will likely just move to another free provider; we've seen large chunks of spam on WordPress.com from these domains more than once (linkfarming).

Kudos to Google.

</comment><comment><USER18> Google blocked one domain that was reselling subdomains.

</comment><comment><USER19> i never really saw many co.cc domains in the search results anyway. From what i've heard, many of the co.cc domains were used for distributing malware.

If you provide a free hosting service, you have to be prepared to constantly deal with spammers and phishers.

</comment><comment><USER20> At Zite we have a domain-level spam filter and

       .co.cc

is the the 6th strongest feature for spam indication. The first five are:

       cheap
       forex
       pills
       viagra
       urnitur

</comment><comment><USER21> This is one of the dumbest things Google has done.

If Google really wants to get rid of 90 percent of spammy sites all they need to do is block any website that is registered with Godaddy.

<comment><USER22> That doesn't make much sense. GoDaddy is the largest registrar in the world, with the most extensive general public advertising campaign, and manages over 45 million domains. They're the registrar for your neighbor and your neighborhood small business more often than not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> you could probably take it even further just by making it a lot more difficult to rank the other types of domains:

1\. anything that's not a .com or .org(let's face it...if it's a .net, then it's most likely bought for seo optimization)

2\. the .co.uk/.de etc, should only get a bonus in their own countries.

3\. anything that's longer than 16 letters. If it is, chances are that its just a spam domain.

4\. anything with a dash in the domain(the more dashes, the bigger the penalty).

5\. anything with a # in the domain

this way brands would be fine, but those crappy domains that were purchased solely for SEO wouldn't be as effective. Sure, .com exact match would be fine, but that's a lot less to worry about.

<comment><USER24> Most ISPs I've used use .net for their domains, and there are plenty other legitimate sites that use .net (Battle.net, anyone?).

<comment><USER23> brands would still be able to rank.

it's just going to get a lot more harder to rank legitimateISPs.net</comment></comment></comment>


How much college cost the year you were born - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/04/heres-how-much-college-cost-the-year-you-were-born.html <comment><USER2> 0\. The same costs of when I attended it at 17. Public federal university in Brazil.

PS: Of course it's not exactly free as everyone pays taxes. Just following the premise in the article.</comment>


Judge orders defendant to decrypt PGP-protected laptop - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10172866-38.html

<comment><USER2> And what happens if he claims to have forgotten the password?

What happens in legal cases, as they mentioned, where I have to hand over the key to a safe, and I've lost the key?

<comment><USER3> You might be interested in this:

<http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/?s=plausible-deniability></comment></comment>


Knock – unlock your Mac without a password using your iPhone - <AUTHOR> http://www.knocktounlock.com/

<comment><USER2> The site is buggy on the iPhone, I've managed to scroll down only once.</comment>


OpenSUSE's YaST is being rewritten in Ruby - <AUTHOR> http://opensuseadventures.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/yast-is-being-rewritten-in-ruby-geeko.html?utm_source=rubyweekly&utm_medium=email <comment><USER2> From perl to ruby, first it was annoying. Now it is annoying and slow. Great!</comment>


How Dogecoin Proved its Worth with Kindness and Generosity - <AUTHOR> http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-dogecoin-proved-its-worth-kindness-generosity-1433561

<comment><USER2> While I get that a kind community can go a long way, I just don't really see how a new currency fits into this.

If Dogecoin has technical advantages (and many argue that it does) then that's great, but all I hear when I read these articles is that a bunch of people thought that Bitcoiners were real meanies so they started their _own_ currency! Hah!</comment>


NYT NEWS ALERT: Obama Claims Victory in Front of Huge Crowd in Chicago  - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/nytimes/status/991097447 Before an exuberant crowd of tens of thousands in Chicago's Grant Park, Barack Obama delivered his victory address. It's been a long time coming, but tonight change has come to America, he told the crowd. <comment><AUTHOR> Before an exuberant crowd of tens of thousands in Chicago's Grant Park, Barack Obama delivered his victory address. It's been a long time coming, but tonight change has come to America, he told the crowd.</comment>


Show HN: Fluffify – Make fun of corporate phrases on the web - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/serverdensity/Fluffify

<comment><USER2> Link to the dictionary: [https://github.com/serverdensity/Fluffify/blob/master/fluffi...](https://github.com/serverdensity/Fluffify/blob/master/fluffify/data/dictionary.json)

</comment><comment><USER3> Fun idea. It would be nice if the README had an example of some text before and after.

<comment><USER4> The best would really be some links to some pages which transform especially well, eg:

[https://www.oracle.com/applications/enterprise-resource- plan...](https://www.oracle.com/applications/enterprise-resource-planning/)

[http://discover.sap.com/S4HANA](http://discover.sap.com/S4HANA)

Glad to see there are PRs in for leverage, platform, etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good idea, I'll include that in the readme. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It would bring me great relief to replace the verb "leverage" with "use". Unfortunately the noun "leverage" is legit and this extension wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

</comment><comment><USER6> Elon Musk => Elon the Archmage. Lol, awesome.

</comment><comment><USER7> From the linked XKCD : "Could not be reached for comment" => "is guilty and everyone knows it"

</comment><comment><USER8> Replace cloud with butt: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cloud-to- butt-plus...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cloud-to-butt- plus/apmlngnhgbnjpajelfkmabhkfapgnoai)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's already in there :). This plugin was partly inspired by that. There is a whole host of other words now!</comment></comment>


The One Thing to Avoid While Coding - <AUTHOR> https://blog.benroux.me/the-one-thing-to-avoid-while-coding/ <comment><USER2> _" Bad this happens when coders are bored. Their productivity slows, they pay less attention to the details of their work, their growth stagnates and their passion is sapped."_

yep</comment>


Before the iPod, Before the Walkman, There Was the Mikiphone - <AUTHOR> http://technabob.com/blog/2011/04/20/mikiphone-antique-portable-turntable/ <comment><USER2> Call it bread and circuses but when people complain about the ever growing "wealth gap", I can't help but feel rich anyway.

I've got a music player that stores _all_ my music in my pocket. It also happens to be a global communicator right out of the sic-fi I loved as a kid. All the money in the world couldn't have bought half so much in 1924.

If I have to suffer Steve Jobs flying around on his personal jet and tearing down his mansion to build a better one to have this, let it be. Or should I say "make it so"?

<comment><AUTHOR> Everythings Amazing & Nobodys Happy[1]

\-----

[1]: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk>

<comment><USER3> It's the hedonic treadmill:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Does anybody know what record is played in the video? More specifically, what track?

\-----

Edit: Found it on the actual YouTube video page, in case anyone else is wondering.

Track: Ain't Misbehavin'

Performed by: Quintette of the Hot Club of France</comment>


FizzBuzz in J, Explained - <AUTHOR> https://wycd.net/posts/2017-01-19-fizz-buzz-and-triangles-in-j.html <comment><USER2> Paraphrasing an earlier Reddit post, here's how it might look in K3.

Generate a range of numbers up to 20 (for brevity), inclusive:

          1+!20
        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Apply a function ({x!/:3 5}), which takes an element modulo 3 and 5, to the range:

          {x!/:3 5}1+!20
        (1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
         1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0)

Taking the negation (~) shows us the places the elements divide evenly:

          {~x!/:3 5}1+!20
        (0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
         0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1)

Convert these into base-2 indices:

          {2 _sv~x!/:3 5}1+!20
        0 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1

We can then use those indices to select from a list. Note the addition of a map ('), because if we continue performing all these operations in parallel we won't have access to x as some particular item of the list:

          {(x;"Buzz";"Fizz";"FizzBuzz")2 _sv~x!/:3 5}'1+!20
        (1;2;"Fizz";4;"Buzz";"Fizz";7;8;"Fizz";"Buzz";11;"Fizz";13;14;"FizzBuzz";16;17;"Fizz";19;"Buzz")

<comment><USER3> To translate that as literally as possible into Dyalog

      fizzbuzz ← {
        {(⍵ 'buzz' 'fizz' 'fizzbuzz')[1+2⊥0=3 5∘.|⍵]}¨⍵
      }

called as

      fizzbuzz ⍳100

or just

      {(⍵ 'buzz' 'fizz' 'fizzbuzz')[1+2⊥0=3 5∘.|⍵]}¨⍳100

with unnecessary parens

      {(⍵ 'buzz' 'fizz' 'fizzbuzz')[1+(2⊥(0=((3 5)∘.|⍵)))]}¨⍳100

<comment><USER4> Since you are using ¨, ⍵ is a scalar, so you don't need the ∘.

Translated back to J

      ((;'Buzz';'Fizz';'FizzBuzz'"_){~2#.0=3 5|])"0>:i.100

The boxed list in J feels a bit cumbersome compared to mixed arrays in APL.

<comment><USER3> Fair enough. Like most APL I wrote it backwards until it worked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Doesn't it make sense that in mathematics, we use the integral symbol instead of A.Integral(B)?"

In my experience the obscure notation is what made college math hard for me to learn. As a programmer I really wish there was a math textbook that used A.Integral(B) type notation to teach concepts, because I think I could have been good at math.

I realize that people who start with math have the opposite experience; my physicist friend complains that whenever he has to use a CLI or write code everything seems arbitrary and confusing to him.

<comment><USER6> Agreed. And to me it's not just the math notation that bugs me, but the tendency of mathematicians (and perhaps by extension, physicists) to _always_ use one-letter variables.

In software development, you'd get torn apart in code review if your variables are all one letter long. Why is math so terse?

<comment><USER7> I think it's pattern matching and intuition. If I see y = k/x, I can immediately process what that looks like. Further, I can take advantage of tons of conventions that make it read differently from a = b/c or even y = z/x. The conventions take some getting used to, but after a while writing out dependentVariable = divideBy(constant, independentVariable) would get super tedious and it's absolutely not instantly pattern matchable. Especially when you're working out some manipulation where you have to write the same variable a zillion times, and maybe even depending on your brain's pattern matching and inspiration to kick in. Hell, at this point I even use a shorthand for cos and sin for those reasons.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I have had several opportunities to write Mathematica code in a style similar to this. Specifically, building up functions to map over entire lists rather than iterating over them.

Each step feels very intuitive and satisfying. But when you just look at the end result of any non-trivial example, it nearly always looks unreadable. I found myself needing to work quite hard to understand functions I myself had written, even if I was only interrupted by lunch.

</comment><comment><USER9>
      > 1{::(('FizzBuzz';'Fizz';'Buzz';":) 1337)

      Fizz

Is equivalent to:

      > ['FizzBuzz', 'Fizz', 'Buzz', 1337][1]

      Fizz

In a language with less foreign syntax. You can make it more familiar by putting the index on the right side of the array with '~':

      (('FizzBuzz';'Fizz';'Buzz';":) 1337){::~1

      Fizz

This is the modulo bit:

      (0 i.~15 3 5|])

<comment><USER10> I think comparing it with other languages may make it easier to grasp. Sometimes it's good to test it in a language you are used to. The selector expression could be represented in Python like this:

      a = lambda n: [n % x for x in [15, 3, 5]].index(0)

<comment><USER9> Yep, I started writing this out (first in js, but it doesn't map well, python list comprehensions do) but you beat me to it. :)

Now great, you can get the weird syntax and unroll it if you squint. Why is it written like this? Isn't it wasteful to test against all three cases (15,3,5) instead of returning early?

Probably has something to do with 'thinking in arrays' and how its a cheap comparison and that there's probably matrix multiplication or bit twiddling going on under there. That's the interesting bit to me.

To get the feel for an array language. This fizzbuzz example is actually surprisingly interesting because of that.

<comment><USER10> In fact, it's still not the same. In Python, the following expression will raise a ValueError.

      > a(2)

In J, it will return the length of the array, as stated in the post.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> 'explained' I read it twice and still don't understand what it's doing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here. Sorry to hear that. If you want to let me know where I lost you via email or here, I'd be happy to revise it to be clearer.

I think it takes a certain skill to overcome the curse of already knowing something and then explaining it, and I'll definitely have some blind spots.

Thanks for reading it twice!

<comment><USER12> Consider that on HN there are surely people who read about J the first time, or if they have read something somewhere, they already forgot it and they won't go through the whole tutorial (which is not small) before reading the article.

For example, I guess that the

FB"0 >:i.100

is a kind-of for loop, even if I also guess it's not called as such in J, but I wouldn't be able to explain how it exactly works, except that >: is bigger or equal, which I glimpsed from some first page of the tutorial, and i. should mean index of, according to your text? But searching 100 in what? Or is it some new word?

Then, why was 1337 introduced in the explanation at all? I failed to understand, reading the text not too slowly.

Thanks for posting the article here, it's refreshing.

<comment><USER3> FB"0 basically means apply FB to each cell in an array. i.100 makes an array of numbers 0...99 and >: increments every number in that array by 1

So it's mapping FB over the numbers 1 to 100.

Now I don't know j very well so I don't know why this evaluates as (FB"0) (>:i.100) instead of (FB") (0>:i.100) but I guess " is special

1337 is just a stand in number. To try the algorithm without mapping it to an array.

So the algorithm is this make an array of [fizzbuzz fizz buzz x]. Then make an array of x mod 15, 3, 5. Find the first instance of 0 in that second array and use that index to select fizz,buzz etc. If there isn't a zero (0 i. secondarray) returns the length of secondarray which is 3, the same index as x in the first array.

<comment><USER12> Thanks! So I made more than one bad guess. So >: can be monadic, increment and dyadic, bigger or equal. And i. can be a generator or an index of.

But how to avoid reading the wrong meaning? If I'm reading right to left, I read 100, then I see i. then see something on the left of i. then why is it not a dyadic i. ? Because there is no parenthesis?

<comment><USER13> > But how to avoid reading the wrong meaning?

The only thing other than "practice" you can do is to use built-in J expression pretty-printer. It shows you a graph of an expression, grouping verbs with their arguments. I don't remember how to get to it exactly, I think it was somewhere in foreigns.

EDIT: it's even mentioned in the article, don't know how I missed it: 5!:4

<comment><USER12> Thanks. I've seen it but now that you mentioned I really liked to also understand what that means semantically:

5!:4 <'FB'

I see here:

[http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx005.htm](http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx005.htm)

That every combination of two numbers means something special.

[http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx018.htm](http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx018.htm)

Wow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> There's a blog post about FizzBuzzBazz (note the third value) in LiveScript, I posted a comment there, with J version[1], looking like this:

        fu=:(3&|),(5&|),:(7&|)
        g1=:(,&'zz')"1>;:'Fi Bu Ba'
        ((0=fu i.101){"1(3 1$<''),.(,.<"1 g1)),<"0 i.101

Well, what else can I say? J is really fun to play with.

It's also not true that it cannot be maintainable or readable. J crazy parsing rules and other language features make it very flexible, on the level of Lisp, TCL, PERL, Smalltalk or Io. This means it can be a completely unreadable mess, as well as a readable and maintainable code, depending on who writes it. I made an attempt at writing readable - articulate - J: [https://klibert.pl/posts/literate_j.html](https://klibert.pl/posts/literate_j.html)

[1] [http://livescript.net/blog/fizzbuzzbazz.html#comment-1145818...](http://livescript.net/blog/fizzbuzzbazz.html#comment-1145818066)

<comment><USER14> That cryptic code, ironically, doesn't appear significantly shorter, if at all, than the FizzBuzz solutions in some ordinary, readable languages. What's the point?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I really like the concepts in APL/J. It's probably why I'm so excited to see more array oriented support in Perl6. Keep up the postings.

<comment><USER16> If you enjoy APL/J then you might want to check out F-Script on OS X. It was pretty fun for combining arrays with Smalltalk like syntax and might provide you with some amusement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I found your post very compelling. I have tried messing around with the APL derivatives (J and K and Q), but never created anything substantial. I didn't know you could view the AST like that, and it did really help in your explanation. I'm definitely going to check out an APL again! Thank you for the great post!

</comment><comment><USER18> I tried my hand at a terse fizz buzz, once. [https://twitter.com/taeric/status/250060748548624385](https://twitter.com/taeric/status/250060748548624385)

Not really hard to come up with, but does take effort. Would be difficult to go through that for all programs.

</comment><comment><USER19> It's been a while since I used J, but as I recall it's more idiomatic (though sometimes trickier) to write a function that works directly with arrays than to write a function that works with scalars and then to map it over an array.

</comment><comment><USER20> If the string 'FizzBuzz' appears in your code, you have failed FizzBuzz.

<comment><USER18> How do you mean?

<comment><USER21> Typically, because there is (usually, not always) a more elegant solution when one recognizes 15 = 5 × 3 so you can avoid the need for a separate case to handle divisibility by 15.

<comment><USER18> Ah, I misread that to be either fizz or buzz.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> :('Equilateral';'Isoceles';'Irregular';'Impossible'){::~3&,@<:@#@~.{~2&*@(>./)<+/

Belongs in [https://www.stilldrinking.org/programming- sucks](https://www.stilldrinking.org/programming-sucks)

In other words: I would not want to work with a language like this because I know most of the work is maintenance and it's hell if you need to work with something this sigil heavy.

<comment><USER13> What you say is true for most languages, however, it's different for J. The sigils you see _are_ the _whole_ language - there are only around 20 sigils, which are the core functions of the language. You only need to learn and remember them, you can then work your way through any kind of J code. It may go slowly at the beginning, but as you get used to the most often occurring ways of composing them you get faster.

In other words: you can't really say anything about how it feels to work with J without working with it for some time. This may be true to some extent with other languages, but J is unique/different enough to make this point especially true.

<comment><USER22> There are a billion things against a sigil only language: it's near impossible to give you a helpful IDE (in a word-like language you can use autocomplete but how do you give ideas whether the user should use @ or ^ at a given point?), it's near impossible to search for code examples and such (the other day I was looking for code in any language at all that uses /PZ/u as a regular expression without success), you need to think twice before using any of the standard shell utilities on them and so on.

<comment><USER23> > it's near impossible to give you a helpful IDE (in a word-like language you > can use autocomplete

What autocomplete you need in J? For verbs and conjunctions which are at most 2 letters long?

> how do you give ideas whether the user should use @ or ^ at a given point?

In the same way as IDE helps you to choose . or exp() ? They are completely different concepts, how can you mix them?

> it's near impossible to search for code examples and such

I think it's a common problem for complex code examples, in any language. You may, though, search for comments.

From [http://www.jsoftware.com/help/jforc/foreword.htm#_Toc1917342...](http://www.jsoftware.com/help/jforc/foreword.htm#_Toc191734286) :

> C is a computer language; it lets you control the things the computer does. > J is a language of computation: it lets you describe what needs to be done > without getting bogged down in details

I think it's a great help. J doesn't just reduces typing; it also reduces the amount of things one needs to keep in the head to solve the problem.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hidden Portals in Earth's Magnetic Field - <AUTHOR> http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/mag-portals.html

<comment><USER2> I'm wondering if portal is the right term to use. Seems like it's bound to be misinterpreted by some irresponsible reporter.

<comment><USER3> ...well I hoped those "portals" would let us "teleport" & stuff :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It will be interesting to see more details on how these bridges or threads (I'll avoid calling them portals) affect the magnetosphere, particularly if they are hidden. Are they responsible for previously unexpected behavior in the magnetosphere? Are they a navigation hazard for high orbiting craft?

On the other hand, the video and article seem to be reaching for views and the narration is terrible.

</comment><comment><USER5> I wonder if you could somehow ride the field lines when these things snap, like some sort of cosmic railgun for firing things off into deep space.</comment>