Talking is throwing fictional worlds at one another - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/89/the-dark-side/-talking-is-throwing-fictional-worlds-at-one-another-rp <comment><USER2> I feel like the Piraha stuff comes up every so often, and I feel obligated each time to link to the famous Nevins and Pesetsky rebuttal: [https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/94631/Nevins-...](https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/94631/Nevins-2009-PIRAHA%20EXCEPTIONALIT.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y)

Beyond the disagreement about what recursion is (as used to define the faculty of language narrow (FLN), from the Chomsky, Hauser, Fitch paper mentioned in the interview), there are significant problems with Everett's argument in general which are covered quite well in the rebuttal.

<comment><USER3> Here's Evert's response to the rebuttal: [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215992069_Cultural_...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215992069_Cultural_constraints_on_grammar_in_Piraha_A_reply_to_Nevins_Pesetsky_and_Rodrigues_2007)

<comment><USER4> It doesn't inspire confidence that the German examples in that response are all wrong.

But I can recommend Everett's book "Don't sleep, there are snakes", which is only partly about language.

<comment><USER3> I'm curious (having some basic German) what's wrong with the German examples? Isn't most of the German taken from the article he is responding to?

edit - actually I think I see it - he's not inflecting the articles correctly after "von"?

<comment><USER5> The claim is that "the English possessive is potentially recursive, while the Saxon genitive [its counterpart in German] is not". I think they are confusing some issues. And by the way, I thought Saxon genitive was a term from English grammar.

Anyhow, in German, you can use the Saxon genitive in preposition, if the word in Genitive can be used like a personal name: "ich sehe Karls Auto". And it is true that you cannot recurse on that: "ich sehe Karls Bruders Auto" is not German, except maybe in German poems two hundred years ago, when the language was raped. Even "ich sehe meines Vaters Auto" will sound outside of the norm.

However, you can recurse in postposition: "ich sehe das Auto meines Vaters", "ich sehe das Auto des Bruders meines Vaters". You do not have to say "ich sehe das Auto vom Bruder von meinem Vater".

Several edits, sorry.

<comment><USER6> Would argue that "ich sehe meines Vaters Auto" is valid, but only for lyrics and/or old German.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The note about the Piraha language not having embedding is incredibly interesting. Example taken from Wikipedia:

>Everett stated that Pirahã cannot say "John's brother's house" but must say, "John has a brother. This brother has a house." in two separate sentences.

Compounding this on the apparent lack of numbers/counting, expressing higher order concepts seems like it'd be borderline impossible in the language as-is. I wonder if many other languages started out "simple" like this, and developed grammatical complexity alongside their society?

Of course, the issue here could just be a lack of understanding and insufficient ability to ask questions to native speakers by people researching it. It only has 250 speakers and picking it up as a second language with zero resources leaves plenty of room for error. More recent research suggests it _might_ be possible, but no non-native speakers are really sure.

<comment><USER8> Everett is an extremely controversial figure within linguistics, to put it very mildly.

Recursive embedding is one of the foundational marks of human language (though not the only), and finding a natural language without it would cast long shadows across the existing literature while making that language's "discoverer" very famous.

His data have been challenged by a number of other linguists, despite Everett's attempts to keep others from access to first hand sources.

Note too that the existence of alternate constructions such as "John has a brother. This brother has a house." do not preclude the language's ability to accommodate embedding.

Anyway, I'm no orthodox Chomskyist (in part because I'm not well enough educated to be:) but I think all of Everett's claims should be taken with as many grains of salt as we can find in our immediate vicinity.

<comment><USER3> Traces of recursion have been found in animal "language" also - [https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/cognoculture/the_less_h...](https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/cognoculture/the_less_human_humans_recursion/) describes recursive elements to certain bird song.

More recently here's a recent experiment - [https://cosmosmagazine.com/people/behaviour/complex- linguist...](https://cosmosmagazine.com/people/behaviour/complex-linguistic- feature-not-unique-to-humans/) \- which seems to show that some primates have similar "recursive" reasoning skills as young (under 4) children.

<comment><USER9> The studies on song birds have for the most part been very poorly conceived and based on a simple misunderstanding. (The fact that a grammar _can be_ defined using recursive rules doesn't entail that its string language can't be _recognized_ by non-recursive procedures.) For example, the common A^nB^n string language (which can be defined using a recursive CFG) can obviously also be recognized by counting.

<comment><USER10> But the a^nb^n language is context free so there is no regular grammar that can represent it. If a couting mechanism can be used to represent a^nb^n the result will still have to be a context-free grammar, otherwise a^nb^n would not be context-free.

<comment><USER9> No, that's exactly the mistake. You can check that the counts are equal without parsing the string at all. So the ability to recognize the string language is not evidence that the string is being parsed according to a particular CFG (or any other grammar). In other words, it is not evidence that the birds are pairing up each A with the corresponding B.

Most of the literature on birds stems from a confusion of the distinction between regular string languages and context free string languages with the distinction between grammars with and without recursive rules. The two distinctions are largely orthogonal. It is certainly possible, for example, to define certain regular string languages using recursive grammars, and to define certain context free string languages without using recursive grammars.

When you say that "the result must be a context free grammar" I think what you mean to say is that the string language defined must be a context free (and non-regular) string language. But that does not in any way entail that the only way to recognize the string language is by means of a particular context free grammar.

<comment><USER10> Ah, I see - my mistake. You're saying that one can count n "a"s followed by n "b"s without the need for a context-free grammar (or any grammar!). I agree.

What I meant by "the result will still have to be a context free grammar" was a context-free grammar that incorporates a counting mechanism, as part of its definition. Something like this, perhaps (in Definite Clause Grammars notation so you can actually run it as a Prolog program):

      'S' --> 'A'(N), 'B'(N).

      'A'([1]) --> 'A'.
      'A'([1|As]) --> 'A', 'A'(As).

      'B'([1]) --> 'B'.
      'B'([1|Bs]) --> 'B', 'B'(Bs).

      'A' --> [a].
      'B' --> [b].

Though that one is recursive (or at least the counting mechanism is) and I'm not sure how you'd do the same thing without recursion to be honest (or without going up a couple of levels to Turing-completeness so you can call arbitrary functions). So, never mind- I just misunderstood what you meant.

<comment><USER9> I see, fair enough. I think I may have misread your original comment.

<comment><USER10> No, I misread yours :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Interesting interview, but weird that the interviewer pulls the title "Talking Is Throwing Fictional Worlds at One Another" from his own words, not the interviewee's. I guess he was rather smitten with his own turn of phrase.

<comment><USER12> _The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense._

― Tom Clancy

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> The title is a bit clickbaity, but some parts of the article were interesting (there is a lot of noise though, if what you're looking for are technical details).

In case some of you are interested by the "merge" structure they mention, you can look for "Minimalist Program", by Chomsky and others. That's where it comes from:

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

<comment><USER14> relevant XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/2043/](https://xkcd.com/2043/)

I've worked with some clever animals, and agree they didn't show any signs of recursive embedding (they "lex" but don't "parse"), but must note that modern anglophone humans are relatively embedding-impoverished compared with prior centuries, a reduction which we can observe in comparing the number of stack levels necessary to parse the subordinations and coordinations[1] in the dendritic periods of the 1st president of the US with the number necessary to parse the sequential utterances of the most recent.

[1] [https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/inaugtx...](https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/inaugtxt.html)

> "In these honorable qualifications, I behold the surest pledges, that as on > one side, no local prejudices, or attachments; no separate views, nor party > animosities, will misdirect the comprehensive and equal eye which ought to > watch over this great assemblage of communities and interests: so, on > another, that the foundations of our National policy will be laid in the > pure and immutable principles of private morality; and the pre-eminence of a > free Government, be exemplified by all the attributes which can win the > affections of its Citizens, and command the respect of the world."

<comment><USER15> I'm not a linguist but that to me is more a list (a sequence of qualifiers) than a recursion (a nesting). However, a quick browse shows I'm wrong so for those who also aren't sure

[https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3252/what- is...](https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3252/what-is-recursion)

[https://www.thoughtco.com/recursion- grammar-1691901](https://www.thoughtco.com/recursion-grammar-1691901)

<comment><USER16> I'm not sure that those links completely show that you're wrong. The example you're replying to appears deeper than it is because each nested element is quite broad, so the absolute depth is not as much as it might seem (I think).

<comment><USER14> Agreed, there are listings, but even they are not always just a flat unary tree. For instance, there's the structure within the listing of:

        (no ((local prejudices) or (attachments))
         no (separate views)
         nor (party animosities))

which is itself embedded within

        ... will misdirect ...
        as on one side ... so, on another, ...
        etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> > Despite that seeming constraint, Adger argues in his new book, Language > Unlimited, that the sentences we make are infinite in faculty, form, and > expression.

This is such a journalist thing to write. The idea that the number of sentences that can be produced using a given language is potentially infinite is such an old one that it hardly has anything to do with Adger, and Adger hardly needed to "argue" it.

</comment><comment><USER18> "I think about it like even numbers. There's an unlimited number of even numbers but obviously they're limited, right? Because 3s and 7s aren't in there. Language is like that. There's an unlimited number of possible things we can say, of sentence structures, but not anything can be a sentence structure. So you're absolutely right. Language is unlimited, but it's unlimited in a limited way."

This is such a tantalizing idea, but there doesn't seem to be anyway to extend it beyond "we don't know what it would be like to think with a different language paradigm, but it would probably be different." I want to know _how_ human thoughts are shaped and constrained by human language.

<comment><USER19> The issue, in my opinion, is separating the fact from the language shaping the thought to the thought shaping the language. It quickly leads into strong linguistic relativity, which has been proven wrong. And even the weak form, in my opinion, isn't very strong proof that it's necessarily a specific language, as opposed to cultural influences, affecting it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Shameless plug for my essay [1] that discusses some similar ideas to this article. I focus more in-depth on what the consequences of compositional grammar are for ML-based NLP and why we should be looking to theories of psycholinguistics and philosophy of language for inspiration as a research community.

[1] [https://rohan.bearblog.dev/humans-spoke- vectors/](https://rohan.bearblog.dev/humans-spoke-vectors/)

</comment><comment><USER16> > We don't do this by putting the two words in a sequence, like an artificial > intelligence or a bonobo would do. Instead we build a new hierarchical unit. > This unit puts together the verb drink with the noun wine to create the > phrase drink wine, with wine being the grammatical object of drink.

AI can do compositionality.

</comment><comment><USER21> I wish this had less of a clickbait title. I have no idea what the article is about other than linguistics.

</comment><comment> j-pb Relevant XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/114/](https://xkcd.com/114/)

<comment><USER22> I'm generally a fan, but that's quite possibly the least funny XKCD ever.

<comment> j-pb My computational linguist friend disagrees and asked me to design this for his iPad: [https://m.imgur.com/gallery/oPzM8U7](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/oPzM8U7)</comment></comment></comment>


Why Google can't search for words prefixed with '--'? - <AUTHOR>

Why Google can't search for words prefixed with '--' ? Try searching for "--enable-thread" https://twitter.com/#!/ronbeltran/status/117457491176071168 <comment><USER2> It can. Try to quote the term:

"--enable-thread"

(with quotes)

will yield results.

</comment><comment> saiko-chriskun if you prefix anything with a dash google takes that keyword out of search queries, for the most part.

so if I wanted to search for computer stuff, but nothing to do with windows, I'd type in: "computers -windows"</comment>


Ask HN: Has anyone trained themselves deliberately in unique skills? - <AUTHOR>

Examples would be:
lucid dreaming
Visualizing/Imagining/Creativity (there was an article about someone training like Tesla, can't remember his name)
sensory - increasing the power of senses (a few years ago, I remember going for a walk blindfolded, in a camp I had gone to)
etc. How did you do it? <comment><USER2> Hey, sorry this is not answering your post, but I saw your question on an old thread [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9236997](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9236997) and I want you to read my answer.

I was wrong, smart-content is not by itself pointless entertainment. It's all about your state of mind while reading it. I believed that reading smart- content would make me smarter. Like you, I've read hundreds of hacker news submissions. Yet I gained nearly no knowledge.

To answer your question; you've already figured out what you should and shouldn't read. What -really- matters is -how- you read. Don't skim and expect to become smarter automatically. Because when you do this, you assume the author is right all the time. You need to be critical.

And ooooh, I've heard that one so many times "just be critical". I've never understood what this meant, until I decided I wanted to truly understand my texts. It can take me over five minutes to read a single page since I've started trying to truly undertand a book.

Try some of these, see which ones you like and which ones you dislike. Find the ones that work for you. I've tried these and found that they help me dig really deep into any text.

\- Doodle and write in books. Honestly \- Collect and present a text's statements and opinions as fact. I can assure you you will find logical inconsistencies \- Summarize texts \- Force yourself to capture the essence of a text within one sentence</comment>


I Now Have a Cardiologist - <AUTHOR> https://joecieplinski.com/blog/2019/03/28/i-now-have-a-cardiologist/ <comment><USER3> I have had a couple instances of ventricular fibrillation. I have an implant which brings me back to life when that happens; I would be dead without it. However, I do go unconscious for a few seconds until I get shocked back to life.

Although my case is infrequent enough that it is not thought of as a risk by the medical community, for peace of mind what I would really like to have is a link between a watch of some sort and a car capable of self driving. Should I be driving when I go unconscious, all the car would need to do is automatically kick in autopilot mode while gradually slowing down, until a heart rhythm is detected again.

The risk is small, if you consider the percentage of time I'm behind the wheel, but it would be good for peace of mind. It would also be helpful for others who do not _yet_ know they have a heart condition, or those who are having a stroke or epileptic attack while at the wheel. There are others with worse conditions than mine who are basically advised not to drive, so it would help them as well.

If falling asleep can be detected by any biological signals, that would also be a useful autopilot trigger while waking the driver up, for the general population.

Currently most cars require manually activating the autopilot mode; what I'm proposing is a vital sign monitor to automatically _begin_ self-driving if the human is incapacitated.

If the human doesn't wake up within a half a minute or so, the car could also self-drive itself to a hospital. I think we're far enough with self-driving tech that that saved life would far outweigh the risks of the self-driving system having any issues en route.

<comment><USER4> > the car could also self-drive itself to a hospital

I think you're onto a good idea, except for the above quote. It would be a much better idea to have the car automatically pull over to the shoulder, stop, engage the flashers, and call 911. Paramedics can keep you alive en route to the hospital with drugs, cardioversion, and CPR. Your car cannot.

<comment><USER5> The problem is response time. If you are currently on the road it's probably faster to head to the hospital than to wait for an ambulance.

<comment><USER4> Which hospital is nearest? Which can be reached within the self-driving capabilities of the car? Which has Advanced Cardiac Life Support staff and equipment? Which is still open? Which is not already handling another cardiac emergency? Which route has the least traffic?

Paramedics and EMTs can work these questions quickly and they have lights and sirens to get through traffic. Your car will probably google "hospitals" and (slowly) take you to the nearest one, which might be a closed methadone clinic.

In most cities, an ambulance is going to get to your car much quicker than your car would get you to an appropriate hospital. A modern ACLS rescue unit is effectively a heart hospital on wheels. So calling 911 brings the hospital to you, without putting anybody else on the road in danger from your car's not-yet-quite-ready-for-unsupervised-operation autopilot software.

<comment><USER6> So what it is needed is that the car communicates with 911 and an automated system will tell it to wait for help, go to a destination where help will go to, or go to a help center (hospital or similar) where help will be waiting.

It could even work if you are at home and have an emergency. Call 911 and if they decide you should go to a health center on your own it will send where to go to your car.

Of course at first wait for help should be the default, but when automated driving improves, and the processing of emergencies improves too, an automated response system should be the norm for most of the time.

<comment><USER4> Agreed. Technology could help. There are significant elements of assessment, planning, and optimization that now are done manually by emergency responders that probably could be automated.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you put a popular device, with a medical detection tool into the wider population, it would be logical that the device would pick up on patients who would other not notice the symptoms (at least initially, if any).

So then the question becomes what other daily device(s) could be made to do automatic health checks of certain specific indicators, which would give an early indication to the possible condition, thus improving life expectancy and quality of life, while lowering associated medical costs.

i.e. toothbrushes that detect cavities, sunglasses that check your pupils for certain symptoms, hats that monitor your EEG. These are obviously extreme examples, but you get the idea...

<comment><USER8> A toilet that monitored urine and stool samples would be a major lifesaver.

<comment><USER9> This strikes me as an exceptionally difficult problem to solve. I'll be impressed if someone brings a workable solution to market in any reasonable time-frame. I guess if you can retrain people in how they use their toilet, you might be able to simplify some of the challenges, but many people use their toilet as a generalized soft/liquid garbage can.

<comment><USER10> Well that's just it the UX of using a toilet would remain the same and the smart toilet wpuld collect the sample(as a toilet does now)/analyze it and send the data if it detects irregularities to your doctor. He/she then analyzes it and schedules a follow up appointment if needed.

<comment><USER9> Keeping the user experience the same — I suspect — will be excessively difficult

<comment><USER10> How so you use the toilet as you always would and everything is done automatically by the smart toilet.

<comment><USER9> Right, I also want a machine that magically makes me lose weight while I sleep, while not affecting my sleep and costing $5 ... that doesn't mean it's mechanically or physically possible with current technology though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> from the article: "Did my Apple Watch save my life? I think in my case, that's a bit of an overstatement."

Thanks to an Apple Watch w/ ECG, I now have a cardiologist, too. My A-fib burden is only 4% and at my age without diabetes my increased stroke risk is minimal, so my Dr. basically asked why I was bothering to wear this thing if it was just worrying me unnecessarily.

I mostly agree. It _is_ nice to finally know what's going on because I've been having irregular heartbeat when exercising for over 5 years & a stress test (ECG on a treadmill) didn't show anything. Now I've had 2 weeks of monitoring with an iRhythm Zio & an echocardiogram so I know I'm reasonably safe to continue exercising.

Is it worth the $$$ insurance paid for all of it? I'm really not sure about that. I kind of wish the Dr. had told me "lose some weight or you'll drop dead" because I would have listened. I'm also not sure what I would have done if I hadn't been able to figure out what was happening. Probably just continue to keep my rate under 150 as it's a high rate that usually correlates with irregular beats.

<comment><USER12> So you're cardiologist is saying it's not a big deal to be in afib (unless you're on blood thinners)? I don't understand how that could be a reasonable thought.

<comment><USER11> My cardiologist is saying that it's not a big deal for _me_ to be in afib 4% of the time with the longest lasting 3 hours 10 mins over a 2 week period. I haven't had a stroke or transient ischemic attack previously, don't have diabetes, hypertension or congestive heart failure. I'm male and 51 years old. Thus, my CHADS₂ and CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores are zero.

<comment><USER12> If you come out of it reliably on your own within a few hours, that makes sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It is odd to me how he keeps describing his $500/month insurance as being useless: he is generally in excellent health and his yearly expenditures are low enough that he is always paying down the deductible.

Does he feel car insurance and home insurance are useless since he didn't total his car last year and his house didn't burn down?

He knows this (as he mentions it obliquely) that he could lower his deductible but his costs would go up. Is he complaining that he is on the wrong part of that tradeoff curve? Or does he expect low-cost insurance with a low deductible that covers all of his routine medical expenses?

<comment><USER14> Imagine a regular sized family of 4, you have to shell out more than $20K/year for the most basic health insurance for your family if you are self employed, $20,000! and you still have to pay for EVERY doctor visit for your kids and regular checkups, and your family deductible is around $10-12K. And every year they send you a new increased quote by 10-15%. There should be some kind of a discount for families, like when you have multiple cars under your insurance your rate barely goes up when you add another one.

<comment><USER15> In my expensive area of CA, a gold insurance plan for a family of 4 costs $20,400 per year. That's an insurance plan with a $0 deductible and $30 co-pay per doctor visit. That is far from the most basic health plan. A plan with a $12k deductible is $13,500 per year.

Even so, a $20k a year is peanuts compared to the out-of-pocket expenses of a serious medical emergency. Don't fall into the trap of thinking insurance is not with it just because you haven't had to use it yet.

<comment><USER14> > $20k a year is peanuts compared to the out-of-pocket expenses of a serious > medical emergency.

And that's the most annoying part. The fact that $20,000 is considered peanuts in a medical condition is already outrageous. My friend's wife had a c-section child delivery and was billed $38,000...for a 3 days stay at the hospital. No complications just a planned c-section. I understand that's the reason why the insurance is so high

<comment><USER16> > No complications just a planned c-section

There was a lot of effort, planning, and training that goes into making sure that there aren't any complications. Not to mention the fact that even routine procedures can have unexpected complications that have to be planned for and addressed. I think that $38k for a surgical procedure with post-operative care for the mother and child isn't necessarily that outrageous. Just imagine the people, training, facilities, etc...

EDIT: Now that I'm thinking about it -- was the $38k bill with or without insurance? Meaning, was this their out of pocket costs with insurance? If so, that does seem rather unreasonable. If that was the billed rate for the insurance company and your friend's out of pocket costs were lower, that would make more sense.

<comment><USER17> I have 3 kids delivered by c-section. Total paid - €0. Performed by trained professionals in a nice hospital, not by villagers in a shed.

<comment><USER16> Given that you are quoting the price in Euros, I suspect the funding mechanism for your hospital is very different than the hospital costs the parent was talking about.

I know nothing about how the financial side of European hospitals work though... but I assume they still have internal costs that are tracked and tallied. Your kids' deliveries may not have cost you, but there was a total cost somewhere in the system. It probably wasn't anywhere near $38k, but even that isn't a fair comparison due to the substantial differences between the medical systems and the way indirect costs could be covered.

(I'm not trying to defend one system or the other, just pointing out that the systems are different so direct comparisons like $38k vs €0 aren't that straightforward. It gets even less straightforward when you factor in the US medical insurance system.)

<comment> yoz-y In France a 1 day stand in hospital is billed around 1000€, of course it is almost entirely covered by insurance. You have to pay a fee of 17€ a day if you have some standard insurance package. If you 'stay' at the hospital then all costs are bundled in this price, if you only follow exams they can actually get more expensive in total (usually they offer you to stay the night if you have exams that would cost more than a "full-pension")

This was a few years ago so the prices may have changed.

<comment><USER16> Thanks for the insight into how things work in France. Like I said -- I don't know much about how non-US healthcare systems are funded.

But, I think the main question I was trying to get at is -- how much are the French (or Japanese from a different thread) hospitals subsidized by the government. I expect for there to be indirect costs that might have to be covered by direct billing in one country, but not another. For example, electricity bills (or the cost of the building, etc)... is this covered by the 1000€ bill, or is is paid for by some other means? I recognize that US hospitals also get some level of subsidy, but there are hidden costs that aren't always apparent.

This is what I was trying to get at... that direct comparisons of costs aren't always that straightforward when comparing different systems. A 2000€ or $2000 bill might represent only a fraction of the actual cost of treatment. And given the opaque nature of heathcare billing, it's very hard to know.

<comment><USER18> > Like I said -- I don't know much about how non-US healthcare systems are > funded.

Then shouldn't you read up on that before expounding upon how a 38k price tag for a scheduled routine procedure is reasonable? Healthcare billing isn't that shocking when you travel outside of the states.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> While this is great for Afib detection it's its very rare CDC says 2.7-6 Million people[1]. Still great for those people! I still think we need to do much better. High BP and hypertension is way more important to measure since they can be diagnostic in a larger percentage.

My dad is a triple bypass heart patient. ECG and stress tests did diddly squat to detect it, until it was too late and it was diagnosed by a CT Angiogram. I now get CT Angiogram with contrasts every few years just to be safe because of family history.

[1][https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_atr...](https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_atrial_fibrillation.htm)

<comment><USER20> Do you know how many sieverts you get each time? I had one of those and I think I got one year's worth of background radiation in those few seconds that it lasted.

<comment><USER21> People worry too much about radiation. A year's worth of background radiation is not that much radiation.

<comment><USER20> I wouldn't know what's too much or not, but here's a link with the numbers [https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=safety- xray](https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=safety-xray)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is the 2nd or 3rd story I've heard like this about the Apple Watch's new ECG feature. I wasn't interested in smartwatches before, but now I am considering getting an Apple Watch, even if it's just for my parents.

<comment><USER23> Edit: Still not in Canada, though it seems to be in more countries. Very frustrating!

Original: I don't think they enable the ECG feature for anyone outside the US. It's locked based on the point of sale last I checked. Very frustrating to buy something so expensive to find out it's been region-locked!

<comment><USER24> It counts as a medical device, which means it has to go through extensive certification. Different countries have different procedures.

<comment><USER23> Correct! The frustrating part (for me) is Apple's lack of transparency in the extended delay in the release of this feature. It was heavily promoted, yet to find out that the ECG feature wasn't available prior to purchase you had to dig through their support documents to find the list of countries it is available in - which at the time of my purchase, was between 1-4.

But I only found that out after spending 3 days income on the device - <USER2> who would expect that a heavily promoted feature WASN'T available?

I understand Apple's choices of communication from their perspective as a for- profit business, which only makes me unhappier.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> A friend of mine in his early twenties drowned a few months back due to a cardiac event related to atrial fibrillation. He was otherwise in phenomenal shape and living life to the fullest.

<comment><USER26> I'm really sorry that happened to your friend and to you. I think the best outcome of tech like this is that it makes what seems like maybe small and maybe seemingly mundane improvements that reduce the frequency that things like this happen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> > resting heart rate being in the 113-120 bpm

That seems insanely high

<comment><USER28> It's not "insanely" high. And blanket statements like this can cause undue alarm.

If you're worried about an elevated resting heart rate, go get an ECG done. Don't let random people on the internet talk you into health anxiety.

<comment><USER29> As even the tiniest bit of research will show, that _is_ insanely high. Well over 99th percentile for that age group, according to US CDC. While it might be counterproductive to get anxious about minor symptoms, when one of the most critical indicators of overall health is off the charts I think "you should be worried" (with "go see a doctor" as the express or implied followup) is the humane response. "Meh" or denying the statistical reality is IMO irresponsible.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> > It's also worth noting at this point in the story that Atrial Fibrillation > is extremely rare in men my age. Less than two percent of people in my > demographic have it. Go figure. When I do something, I go big I guess.

This is looking at it backwards. How many serious health problems have similar rates of affliction? If there are 50 different potential health problems then he has a 2 in 3 chance of having at least _one_ of those.

<comment><USER31> This reminds me of Lupus and Guillain-Barre syndrome both rare diseases. But I know half a dosen people with lupus and four people that had Guillain-Barre and suffer lingering effects.

So if you're a doctor it's really unlikely that you patient has either of those. But start adding up all of those rare syndromes and it starts getting scary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> > _" I continue to pay for my insurance because thanks to the Affordable Care > Act, I have to. It's the law. And I'm okay with that. Because I know paying > into the system helps others who make less money than me have access to > care._"

One had better be okay with it, because if you don't consent, they'll take the money from you by force.

</comment><comment><USER33> I saw some variation of this story around the time it came out:

 _Grandfather discovers heart condition thanks to children's museum exhibit_

[https://kdvr.com/2019/02/21/grandfather-discovers-heart- cond...](https://kdvr.com/2019/02/21/grandfather-discovers-heart-condition- thanks-to-childrens-museum-exhibit/)

I don't think I submitted it to HN. I felt it would be viewed as fluff.

But we have incredible and constantly increasing opportunities to casually check biometrics that previously required serious medical exams and lab work, etc. It's absolutely changing things.

</comment><comment><USER25> Are there any quality alternatives for literally just monitoring your heart? I don't like the watch but I want that feature pretty badly.

<comment><USER34> Go to a doctor for a physical every year.

<comment><USER25> So I do. But nothing he does touches on this subject, at least I think. Maybe I'm not in the right age group for him to bother. He listens to my heart and checks blood pressure. My sense is that this is just so unlikely given what he does know about my health that he doesn't explore further.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Here in Italy in order to subscribe to a gym you need to bring your ECG (not mandatory by law but a number of gyms will ask for it), and every year you need to make a new one, so I would say that the percentage of "active" population that is not regularly checked is small. How is this matter in the rest of the world?

<comment><USER36> Israel used to be this way and it used to be a requirement by the government (not an ECG but a doctor note). Like a lot of other regulation it made it less likely for people to work out.

Now it's a questionnaire instead. I think the new system works better here since it's one less hurdle to get over before you can sign up for a gym and work out.

<comment><USER35> I would say yes and not: yes it may become a barrier, but no, here most gyms organized that they have a doctor inside and for 40 euros they do the doctor checkup + ECG.

<comment><USER36> Oh, in Israel getting a doctor checkup or an ECG is free and most gyms don't have doctors or even a nurse (all gym instructors must get CPR certification though).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I love the matter-of-factness of this article. Not only is it a great example of how technology can have unexpected positive outcomes for users, the author also manages to sneak in some extremely relaxed observations about the ACA and having to subsidise healthcare of others. I am impressed!

</comment><comment><USER38> > "Since I don't have a "job job," I pay roughly $500 a month for "health > insurance" out of my own pocket"

Tangential question, related to the above: I am currently paying for COBRA, and the amount paid is outragerous. Anyone has suggestions for a cheaper, good enough alternative?

</comment><comment><USER39> > (a direct result of my resting heart rate being in the 113-120 bpm range)

Yeah that should have been a red flag in itself

Also remember that while it will give "true positive" results, there will be a lot of borderline or non-worrying alarms that will need to be checked.

</comment><comment><USER40> One thing to note: portable ECGs are <$100 on amazon. Not as feature rich as the apple watch, sure, but the watch only measures from one location, normally you want to measure from a few, usually at least 3: leg, arm, and chest.

<comment><USER41> the watch measures from two locations actually, through the wrist and through a finger on the crown. you're still right that 3 (and more) is better.

<comment><USER40> For each of the three locations I mentioned, you also need to contact the portable ECG with your finger. The finger is being used to create a closed loop. It is not a measurement site.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> My health and my retirement depend upon Apple getting this right :)

</comment><comment><USER43> I wonder when there will be tech like this for epilepsy.

</comment><comment> dis-sys from the article

> resting heart rate being in the 113-120 bpm range

with such readings, I guess one would just go to see a doc?

</comment><comment><USER44> I also have a cardiologist.

It takes the form of a combination of very high output training (BJJ) coupled with regular, sustained aerobic training at a high percentage of my aerobic capacity (running and plyometrics).

It sounds like I'm being flip, or worse, self-satisfied - but I am quite serious.

If my heart started behaving strangely, or weakened in some way, _I would notice immediately_. It would be quite marked. Things that I partake in, and think about, _and feel_ , would suddenly be off.

Or to put it more technically, I am running my body at a much lower set of tolerances where defects are immediately identifiable.[1]

I have a suspicion that _my cardiologist_ is actually better than the apple one, since I could _feel_ some differences that might not yet manifest themselves in some kind of measurable heart output.

The downside to all of this, in the faraway future (I am currently 42 years old) is that "heart trouble" might manifest itself _during exercise_ in a sudden and acute fashion that leaves me dead. On the other hand, the exercise makes that, statistically, less likely.

I also enjoy it very much, so there's that.

[1] [https://www.keyence.com/ss/products/measure/measurement_libr...](https://www.keyence.com/ss/products/measure/measurement_library/basic/tolerance/)

<comment><USER45> _The downside to all of this, in the faraway future (I am currently 42 years old) is that "heart trouble" might manifest itself during exercise in a sudden and acute fashion that leaves me dead. On the other hand, the exercise makes that, statistically, less likely._

Actually depending on your condition and your activities, it's entirely possible that the first warning you'd have is dropping dead. I'm also not being flip or self-satisfied, and I also have an anecdote to share. A good friend of mine who was a serious tennis players, and later an equally serious swimmer and runner got his "warning" about two years ago. He was at a conference and complained of feeling a bit ill. Then he experienced sudden cardiac arrest and despite an AED on premises he died.

He wasn't much older than you, was in perfect shape and ate well his whole life, saw his doctor and had good lab numbers. The "far future" you imagine is hopefully just that, far in the future, but it might not be. Like a lawyer as their own client, don't be a fool and pretend to be your own cardiologist.

<comment><USER44> "Actually depending on your condition and your activities, it's entirely possible that the first warning you'd have is dropping dead."

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

<comment><USER45> You placed that possibility in, and I quote, "the faraway future" and all in the context of your fitness regime being an early warning system better than a cardiologist. Even taking your post with a generous helping of charitable interpretation, it seems Ill-conceived.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> If the Apple Watch can be credited for new detections, can we also blame it for non-detections?

Just asking... Because if the value prop is that they can detect, then they should have some accountability for non-detected positives, no?

<comment><USER24> > they should have some accountability for non-detected positives

The device has been given a class II clearance by the FDA, which means it has to " provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness ".

False negative rates are definitely one of the things that are considered in getting this. That doesn't mean false negatives aren't possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> IDK about this. I find it kinda creepy to have my heart beat monitored & sent to a server far away and not under my control. I mean, ad companies already have so much data about me, do they also need to know how my heartbeat reacts to an ad? Does my insurer need to know it? I wonder whether it can detect sex and be used to e.g. track infidelity.

On the other hand, of course it's great to save lives and help you detect possibly harmful conditions. The thing that makes me uneasy is not the idea of a heart tracker watch per se, but the possibility that maybe one day the facebook app wants access or chrome because of WebHeartBeat API or whatever. This trend of constantly increasing amounts of data sources sent to the cloud is sick.

<comment><USER48> > I find it kinda creepy to have my heart beat monitored & sent to a server > far away and not under my control.

Heart rate information, like all health information gathered by Apple Watch, stays on your device unless you choose to back it up to iCloud. In this case it is end-to-end encrypted.

<comment><USER49> Data backed up to iCloud is not yet encrypted in a way that Apple cannot access it.

<comment><USER48> Health data is encrypted with a key that Apple does not have access to. It's true "end-to-end" encryption.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


3 ways Facebook could fight spam - <AUTHOR> http://safeandsavvy.f-secure.com/2010/08/25/facebook-fight-spam/

<comment><USER2> _Once upon a time, Spam was a salty lunch meat. Then it became unwanted email. Then spam became anything on a webpage that was self-serving, repetitive or annoying._

No, actually, it didn't. What they're calling "spam", the rest of us call "advertising." And I think most Facebook users are content with the current FB business model (i.e., a free, ad-supported service.)</comment>


Ether One: The Video Game That Tries to Simulate Dementia - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/ether-one-video-game-tries-simulate-dementia

<comment><USER2> Jonathan Franzen's book, The Corrections, contains some very vivid scenes & chapters through the eyes of a man suffering from dementia -- I can't speak to their accuracy, but they are very powerful.

</comment><comment><USER3> The same developer who made Dear Ester previously made a HL2 mod that takes the player through delusions of someone suffering from Korsakoff's Syndrome

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

[http://www.moddb.com/mods/korsakovia/news/korsakovia- release...](http://www.moddb.com/mods/korsakovia/news/korsakovia-released/)</comment>


How to design a good toaster with lessons from the 1940s [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLk1cjZ4ll0 <comment><USER2> This classic toaster design was not without it's deficiencies. The raising mechanism was far too slow and the bimetallic strip had a tendency to get blocked with crumbs, etc., causing unexpectedly variable toasting. There is certainly some elegant engineering on display, but most people would probably not want to deal with this toaster on a daily basis.

That being said, today's toasters have their own problems. Most simply aren't built to last. My previous toaster had a mechanical lever to lower the toast and engage the heating elements, latched down with a timed release with a nice digital display. The timer was, unfortunately, a relatively cheap part that was fried one day, likely by heat or a voltage spike. After that happened, the toaster would only toast if you _held the lever down_.

I do get the feeling that a lot of people are starting to place more and more value on reliability. Most of us don't want appliances that randomly fail after a year or two. The trouble is that it's bloody hard to tell if a given "premium" toaster with "excellent build quality" has an Achilles heel like the timer in my departed toaster. You just can't tell if a toaster will last based on its price, marketing buzz-words, heft, etc..

To manufacturer's, the trick seems to be to keep customers coming back without taking them out of the market with a product that simply lasts. Their ideal toaster is one that reviewers will say is "built like a tank" and "should last generations", but has a hidden flaw that bricks it after a couple of years.

<comment><USER3> For a lot of appliances, there are brands that are known to last for years. The only problem is that you get what you pay for, so they tend to be rather expensive.

<comment><USER4> Give us some examples. OK, I'll start... Vacuums: Miele. I don't think Miele vacuums are quite as reliable as they used to be, but they are still (with some success) being marketed that way. What other brands for appliances ("white goods")..?

<comment><USER5> Our Dualit two slice toaster is ~15 years old. It has a touch of Trigger's Broom because I've replaced the central heating elements once, and will do the same with the side elements soon. I know Dualit sell replacements for the timer mechanism though ours has been fine so far.

I would like a toaster that could handle thicker slices. But I quite like having a toaster that has survived three house moves, two children, a lot of floating cat hair, and generally rough treatment, and doesn't have a visible scratch. I think they must make them from old battleship armor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> No. I once owned one of those toasters. That automatic up-and-down bread feature worked for maybe a day. The it gets stuck and I have to extract the break with a fork. Maybe it works for wonderbread slices in the studio. It doesn't work for my bagel in my kitchen.

Really care about toast? Don't let the machine do the thinking for you. Pop the toast up when YOU know it's done. But to do that you will need _any other toaster_ than those with the automatic up-and-down feature. Half the time I ended up unplugging the thing and shaking the toast out.

<comment><USER7> It's true they don't work so well with bagels, as bagels are thick, but there is an adjustment screw on the bottom which can normally solve any problem with regular toast not coming back up again.

<comment><USER8> In their defense toasting bagels was not a feature in wide spread demand at the time these were made.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The previous video on this got a big discussion last year: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21164014](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21164014)

</comment><comment><USER10> > Toast has become my jam, and jam is what I put on toast

I love this guy. Probably my favorite tech YouTuber

<comment><USER11> His cheesy joke delivery has gotten fantastic over the years. It was a bit rough in his early videos but it just goes to show how anything can be improved with practice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I grew up with one of these, and then lived for several years with another (by way of a roommate). These things inevitably revert to one of two failure modes:

1) The toast does not go down, despite banging the toast up and down like a basketball.

2) The toast does not come up, so you have to dig it out with a knife or a fork.

There's an adjuster screw for #1, but it's a finicky analog adjustment. I already pick banjo, I don't want to have to retune my toaster on the same schedule.

#2 is probably just due to the undersized holes and necessarily weak spring action.

</comment><comment><USER13> This guy makes great videos on tech. Look at his video on the RCA CED system, because RCA actually made a flux capacitor.

</comment><comment><USER14> Side note: if you get a new cheap toaster from the shop it will have an integrated toaster controller IC. And the functions defrost/reheat which are sold at premium are in all ICs, only the buttons are missing in the cheap ones.</comment>


NIC.LY statement regarding the decision to block vb.ly - <AUTHOR> http://nic.ly/anvp.php <comment><USER4> For the record we did NOT receive any communication from NIC.ly before they pulled the vb.ly domain.

We had received other emails from them previously including our domain renewal notice just a month and a half before so I know they had a working email address for us and that we were receiving their other correspondence.

They've made out in their statement that we ignored their email - given how upset myself and Violet Blue have been over this I would urge people to consider whether these are the actions of two people who would intentionally ignore such a significant warning. Why would we do that?

I do, however, feel relieved that they will not be letting anyone else register the domain - we were concerned from a security perspective of someone else registering the domain and re-routing existing vb.ly links out there to insecure or spoofed websites.

 _(we hadn't highlighted this concern previously because we didn't want to give anyone ideas but now they have said the domain is 'locked' I'm happy to talk about that concern_ )

<comment><USER5> hey Ben,

Not to add insult to injury, but it is very hard - next to impossible - <USER3> believe your version of this over the nic.ly version or vice-versa given the available evidence. All there is are stories.

You are the 'injured party' and it is to your advantage to present your case as strong as possible, and not being warned is of course going to make the other side look bad.

They in turn are going to make it seem as though they did everything they could and only used the disabling as a last resort.

From what I understand though, you were happy to operate this service under their terms and conditions, knowing full well that they could repossess the domain at a moments notice.

I would very much like to believe that they never sent you any email but it's going to be very hard for you to prove that conclusively, they are going to have an equally hard time showing that they warned you, but even if they didn't it will not change things much (as far as I can see they're not going to have a change of heart any time soon).

If I were you I'd pick a .com that has a good ring to it and relaunch, use the current media frenzy around the story to get your new name out there before you are 'old news'.

That way you get to rescue as much of the wreckage as possible.

Think about the future, not about the past. Good luck!

<comment><USER4> _Not to add insult to injury, but it is very hard - next to impossible - <USER3> believe your version of this over the nic.ly version or vice-versa given the available evidence._

We didn't receive any prior warnings. If you're, essentially, saying you don't believe me then that's your call.

I'm not sure what more I can do. Sad.

<comment><USER5> No, what I'm saying is that for an outsider it is impossible to know the truth, no matter who you would want to believe or who you care about most. Personally, I think you should be able to do whatever you want with domains that you register in your name and that you paid for, so I'm sympathetic to your case.

But the time to move on is NOW, not three weeks from now so use your 15 minutes of fame to relaunch your service on a new domain while the media hype lasts or you'll have to start completely from scratch. You might even be able to turn this whole thing to your advantage, I'm not a fan of URL shorteners in any way, but if you're going to do one then make use of this, turn a disadvantage in to an opportunity.

I'd never even heard of vb.ly before, I have now, and I'm sure that a relaunch on a very short timeframe would still get you some media coverage.

<comment><USER4> _Personally, I think you should be able to do whatever you want with domains that you register in your name and that you paid for_

Do you not think that, really, this is the key issue and is a million more times more important for everyone than what we were doing with the url shortener itself?

I've spend a large amount of my career helping to build a free press (http:/bbc.co.uk/news) and it's something I believe strongly in.

Violet has published 30+ books on sex and sexuality and is a guest on Oprah and other outlets. I've got a good name for myself across the UK and San Francisco start-up scene even if you've never heard of me. I don't think we need to use this to get publicity for ourselves or our service (which was never really commercial, we ran it for the benefit of the community).

The reason we're making a big deal of this is the censorship angle and making sure that everyone else who has a .ly knows what is going on. We could have just let them do this and no one would have known.

<comment><USER5> You make the mistake of trying to impose your own worldview and morals on an entity that has absolutely no stake in that and has fairly clearly indicated that your views and theirs are in conflict, and likely will remain so. You are not going to convince Libya, the Liberian government or NIC.ly to change their mind on this, and here on HN you are preaching to the choir.

Of course censorship is bad. And editorial control by a registrar over the content of websites under their TLD sucks. But that was spelled out up-front.

You may think that that is the key issue, but in reality the key issue is if you're going to wise up to the fact that you're fighting windmills here and that if you don't move on, and fast that all your work on this will have come to naught.

I fully understand you're upset, but frankly I don't care one bit how many books your s.o. has written and how often she's on TV, the censorship angle has nothing to do with it, unless you were purposely doing this from the beginning to create a case to show that censorship from sexuality in Islamic countries was what you had in mind when you registered that domain.

Personally I have a hard time believing that, I think that that is something that only came about after you found your domain taken off-line, in other words, you only started to care about censorship after being censored.

Sure, censorship is bad. That's why you stay away from dealing with government entities that will allow themselves the right to censor you.

See Google vs China and many other examples.

<comment><USER4> _I don't care one bit how many books your s.o. has written and how often she's on TV_

I just wanted to say I think you got the wrong end of the stick on why I wrote that... The gist of what I was trying to communicate is that we don't need to use this "15 minutes of fame" (as you put it) to further ourselves or our projects.

The point I was trying to make (which respectfully I don't think you got) is that instead, I'm trying to use the attention to highlight the wider issues of the .ly domain space for those who already own .ly domains, might register one in the future or simply rely on .ly domains such as for url shortening.

In other words, this isn't about us. It's about the wider issue of .ly domains in general. I'm sorry that this didn't come across to you from my previous reply.

<comment><USER5> > The gist of what I was trying to communicate is that we don't need to use > this "15 minutes of fame" (as you put it) to further ourselves or our > projects.

Ok, I believe you.

What made you decide to go ahead with the .ly domain after you read about their terms of service?

For me their policy would be a huge red flag, there is no way that I would ever invest any time or effort or funds in to something on such a shaky foundation, that's the part that puzzles me most about all this. After all it should have given you an indication that the NIC of the TLD that you decided on had a dim view of anything adult related.

My view of the .ly other TLDs like that is they are used mainly by several gropus of people, most notably those that try to imitate something that is already successful (for instance, bit.ly), or they feel that there is not enough choice for catchy names in the predominant TLDs.

In your case I can see a technical motivation (URL shorteners should have a short domain name or else their whole purpose goes away), and a bit of the imitation factor. But those two together don't offset the risk for me, so what made you do it?

Why not secure their agreement that they would be ok with this beforehand?

Someone else here in this thread mentioned that I probably don't read the terms of service of the services that I use, and the funny fact is that I do, and that I pick my suppliers very carefully, even if that sometimes means paying a (hefty) premium. Business continuity is nothing to trifle with.

<comment><USER4> _What made you decide to go ahead with the .ly domain after you read about their terms of service?_

Sure, thanks for asking - and perhaps I should highlight this elsewhere.

So we DID read the regulations (at <http://nic.ly/regulations.php>). It doesn't say ANYTHING in their regulations that they are going to make editorial decisions upon the content of your site (as I said previously, anything written on LibyanSpider.com is reference and not the article of record, and as it happens they have changed a lot of wording since we registered the domain 13+ months ago -- yes, they had no problems with this for over a year!).

People have written whole blog posts on how we were wrong because it says clearly they won't allow sexual or offensive references in domains. But the wording in that caluse pertains to the DOMAIN and just the domain, not the content of the site. And so the string "vb" in vb.ly clearly doesn't infringe on any issues around sexual or offensive content.

So we're good so far, would you not agree?

The area we considered, and which ultimately NIC.ly said we were in violation of is:

 _3.5 The Applicant certifies that, to the best of his/her knowledge the domain name is not being registered for any activities/purpose not permitted under Libyan law._

Now let me use what NIC.ly actually wrote to us, rather than this wider peanut gallery speculation that people are putting upon this. As per [http://techyum.com/2010/10/official-vb-ly-link-shortener- sei...](http://techyum.com/2010/10/official-vb-ly-link-shortener-seized-by- libyan-government/), Mr Alaeddin S. ElSharif of NIC.ly wrote:

 _Moving up the Regulations list we find clause 3.5 clearly states that: "The Applicant certifies that, to the best of his/her knowledge the domain name is not being registered for any activities/purpose not permitted under Libyan law."

Pornography and adult material aren't allowed under Libyan Law, therefore we removed the domain,_

Sure, ok: pornography and adult material isn't allowed under Libyan Law.

We didn't host any Pornography or adult material. The site was a single page, as you can see from the screen grab on the TechYum url above.

So in conclusion I feel we performed the due diligence as per the regulations and stayed within the regs. What I didn't expect is that NIC.ly would interpret their regulations quite liberally _(no pun intended)_ in an effort to close the domain. They claim there was a lot of pressure upon them internally to do that, but what I assumed (incorrectly) is that no matter what pressure there might be if something is within regs then I don't expect the rug to be pulled out from under me.

What do you make of the above, Jacques, seeing as you have been quite vocal on this top within this HN thread?

Thanks

<comment><USER5> > But the wording in that caluse pertains to the DOMAIN and just the domain, > not the content of the site

Yes, that's true but that assumes a westerners mindset where you can go and argue and if you are right 'you will get your way'. To me the fact that that clause is present is a warning that they do care about the content of the URLs themselves, which is one step removed from the content of the site. In that case I would have either decided to let it go or I would have decided to contact them to get an advance ruling if what I'm doing is ok with them.

> So we're good so far, would you not agree?

Technically, yes. But if they decide otherwise you will have to go to court after pointing it out to them and then all they have to do is insert paragraph 4.4 which states that they now also reserve the right to yank .ly domains.

See, the whole idea that this is somehow 'right' is wrong to begin with. They reserve the right to literally do what pleases them and you might be right in a lawyerly sense but that won't get you anywhere until you're willing to take it to a judge. And then you'd have to find a way to convince that judge that:

(1) having abided by the original terms of service you should be given your domain back

(2) that even after you're given your domain back the only terms of service that apply to you are the ones in effect at the first registration date, any amendments do not apply to you

(3) that free sexuality is not in conflict with Libyan law

Add to that that every bit of publicity around this will likely work against you in a society like that where 'setting examples' and a general dislike of a public lack of perceived morality are the norm. Even if that's just lip service that's an uphill battle.

> We didn't host any Pornography or adult material.

But you were actively promoting things that might be construed offensive or pornographic according to them.

I've had a number of Turkish friends in the Netherlands, all very nice and well adjusted people. Except on one front, the way dutch women dress. To a man they considered dutch women 'harlots', and they used a much less friendly term for them because of their dress.

What's pornography to you and a Libyan devout believer might be two very different things.

> What I didn't expect is that NIC.ly would interpret their regulations quite > liberally (no pun intended) in an effort to close the domain.

I think that you are probably at odds with a single individual very high up the tree in the Libyan TLD administrator, who finds the content offensive and wants to make sure that a signal is sent out to sites that associate themselves with western morality when it comes to sexuality to leave the .ly domains alone. I admit freely that that's pure speculation on my part.

> The site was a single page, as you can see from the screen grab on the > TechYum url above.

To some people that image would be offensive. I understand if that is something that you can not even fathom, please contrast it with the amazement of US visitors to the Netherlands when they go to the beach here and see plenty of naked people. They too find it offensive, here nobody bats an eye (though some might peek).

> So in conclusion I feel we performed the due diligence as per the > regulations and stayed within the regs.

ok.

You underestimate how loose the interpretation of rules can be when you are no longer in a 'Western' society, the safe bet for stuff like this is 'when in Rome do as the Romans do', and to use a country specific domain for something that people in that country are unlikely to engage in and that might offend sensibilities there is not the best course of action, even if by our standards you are both in the right and should be perfectly free to do as you like.

By my standards nudism is fine, homosexuals should be able to marry and people should be allowed to smoke pot and even use hard drugs if they desire to do so, and that people should have the right to end their own lives (and with dignity) if they so desire, but by the standards of the US that is not the case.

So I probably wouldn't make a site with lots of instructions on how to grow pot or other stuff like that under a .us domain and expect to be allowed to operate it. Maybe they'll let it go, maybe they won't but I am not in an urgent need to find out.

I note that the US government has seized a bunch of .com domains (see [http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-and-megaupload-escape- dom...](http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-and-megaupload-escape-domain- seizure-by-us-100707/) ),

See for instance:

<http://zml.com/index.html>

I find that just as bad, and possibly worse because to me the US can and should be held to higher standards than Libya, given their usual attitude of having the moral high ground in matters like this.

<comment><USER4> So I take on board a lot of your points and also minded that there comes a point in all this where perhaps we're only going to get so close to agreeing. To debate this much more probably offers diminishing returns.

Two comments though if I may:

Your point on

 _...that won't get you anywhere until you're willing to take it to a judge [in the local country]._

While you might be right on one hand, if we conducted our life based on that then many things in life would be curtailed.

I don't have the resources to visit Canada to visit court if I needed be, does that mean I shouldn't sell my stuff on eBay to someone in Canada?

I want to visit Japan for vacation but I don't have the resource to go to court for damages if the hotel doesn't honor my booking - do I therefore not visit Japan?

I like to buy books and stuff from Amazon but I don't really have the resources or inclination to go to court in Washington State (3 hrs flight away) if they run off with my money and don't send me my stuff. Does that mean I don't buy things from Amazon.com?

I want to rent an apartment here in San Francisco but I don't really have the resources or inclination to go to court if the landlord takes my deposit - does that mean I shouldn't rent here?

etc.

Do you REALLY think everyone who buys .ly domains is prepared to go to Libyan court (including bit.ly?). Other way around, do you think everyone who registers a .com/net/org is prepared to go to US federal court?

It's also interesting that you assume I'm American, as you've made several references to that in my post. I'm actually British, spent most of my adult life living in one of the most populated Islamic areas of London and indeed the UK (Bethnal Green, East London) and I've read most of the Qur'an as part of my education (not the case for education here in the US, as it happens). I've extensively traveled through many Islamic countries.

I'm pretty aware of what Islam thinks is right or not based on it's views of decency and I actually thought we were careful to navigate around that based on what the NIC.ly regulations said they would (and wouldn't) regulate around. The point is that I don't think Islam or Libya for that matter is some crooked society where the rules of law are malleable as you make out. Perhaps on that last point I am wrong.

<comment><USER5> > Do you REALLY think everyone who buys .ly domains is prepared to go to > Libyan court (including bit.ly?)

No, but that you don't go to court in general is taken to mean that either you don't care enough about the issue, that you consider your chances weak or that you feel that you can spend your time better, or any combination of that.

You _could_ go to court, challenge their decision and _maybe_ it would go your way. I personally don't believe it is worth the effort, if you have other ways of resurrecting your website then I would concentrate on that instead.

I've gone to court abroad several times and have won in each of those cases, I cared enough that I thought a lawsuit was warranted and even though it cost me plenty I think it was well worth it. I figured my chances were good, and that of course factored in there as well.

Going to court on principle is an expensive hobby.

> It's also interesting that you assume I'm American, as you've made several > references to that in my post.

I tried to stay away from that and tried to use 'western' as a stand in, so if I slipped up then my apologies, HN is quite US centric and at times it feels like the people from other countries here are a serious minority. Especially around US election time.

And you do live in San Francisco, so for now at least you seem to be part of the US more than of the UK, so maybe that would not have been such a bad assumption after all ;)

> The point is that I don't think Islam or Libya for that matter is some > crooked society where the rules of law are malleable as you make out. > Perhaps on that last point I am wrong.

I think their laws are not 'malleable' per se, I think that expecting a Western attitude towards the law in non-Western countries is simply not the right thing to do.

We are very 'straight lined', we believe in logic in all its glory and we like things to be clear. Non-Western societies are much more arranged around customs and the things that are 'not said'. For them to spell out that this is not permitted is possibly already maneuvering them in to a corner where they'd rather not be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> key bit here:

> The domain has also been excluded from future registrations so that no other > entity (local or abroad) can re-register it.

So much for PGs theory that someone there wanted the domain and they took it at a pretext: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1764475> It should be easy enough to check up on it periodically to see if they're true to their word.

I wonder if the "local Libyan internet community" is an open body or if they are semi government.

On the whole this is a pretty levelheaded and clear response, and it never hurts to see the other side of the story.

That said, I still think that you're _much_ better off to invest your time, money and effort in to .com, .net and .org domains and to steer clear of cutesy domains from countries that can disable your domain based on the content of your services.

As for their regulations being only available in Arabic: <http://nic.ly/regulations.php>

<comment><USER4> _As for their regulations being only available in Arabic:<http://nic.ly/regulations.php> _

Yeah, did you read ALL of the regulations? Including the bit about your content needing to stay within Libyan law.

Try finding ANYWHERE on the Internet that outlines what Libyan law is in English.

And I say English not because I expect the Internet to all be in English, but simply because as you point out the official NIC.ly regulations are published in English.

Without that, it is impossible to put together a complete set of the regulations (the NIC.ly regs + the Libyan law).

<comment><USER6> Perhaps you shouldn't have built your business on a Libyan domain in the first place then...

<comment><USER7> This is what I keep coming back to. When you register a foreign domain, you are at the mercy of the laws/whims of that entity. Eyes wide open and all that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm not sure I understand the hubbub over this. When you register a domain from a country where.. um, "reasonable dispute resolution" can't be expected, caveat emptor.

If this was a dispute with Network Solutions, or GoDaddy, I can see the outrage. But it's with a domain associated with Libya. I say again, Libya.

Lower your expectations, and then lower them even more.

<comment><USER9> It's not simply Libya.

This country's full name is Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

<comment><USER5> Yes, just like the former East Germany was called 'the peoples democratic republic of Germany'.

North Korea, China and a bunch of others all have very flowery names hiding some pretty ugly stuff.

<comment><USER9> I dunno what your comment has to do with anything other than getting upvotes, which I'm sure you'll get plenty of.

My comment was more geared towards pointing out the obvious incompatibility of US based porn capitalist and Libyan Arab Socialist government. And that's not even getting into history of these two countries' relations.

I'm amused how little educated some people here are about the Rest of the World.

<comment><USER8> _...pointing out the obvious incompatibility of US based porn capitalist and Libyan Arab Socialist government. And that's not even getting into history of these two countries' relations._

from your original comment:

 _It's not simply Libya._

 _This country's full name is Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya._

I tend to think the more common takeaway from your comment is that you were being picky about my use of Libya's common name as opposed to the full name. That's how I read it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Who cares what they say? This is an organization run in a nation state without the rule of law. There is _no governing organization you can appeal to_ to ensure their decisionmaking is consistent. The rule that allocated them ".ly" is (essentially) ISO 3166-1, and ISO 3166-1 does not care about you, your business, or your rights. Neither, it should go without saying, does Libya.

<comment><USER5> > This is an organization run in a nation state without the rule of law.

Libya actually has a pretty modern legal system (other than being based on 'Sharia' law that is), with several levels of appeal possible including a supreme court.

> There is no governing organization you can appeal to to ensure their > decisionmaking is consistent.

Actually, there is:

This Regulation shall be interpreted and construed under Libyan Law.

So you could appeal to the Libyan courts. As they say though, good luck with that, but that would be something to do before making the claim that this was unlawful.

<comment><USER10> That doesn't mean anything. The "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya" outlawed political parties 40 years ago and has been ruled by Muammar Gaddafi ever since. The Iraqi Baath party could have made the same legal process claims, while leaving out the fact that you'd be slowly boiled in a vat of oil if you attempted to avail yourself of that process.

We need to stop kidding ourselves. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't make it not real: people buying .ly names are doing business with one of the world's great dictatorships. Whether or not that's bad ethically, it sure is a dubious business decision.

<comment><USER5> > That doesn't mean anything. The "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab > Jamahiriya" outlawed political parties 40 years ago and has been ruled by > Muammar Gaddafi ever since.

Agreed, but you'd have to give them the benefit of the doubt before pronouncing judgment, otherwise you can't make that statement. After their courts have let you down you could make the case that you've been duped but given the terms-of-service I would not find it totally incredible if the courts sided with the NIC for valid reasons.

> The Iraqi Baath party could have made the same legal process claims, while > leaving out the fact that you'd be slowly boiled in a vat of oil if you > attempted to avail yourself of that process.

Unlikely in this case, and we're discussing Libya, not Iraq before the removal of Saddam Hussain & his cronies.

> We need to stop kidding ourselves. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't > make it not real: people buying .ly names are doing business with one of the > world's great dictatorships.

As dictatorships come, Libya is fairly small fry. Just like in former Iraq - which we're still not discussing ;) - life for most Libyans is at a perfectly acceptable standard for the region, and they are not so upset about these things that they seem to be inclined to overthrow their government any time soon.

> Whether or not that's bad ethically, it sure is a dubious business decision.

Personally I would not do business with a .ly registrar exactly because I would not want to put my business at risk like that, but _also_ because doing so effectively sustains a regime that I feel no sympathy for. I don't think that any money sent to the .ly registrars will end up to benefit the Libyan population in general, but most likely will end up in a few very select pockets or to do stuff that I do not want to be associated with.

<comment><USER10> I don't have to give them the benefit of the doubt. It would in fact be stupid to do so. The Libyan government does far, far worse things than capriciously turning off domains on a regular basis. That logic is repellent.

We need to stop kidding ourselves. _.ly really is Libya._ I don't support bombing them, or anything crazy like that, but doing business with them is lunacy.

<comment><USER5> > I don't have to give them the benefit of the doubt. It would in fact be > stupid to do so.

So in any altercation between a westerner and the Libyan government the Libyan government is automatically at fault?

> The Libyan government does far, far worse things than capriciously turning > off domains on a regular basis.

Agreed.

> That logic is repellent.

No, that's just not descending to their level because I disagree with their politics.

> We need to stop kidding ourselves. .ly really is Libya. I don't support > bombing them, or anything crazy like that, but doing business with them is > lunacy.

That's up to every individual to make that choice, I would advise against it but those that do have made their bed and should lie in it rather than complain.

<comment><USER10> <http://j.mp/cruhgd>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Some really good points about this whole fiasco here --> [http://saint- rebel.com/2010/10/06/feigned-outrage-ly-domains...](http://saint- rebel.com/2010/10/06/feigned-outrage-ly-domains-are-fine-just-respect-the- tos/)

</comment><comment><USER12> The vb.ly story reminds me of when Christmas Island shut down goatse.cx ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx#Domain_suspension_and...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx#Domain_suspension_and_sale)).

<comment><USER13> I think in this case they did good to all of humanity by removing it ;p ( I used to think free speech was above all until I forgot my account log in for 5 mintues once at work and someone wrote a script that pulled up firefox and goatse every 5 minutes ;p)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> We've released a response to NIC.ly's statement, available at [http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2010/10/our-response-to-nic- lys-...](http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2010/10/our-response-to-nic-lys- statement-on-the-vb-ly-domain-deletion/)

</comment><comment><USER14> You simply deserved to loose that domain. The lybian tld has their own set rules, you didn't obey to their TOS, so you loose your domain. If they contacted you or not, is completely irrelevant.

And I guess that they did contact you, but if you would acknowledge it now, it would come out that you were lying big from the start.

</comment><comment><USER15> Communication, communication, communication... Read your 'technical contact' email!

<comment><USER4> um no, spin spin spin...

see my thread above <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1772206>

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm offended that NIC.LY would use the expression "sex positive". It should be shut down.

(Incidentally, paranoia about my domain being killed is why I have my real contact information in my .us registration. NIC.* registrars seem to be super- strict about their registration policies.)

</comment><comment><USER17> I find this story about vb.ly pretty interesting. First of all, I'm sorry for your loss ! :) The thing is, as many pointed out, don't expect to be able to negociate anything with Libya. I'm not saying it's a bad country or anything, but it's just how this country runs ! They do their stuff, and that's ok with me. (I'm no-one to have any concern about how the libians should run their internet).

The .ly domains are pretty popular these days. Maybe because there is bit.ly which is well known, and because 'ly' is something new, and better than '.fr' for example. But maybe it's time to move on. I know, the domain is important. But vb.ly is not like smart.ly ! it's not a word. You can take any other domain from now, and your name won't change that much.

Jacquesm (who I respect a lot), is saying the key bit is that they won't let anyone register this domain again. What makes me write a comment here is another 'bit', : "We as a Registry would prefer seeing art.ly used for a website about Libyan art for instance, or lda.ly used by the Libyan De-mining Association, rather than adding more URL shorteners under our National TLD."

THIS, is something I really can understand. The net is something done globally, and it's not something that just can be ruled by what _we_ call the western world. The LY domain is the libian top domain. As far as I know, Libya is a country, and they so have the right to rule this domain as they wish. Maybe they want some control over it ? That's their right. They have policies different than the .com NIC registration rules, they also have the right to be different, in their .ly ruling, than what _we_ (the westerns) have done done with the .net/.com/.org domains.

And maybe this call to 'we would prefer art.ly pointing to a libian art website' is maybe only PR stuff. But even in France I remember some trials about national TV's websites (france2.fr, france3.fr) that foreigners owned. These owners lost their domains due to the fact that .FR domains are made FOR FRANCE. That means, France, the country, can do whatever he wants with the .FR if you don't comply to THEIR rules. So, in short, I'm just saying I completely agree with that particular point.

Libya is growing, it's going on the globalization stuff. Maybe they are right to have a control over their domains (as they SHOULD do, in my opinion). Maybe one day they will develop their tourism and will have to host websites on very important domains , related to them (on .ly). And I would not be surprised if they properly stop the renewal of some .ly domains in the idea to acquire them for themselves, in order to host art.ly, hostels.ly, etc... And you know, I would find it very _right_.

edit: I accept any downvote, no worries ! I know what I am saying here is completely against freedom regarding whoever wants to squat the .ly domains ! And I know I'm actually defending what they did, and that they don't have a good reputation. Personally I hate their president/king whatever because of what he did in the past, but that's not a reason to loose it on Libya, with some racist arguments I read here, just because they modified the way we see the domain rulings :)

<comment><USER4> I agree.

I wonder what the currently owners of art.ly think about the statement?

So basically the domain registry of their domain don't really want them to own it (having already sold it to them) and would rather they had it back and could sell it to a local company.

!

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Appears to be down for me.

<comment><USER19> Keep trying now and again; it seems to come and go. Just in case here is the current text:

NIC.ly rules and regulations were set by the local Libyan internet community (in accordance with best practices for ccTLDs) to reflect it's identity and content. It's a bottom up module in which the Community's feedback, opinions and remarks are taken into decision-making consideration, and it is our duty to uphold these rules and regulations to serve the better interests of the community we represent.

In reference to the vb.ly incident: the domain's purpose (proclaimed by its registrants themselves) was to serve as a 'sex friendly URL shortener', mainly for adult uses. This means that vb.ly had a policy different than the other URL shorteners, not using filters and encouraging the use of this service for creating links to adult sites and other "NSFW" links, thus placing vb.ly by definition in the porn/adult site category. This use was deemed as unacceptable by our local internet community, regardless of whether or not the site hosts adult material or redirects traffic to 3rd party sites

Contrary to vb.ly's claims, they were contacted on numerous occasions to investigate these concerns, and over the course of these contacts vb.ly has ignored our efforts and even changed their contact numbers.

When our repeated warnings were ignored, and after over 3 weeks of failed attempts to contact the owners of vb.ly, NIC.ly had no alternative but to apply its regulations that clearly state that it reserves the right to suspend or remove a .ly domain name in violation of rules and regulations. The domain has also been excluded from future registrations so that no other entity (local or abroad) can re-register it.

As to the decision to keep the registration of domain names shorter than 4 symbols long under .ly only for entities with a local Libyan presence, this comes in accordance with NIC.ly's concern that the rise in popularity of URL shorteners from abroad taking up all these names has deprived locals of their right to register the important 3 letter abbreviations of their various businesses and interests. We as a Registry would prefer seeing art.ly used for a website about Libyan art for instance, or lda.ly used by the Libyan De- mining Association, rather than adding more URL shorteners under our National TLD. For over 5 years, we as a Libyan Registry recognized by ICANN have been open for domain name registrations from all around the Globe, and we pride ourselves on being the online destination of thousands of domain names from all over the World. Over this span of time never once have we abused the trust invested in us by the Global internet community, nor have we ever taken advantage of having an attractive extension like '.ly'. Only when our Community's rules and regulations were compromised was when we had to act.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Now they are offline too, that'll learn 'em

</comment><comment><USER21> Sorry dotBen, but you're being a whiney crybaby on here. OH NO, LIBYAN GOVERNMENT DOESN'T RESPECT US RULES!

No shit...

Move on from it. Otherwise go join a political group that fights for women's rights in Libya.</comment>