Why trust is the next step in the future of AI - <AUTHOR> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/03/why-trust-is-the-next-step-in-the-future-of-ai/?utm_content=buffer76fb4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer <comment><USER2> When I want to transfer money, I don't want to talk to the bank VAI (voice AI interface) I want to talk to my personal AI and have that hook into the bank API.

I don't want to have to chat to 20 or 30 different 'voices' a day, some good, some bad, some that understand me, some with a tiny vocabulary.

</comment><comment><USER3> TL;DR: "Sincerity - if you can fake that, you've got it made." -- George Burns</comment>


TensorFlow: Good practices for files, folders and models architecture - <AUTHOR> https://blog.metaflow.fr/tensorflow-a-proposal-of-good-practices-for-files-folders-and-models-architecture-f23171501ae3 <comment><AUTHOR> TL, DR:

\- I list all the different tasks one will have to do when doing ML

\- I show a common folder structure that I believe handles all possible use cases nicely

\- I show a basic Model class, easily extendable that structure a lot of possible kinds of models

\- I describe how to build a good "shell API" for easy iterations.

Bonus: Some TF code linked to the subject.</comment>


Ask HN: Do online press releases still make sense? - <AUTHOR>

Back in the day it used to be common practice to issue a press release on sites like prweb.com when launching a new product. As far as I understood, for SEO purposes since Panda 4.0 that doesn't help anymore. And it's been long since I've seen a blog post referencing a press release. Is it still worth it? is being featured in NH or TechCrunch there only good option left for a successful launch? <comment><USER2> The Old School PR Model is broke & busted. Nobody cares about your press release.

Here's a good read on getting buzz from Tim Ferriss> [http://fourhourworkweek.com/2013/09/17/how-to-get- national-p...](http://fourhourworkweek.com/2013/09/17/how-to-get-national- press-with-no-budget-plus-one-year-of-mentorship-from-alexis-ohanian/)

<comment><USER3> Totally agree that nobody cares about press releases anymore. I've seen a TechCrunch article net almost nothing for launches. It's interesting to watch founders get hyped up for the press hit... and then nothing happens.</comment></comment>


Challenge-response: the use of incorrect responses in validating identity - <AUTHOR> http://hypecycles.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/who-are-you-really/

<comment><USER2> American Express recently added these "3 questions" to my account, and it made me very mad. For one thing, their "request" was persistent; it eventually wouldn't let me log in until I provided them, so they were really a requirement. "For security", of course, even though there's evidence [1] they make security worse.

To make it more insulting, though, I discovered that the implementation was very dumb:

1\. The questions were fixed, and extremely stupid. Any of them could probably be guessed by someone with a few minutes to Google.

2\. The question lists were too short, making it difficult to pick a really hard-to-guess answer.

3\. The lists were unique to _each question_. So if I saw 2 questions I liked in the first slot, I could choose only one of them, and if the 2nd slot had completely inane options, I had to choose one of the inane options.

4\. The last question _didn't even offer options that applied to me_. So suddenly, for "security", I had to remember which unrelated question I selected, and which made-up response I provided. Thanks a hell of a lot, AE.

[1] [http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/05/secret_questio...](http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/05/secret_question.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> I worked with a system administrator once. He didn't understand two factor security. So he told everyone to remember two passwords.

Maybe he now works at American Express.

I see exactly the same thing with most "security improvements". Hence treat each answer as just another password! a random string of characters, numbers and punctuations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I usually give a different email address to each service that I sign up to, so I can tell if they are selling my address, but I never thought of giving a different mother's maiden name so I can detect phishing. It's a reasonable strategy, but I have trouble remembering the name of my elementary school, my favorite color (I dont care), the make of my first car (my parent's or the one I actually paid for) ... However, I will trythe strategy of giving a couple of wrong answers to weed out the fakes.

<comment><AUTHOR> The issue with providing an answer that is a meaningful response is that one can in fact guess and often get it right. Second, most sites that use these secret answers (favorite color, first car, ...) don't have a mechanism to lock out after a certain number of incorrect attempts.

My first car is likely something like x78uyipoqA.

Call me paranoid!</comment></comment>


Respondable: Write Perfect Emails with Artificial Intelligence - <AUTHOR> http://www.boomeranggmail.com/respondable/ <comment><USER2> Nice, a bit expensive though.</comment>


Hacker intercepts phone calls with DIY $1,500 IMSI catcher - <AUTHOR> http://www.maximumpc.com/article/home/hacker_intercepts_gsm_phone_calls_using_homemade_1500_imsi_catcher

<comment><AUTHOR> GSM was cracked a long while ago, but now after Karsten Nohl has published his 1.7 TB rainbow tables via torrents, script kiddies will eventually be able to hack into your phones..

[http://www.darknet.org.uk/2010/08/gsm-hacking-coming-to- the-...](http://www.darknet.org.uk/2010/08/gsm-hacking-coming-to-the-masses- script-kiddy-style/)

Has anyone thought of what is gonna replace our broken A5/1 GSM privacy the next couple of years? Will we need new handsets to provide us with the next- gen cellphone encryption?</comment>


It's OK to Still Use Angular 1 in 2017 - <AUTHOR> https://www.alexkras.com/its-ok-to-still-use-angular-1-in-2017/ <comment><USER2> I remember my time working in Angular 1; honestly I wish it had been more boring. It's also ok to not want to use it in 2017.

<comment><AUTHOR> 100% but not should people be ashamed of the fact that it makes business sense for them to continue to use it.</comment></comment>


Swirl Turns Washing Clothes Into a Game  - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/swirl-turns-washing-clothes-game

<comment><USER2> Estimate the sphere to have a diameter of 50 cm. The volume is then (4/3) * pi * (25) ^ 3 = 65 450 cubic cm. One cubic cm of water weighs 1 gram. At one third full of water and clothes, the ball will weigh well over 20 kg - probably more like 30 kg if we include the weight of the plastic.

Yeah, let's see YOUR kids kick that around for fun, German designer wunderkinder...

</comment><comment><USER3> It would be good to have an exercise machine that washes clothes too.

</comment><comment><USER4> Ouch. My knees!</comment>


DOJ lied to Supreme Court to avoid judicial review of warrantless surveillance - <AUTHOR> https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/837839-112013-clapper-v-amnesty-letter-1.html <comment><USER2> Read the questions at the end. The letter isn't fucking around:

"We believe that a formal notification to the Supreme Court of the government's misrepresentations in the case--both relating to its notice policy and relating to its practice of 'about' collection under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act--woulcl be an important step in correcting the public record and would be in the interests of the public as well as of the Administration and the Supreme Court."

<comment><USER3> A nice literal example of why the US has three separate, adversarial branches of government. When one gets a bit full of itself the other two have time to band together to put the offender in its place before it can become truly dominant.

Also, this is the most important part of this entire scenario - not the spying, not the secrecy, not the internets, but the executive overreach. The use of spying and secrecy to gain tremendous power (including over the other branches of government). The ability for the executive to grab enough power to coopt the legislature and deceive the courts - and get away with it. Were that to have actually come to pass little else would have been important. It's intriguing and relevant (for us) that this overreach was made possible by the knowledge gap generated by rapidly advancing technology - 'trust us, we'll get the bad guys with this newfangled technology stuff like twitters and facebooks'. But in the end, it's just a power-grab.

<comment><USER4> >The ability for the executive to grab enough power to coopt the legislature and deceive the courts - and get away with it. Were that to have actually come to pass little else would have been important. It's intriguing and relevant (for us) that this overreach was made possible by the knowledge gap generated by rapidly advancing technology

while it make the events relevant to this audience, the technology involvement is a red-herring here as history is full of examples where executive branch was able to perform the power-grab utilizing the technology of the time, frequently an absolute power-grab and with wide popular support in the name of "the greater good" as perceived at the time by the populace. In its current form technology allows to minimize direct violence required to perform the grab, it allows to stretch and smooth the shock of the transition.

<comment><USER5> I've been saying this for a long time, but pre-Snowden I was always met with heavy deference of trust for the checks and balances system. I claim that there has been a backroom debate in the higher level Military Industrial Intelligence Complex (Top tier NSA, CIA, DoD, Pentagon, NSC) in which it was concluded that technology has created a potential for a single non-state entity to cause massive damage, and that "Total Information Awareness" is the only way to prevent it.

Of course, I disagree that the purpose of TIA is security, and I also disagree that it is even successful, but the real issue at hand is beyond that, and is about how the debate was had and who was involved. There was no public debate, and any that did leak was tightly brought under control (with NSL's etc). This is an affront to the democratic process imho, but even if one were to argue that our representatives were involved, I would say there has been a stratification of the congresspeople, so that only a select few people on a select few committees even get to participate, and even then the ones who do are unable to grasp the subject matter fully. Of course no staffers get to see it either.

With the knowledge of how intel agencies work, and more specifically, the contact sport of politics in the beltway, I would also venture to say that even if a fairly principled rep did make it on a relevant committee, though would quickly be brought back under control via the standard methods.

I won't get off too far into this rabbit hole, lest I am accused of conspiracy theory, but I truly think the system of checks and balances is not only crumbling, it is in ruins. Even worse, a facade is being put up to cover it up.

<comment><USER6> Checks and balances are alive and well. No system of governance will prevent an action if everyone in that system supports it, nor should it.

We are the problem, we keep electing people who support this crap.

<comment><USER7> Correction: we keep allowing political parties to give us less than ideal candidates that combined with the first-past-the-post election method ends up having people voting for what they perceive to be the least evil candidate and not an actual representation of, for and by the people.

<comment><USER2> First past the post election system is a problem, but the fact is that only a hip minority of people vote for what they perceive to be the "least evil" candidate. I went to grad school in Chicago, and all the people I know who support Obama genuine think he's a great candidate. Maybe not their ideal candidate, but one they can get behind that they think will be able to build a coalition.

If you look at American policy, it's closely representative of the views of typical voters. High levels of welfare spending for the middle class (i.e. Social Security and Medicare?) What could be more representative of a voting population that consists to a large degree of middle aged middle class folks nearing retirement who won't be burdened with the bill? Foreign wars? How many liberals urged Obama to intervene in Syria even after their ostensible opposition to Iraq? How many liberals supported arming Syrian rebels after complaining for years about arming anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan? On either side of the aisle, Americans are broadly willing to resort to military solutions. The drug war? I grew up in the 1990's and remember being surrounded by suburban soccer moms who thought drugs were more evil than Hitler. The drug war was built on a solid coalition of social conservatives and Reagan Democrats that's only now chipping at the edges as a younger generation becomes parents themselves.

First past the post has notable theoretical weaknesses, but that weakness tends to be entrenching the voice of the mainstream consensus, to the exclusion of minority viewpoints.

Americans love to bitch about the government, but very few would change anything in a substantial way. They argue over issues at the edges because that's the only thing they disagree about. They might disagree with the amount of penalty BP should receive, but people on the right don't want to get rid of the regulatory regime surrounding oil drilling, nor do people on the left want to abandon drilling entirely.

<comment><USER8> It is true that, by and large, public opinion has a massive effect on policy.

The problem with democracy as it exists today is that policy also has a massive effect on public opinion - i.e. propaganda is effective. So it's not an effective check on power.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wish someone could make a treason case out of perjury in relation to a matter of national security during a time of war for these actions.

This crap would stop pretty fast.

<comment><USER2> Let's not go there: [http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/3/essays/11...](http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/3/essays/119/treason).

The U.S. hasn't convicted someone of treason for more than half a century. Even John Walker Lindh, who was literally fighting with the enemy against the U.S., was not prosecuted for treason.

<comment><USER10> Ok fine, but can we at least fire people who lie to Congress and then admit it? What is the point of Congress asking questions if you are allowed to testify in the least untruthful ways?

<comment><USER11> President Obama can fire anyone in his administration any time he would like. That's how accountability works in our system, particularly when no clear-cut crime is committed. If President Obama doesn't sufficiently share your outrage, fundraise, campaign and vote for someone who you think would.

<comment><USER12> _If President Obama doesn 't sufficiently share your outrage, fundraise, campaign and vote for someone who you think would._

Why, so you can stop President Obama being elected for a third term?

To me as an outsider, this is a puzzling part of the US political system. The President has a huge amount of concentrated power within one branch of government, yet approximately half the time, the President of the day is effectively a lame duck with nothing to lose by behaving almost any way they like. Other parts of the government can make that President's job harder, but short of impeachment everyone is basically stuck with whoever it is until their time is up.

I increasingly feel that giving the electorate an absolute power of recall if an elected representative angers enough people during their term would change politics for the better at almost any level. Otherwise, any term of office that is sufficient for reasonable medium- to long-term planning is also sufficient to allow serious damage to be done with relative impunity if the wrong person won the election but the voters only learn that after the fact.

As a side benefit, this also balances the tendency for major elections to be fought on a tiny number of headline issues, with little if any incentive to represent the electorate's interests in all the other significant-but-not- dominant areas, because if you annoy too many small groups of the population, collectively they can become powerful enough to trigger a vote.

<comment><USER11> Democracy is all about giving the people what they want, good and hard. I'm sorry they got it "wrong" from your point of view last year, but in three years they get to try again.

I don't think your version of "serious damage" from this issue matches most voters. Even if this were a parliamentary system where sufficient public outcry could force new elections, or a "do over" recall was available (a terrible flaw in the state constitutions where it exists, IMHO), you'd still not be getting the U.S. administration you seem to want. You need to convince the public and then win elections, that's how change happens.

<comment><USER12> Please note that I didn't express any opinion on the specific situation in the US today. I was just commenting that the checks and balances you implied in your previous post, where a senior individual in the government can choose to fire more junior individuals, don't seem to be very reliable if the senior person themselves has limited motivation to act in the interests of the people they are supposed to represent.

This lack of direct motivation is a systemic weakness in almost any electoral system that involves fixed terms of significant length, and it applies more generally than just the need to choose appropriate subordinates. What you described just happens to be one ineffective case that is relevant to the current discussion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This sounds important, but I'm at a loss as to its significance.

What was Clapper v Amnesty?

It sounds like Solicitor General Verrilli made a lie of omission in the court. Is that considered a lie under oath?

What obligation does Solicitor General Verrilli have to the three Senators to answer their questions? What consequences might he face if he choose to ignore the letter?

Realistically, what could this mean for the original Clapper v Amnesty case, and how might it affect the public in general?

<comment><USER14> "It sounds like Solicitor General Verrilli made a lie of omission in the court. Is that considered a lie under oath? "

Actually, AFAIK, this is incorrect. I'm trying to find a later article i read a few days ago, but apparently Verrilli was not aware of any of this when he made statements at oral argument, and once he became aware, he fought a large internal fight to make sure his statements about giving defendants evidence stayed accurate.

Ah, here we go. At least for the first part of what I said, see [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/17/us/politics/us-legal- shift...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/17/us/politics/us-legal-shift-may- open-door-for-challenge-to-secret-wiretaps.html)

"The move comes after an internal Justice Department debate in which Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. argued that there was no legal basis for a previous practice of not disclosing links to such surveillance, several Obama administration officials familiar with the deliberations said."

(and about the oral argument prep failure here) "As a result, Mr. Verrilli sought an explanation from national security lawyers about why they had not flagged the issue when vetting his Supreme Court briefs and helping him practice for the arguments, according to officials."

So

A. It seems he wasn't aware

B. Once he was aware, he put a stop to the practice.

Now, this doesn't excuse any of what has happened here, but as far as anyone knows, he didn't intentionally mislead anyone.

Note that unlike a lot of folks involved in all of this, Donald Verrilli is the least likely to be involved in anything hinky or lie to a court. He's a true believer in the system.

<comment><USER15> How else would you expect Verrelli to explain what happened once it became obvious what he told the Supreme Court was not true?

It's the solicitor general's responsibility, as it is anyman's responsibility when testifying in court, to ensure his testimony is accurate. He didn't say, "as far as I know, this is what I think we might collect."

The Government made a persuasive argument that collection was limited specifically to the extent required to dismiss the case. This was not an honest mistake, it was a material misrepresentation of fact. There is no plausible deniability here.

I think it's appropriate to discuss what the ramifications should be, but it's naive to think Verrilli was not aware. I think it's also reasonable to question whether Chief Justice Roberts was also aware Verrilli was shoveling shit, seeing as how he appointed every judge currently serving on the FISA court.

<comment><USER14> "It's the solicitor general's responsibility, as it is anyman's responsibility when testifying in court, to ensure his testimony is accurate. "

While true, i'm not sure what you expected him to do here. He asked and checked with his prosecutors. They told him they were doing something that they were in fact not doing.

I guess I wouldn't expect the guy to personally check all of the many prosecutions here. There has to be some level of trust allowed for. At that point, I would just expect him to correct it if he was wrong.

"I think it's appropriate to discuss what the ramifications should be, but it's naive to think Verrilli was not aware."

So this i just flat out disagree with. You are basically calling him a liar who is covering his ass.

Talking with people who know him quite well, i'm basically told he would never do such a thing, and that he did in fact, do what the article says. With all due respect to your opinion, i choose to believe them over you :)

If that makes me naive, so be it.

(FWIW: I certainly don't expect you to trust me on this, i'm just explaining why I hold the opinion I do)

<comment><USER16> > _He asked and checked with his prosecutors. They told him they were doing > something that they were in fact not doing._

He is responsible for that. Either the individuals who induced him to commit perjury should be prosecuted, or, if he cannot reveal who those people are or is unwilling, then Verelli is just as guilty.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Unless some high-level DoJ and NSA officials are thrown in jail for a couple decades for all this, it's not going to stop.

<comment><USER18> I'm not sure that matters very much. It will stop when Congress votes to defund it.

As long as it's perceived as the will of the American people, as expressed through their elected representatives, it will continue.

Alas, I see no sign that Dianne Feinstein is likely to lose an election anytime soon.

<comment><USER19> The problem being discussed is individuals lying to the supreme court. Congress (to my knowledge) has never authorized anyone to lie SCOTUS. What is happening is that is that these institutions are getting away with lieing to the Judicial branch, because the Judicial branch is letting them.

If there happens to be something in the law authorizing people to lie to SCOTUS, then I suspect SCOTUS could strike that part of the law down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Don't expect Holder the _Untouchable_ to ever be punished for this. At this point I think he's more untouchable than even "Emperor Alexander", the current (and soon former) chief of NSA.

</comment><comment><USER21> Lawyers: What precedent is there for supreme court decisions citing a specific piece of evidence as the basis for their ruling, where that piece of evidence is later shown to be erroneous?

</comment><comment><USER22> I know the words "ethics" and "lawyers" don't generally enters people's minds at the same time, but the model rules of ethics for lawyers take this sort of thing seriously. If the Senators show that some lawyers did indeed lie to the Supreme Court, the Court itself could take action on those attorneys' licenses. It's also a lawyer's duty to report if they are aware of another attorney's violations of ethical rules.

I know it's doubtful, but one can hope.

</comment><comment><USER23> These three Senators have realized that they can capitalize on public sentiment against the NSA.

Good on them... that's what representing the people is about.

<comment><USER24> Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been talking about it for years; Ron Wyden in particular went to the floor of the senate and talked about how the American people would be shocked if they knew how the PATRIOT Act was being interpreted.

<comment><USER25> Not to mention Wyden was the one who asked James Clapper the questions that lead him to lie to Congress. Still have no idea why Clapper still holds his position.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsmo0hUWJ08&t=33s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsmo0hUWJ08&t=33s)

<comment><USER26> Do some reading about J. Edgar Hoover and you'll understand why Clapper still holds his position.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Would someone be willing to provide the background, interpretation and ramifications of this document for someone not very familiar with this case?

</comment><comment><USER4> just to put things in perspective - is is any surprise that people who is ok with torture would lie? Why would someone expect it different?

</comment><comment><USER28> Warm Regards</comment>


Ask HN: How do you invent and make money on software products? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious what processes people follow to invent software one can charge for. I think it's hard to come up with a product people actually want to pay for. The dream is to be able to make a living on software and keep improving stuff that matters to people.
So in short, if your main purpose is to make money on software products, what steps do you follow to make it a reality? Most info online is about generic startup ideas.
How do you evaluate the profitability? How do you choose features/language? How do you find clients and how do you approach them? Do you prefer selling software to consumers or businesses? How do you dare take the leap? <comment><USER2> Easiest short answer...

1\. Find a problem you experience on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc.. basis.

2\. Develop software solution for said problem.

3\. Resell said software.

It may not happen on the first try, the second try, or the 100th try, but you are bound to find something that someone has a need for and is willing to pay for. You may not get rich on all of them, but each small success will build upon itself.

Whether it is profitable or not depends on many factors, but the sum of those factors is what did it cost you to develop the software and what does it cost you to maintain it. Does the software require multiple developers to maintain or a call center to support?

As for features/languages. Start small and grow from there. Listen to your users and what they want. Release quickly and often. It's always easier to add features than to be in a constant state of development. For the language, simple, choose what you are most comfortable with. Everyone has their own opinion about every language and framework. If you are more comfortable with PHP than Rails, then PHP all the way.

Clients. Start with a website. Blog. Twitter. Depending on the software, maybe some Google or Facebook ads. Forums. Friends, family, colleagues. Each group is going to be a different approach, but in the end it is all the same.

Consumer vs. Business. This is really dependent on you and your preferences.

Taking the leap. Just do it. If you are not comfortable jumping 100% in, start small and build on your off hours from your job.

Compared to a decade ago, it is a lot cheaper to try and fail today.

For more info you may start with @patio11's blog: [http://www.kalzumeus.com/blog/](http://www.kalzumeus.com/blog/)</comment>


Show HN: quickly share UML diagrams - <AUTHOR> http://app.umlbin.com/index.a

<comment><USER2> Sorry but I literally lost it right when I opened it and saw this

oh my god im literally in tears. This is the best thing ever right when I wake up.

I'm sorry people are abusing your hard work though, I know thats a bummer. :(

[http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d62ff...](http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d62ff8a0006)

[http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d6588...](http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d6588b5000c)

[http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d70a1...](http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d70a15a0014)

<comment><USER3> I find these rather funny and well carried out.

What greeted me, however, when I opened the site is this:

[http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d698e...](http://app.umlbin.com/view.a?show=8a78d3b23d8d5a99013d8d698e43000e)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Perhaps some more attention need to be paid to keyboard people. :-) Just Ctrl and arrow to move things around e.g. and selection tools would be good. Personally though, I w'd like to actually generate a diagram like that without drawing anything, just a few lines of code, and preferably generated bottom-up from the code base itself, instead of concocted by some person who actually doesn't know how the system works, but that's my opinion on use cases in UML. :-)

</comment><comment><USER5> So people still use UML?

<comment><AUTHOR> Strangely it is not dead. Do not know how widely it is used. From other hand what are other good standardized options to share/document software structure and behavior?

<comment><USER6> .png and .markdown ?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Even my rather trivial undergraduate UML project required very advanced options, and the only software that fully satisfied my needs was astah professional. I struggled a lot with browser-based UML tools, always to come across a feature I needed but wasn't supported. It was very frustrating, because I had to restart work on several platform, until I gave up and started using astah.

For this reason, I personally avoid web-based UML tools ever since. But, there might be reasonable use cases for them.

<comment><USER8> Interesting to hear. Have you tried Lucidchart - <http://www.lucidchart.com>. We turn around improvements very quickly and I'd be interested to hear if it meets your needs, and if not, what we're currently missing for you. You can reach me at support [at] ...

And if you're still a student, we give free upgrades to Pro accounts so we'd be happy to hook you up.

<comment><USER7> Thanks. Actually, my university (UCL) was oferred access to Lucidchart for its students for that project that we did. So it was one of the web-based tools I tried. Looking over the paper I wrote, it seems I actually did happily use it for the domain model, the use case diagram and an early version of the class diagram. However, I think for the sequence diagrams I found it a bit clumsy (for example regarding activation boxes) and eventually gave up.

I should note that I think most (probably almost all) of my classmates also happily used Lucidchart, as it was recommended by the lecturer too. But I was a bit overzealous and preferred the more rigorous system of astah, like keeping track of the methods you add to each class and the stricter visual organisation of elements.

As for particular examples of UML elements that I wish lucidchart had, I can't really remember, unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Nice simple idea. Where are the diagrams stored? What measures are taken to avoid them being lost?

I could work out most of the interactions. I suspect people will struggle with connecting two vertices with an edge. You need some kind of visual indication that the creation of an edge has started. Maybe highlight the start vertex and preferably show a preview of the edge after you move around after having clicked on the source vertex.

<comment><AUTHOR> Diagrams are stored in database. Did not get about "lost diagrams"? Why should they be lost? Generally agree there still are places for polishing. The idea was to create app that can just do it's job , to see if UML is still used at all (as stblack also asked) and then polish it according to the feedaback.

Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Honest question, in what sort of situations is using UML diagrams beneficial? I have only used them in school, but never professionally. The most immediate use case I can think of is API, documentation for large code, etc., but lots of bad buzzwords pop into my head when I hear UML like huge Java programs and over management. That's probably not fair. Anyway, it's a nice looking project. Keep up the good work!

<comment><USER11> It helps me designing software and communicate the design to others. I find 'claying' with a design on the whiteboard both easier and faster than doing that in code.

The 'UML is useless; read the code' meme, IMO, is like the 'XML is overly complex' one. Both technologies can and have been overhyped and overused, but that does not mean all their use is useless.

Having said that, I think the idea to make UML complete in the sense that you can model any program in full detail with it and then generate source code as a sort of assembly from it has, to say it lightly, not yet brought the benefits proponents claimed it would, and has needlessly complicated the grammar for other use cases such as the one above.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is the kind of thing that by the time I need to make another diagram I will have forgotten about it. Hopefully I'll never need to, but if I do I'm bookmarking this in hopes I'll remember.

It's not complicated, no fancy UI or flashy landing page. Nice web app.

</comment><comment><USER13> Other than the sharing/social aspect how much has been added on top of the underlying jsUML2 library ?

I ask because jsUML2 looks interesting and I am wondering how usable it is out of the box. (I need statecharts which umlbin doesn't yet support).

<comment><AUTHOR> Basically only tool selection menu was added (and some context menu removed ;). IMHO to use it out of the box it's quite easy, just maybe there is lack of documentation. As main drawbacks I could note missing documentation and not so easy configurable .. However at the moment it fits my needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm not a fan of UML, but some of my coworkers are. Seems like a great tool for sharing UML quickly, without everyone having to get Visio.

Feature request: sequence diagrams. They love those things.

<comment><USER15> I used to use UML diagrams a lot, especially Sequence diagrams. But some time ago I started to use the own code as my sequence diagram, without comments, only declarative enough names. IMO Sequence diagrams are really helpful to explore ideas and make the first analysis, but terrible afterwards to maintain the code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Link is down. I would be extremely interested in reading about how much traffic it took to bring it down and what architecture you are running on.

<comment><AUTHOR> up to 5 request per second

AWS micro instance apache + tomcat java, mysql

My ques is that may be due to some misconfiguration (java or tomcat).

<comment><USER15> Out of curiosity. Are you using autoscaling or aws beanstalk?

<comment><AUTHOR> EC2 micro instance

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Here is the similar project: <http://dbpatterns.com>

</comment><comment><USER18> yUML is a great quick tool that has been around a while, diagrams are written in a really simple markup format and then covert into diagrams.

<http://www.yuml.me/></comment>


Ask HN: Do we no longer support our members? - <AUTHOR> I saw a link marked [dead] earlier today and decided to click through and check it out.  The submitter had a simple post describing where the idea originated and then broke down the development into a nice timeline of events.  He threw this little project together in a few hours with his buddy, working through the night.  That sounds like it would be something HN members would support.
At this point, I wasn't sure why it was marked dead, so I visited the site and found some pretty disgusting submissions from what I can only assume are HN members.  Comments along the lines of "keep this crappy site off HN" and one submission even telling him to die.  These submissions have since been removed.
In any case, the response from HN made me angry and I've been thinking about it all afternoon.  Who cares if it's not the prettiest site, or if it's not something you'll ever use.  This guy built his project and shared his experience with us.  The least we could do is give him some constructive feedback so he can improve it and maybe learn a thing or two.
Here's the link to his original post: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800925 <comment><USER2> I understand that you're not referring to the post on HN that got killed but to the activity on their website.

What happened there is no different than what happens when someone posts a spreadsheet with useful stuff here. Within minutes it will get destroyed or defaced.

The 'griefers' have definitely discovered HN. I suspect that some of them are people that took rejection by YC a bit harder than they should have, and that some others are simply here because they can't see a good thing without being tempted to try to destroy it.

Anything - and I really mean anything - that you put out there on the internet needs to be designed with abuse in mind, because no matter how small it is the abusers will seek it out and will try to destroy it.

That's something that you need to be aware of as much as you need to be a coder or a designer when you plan on making a living online.

Better get used to it.

<comment><USER3> _I suspect that some of them are people that took rejection by YC a bit harder than they should have, and that some others are simply here because they can't see a good thing without being tempted to try to destroy it._

It's almost entirely the latter. Only a small percentage of HN users actually apply to YC, and I can only think of one who became abusive on HN after being rejected (and he sent me an email recently apologizing).

Most of the nastiness we get here is from new users who show up and think they can behave like they do on other sites. This has been happening for years. But I wouldn't attribute to them such complex motives as not being able to see a good thing without being tempted to destroy it. I think they're just 13, or nuts.

<comment><USER4> _Only a small percentage of HN users actually apply to YC_

Slightly off-topic, but what about the inverse of that: how many YC applicants are active HN users [1]? Just curious as to how much of the applicant pool comes from HN.

1\. Since you have to create a HN account to apply, I'm assuming 100% of YC applicants are HN users, so maybe how many actively participate?

<comment><USER5> Also interesting would be to get an idea of what percentage of people who get accepted into YC participate actively on HN.

<comment><USER3> That would be hard to reconstruct, because we don't keep track of people's karma at the point when we accept them, but we usually have 1 or 2 startups per batch with founders whose usernames I recognize as being top contributors. 6 of the 100 users on the leaderboard are YC founders.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I think YC applicants or founders is statically insignificant, but I think your total user base is just as insignificant as this since it doesn't tell us much about what stories are showing up on the front-page and who is saying what about it. Instead, considering you're still only interested in comments, what if you filtered your user base for anyone that has posted a comment in the last 30 days then extrapolated the proportion of comments posted given a threshold of karma or "days alive" on HN against everyone else in your user base.

I think it's more revealing this way if you are interested in how increased traffic and site participation is effecting this 6% you mentioned above or that "days alive" value; IOW, how is increased traffic and new user participation effecting the rate at which this sample is posting comments?

In the end, I don't think increased traffic is effecting the discussion to the extent that it really matters; I think what really keeps everyone else in check is the frequency at which older members are posting comments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> His project reminds me of this great passage from Colson Whitehead's _Colossus of New York_ : "No matter how long you have been here, you are a New Yorker the first time you say, That used to be Munsey's, or That used to be the Tic Toc Lounge. That before the internet cafe plugged itself in, you got your shoes resoled in the mom-and-pop operation that used to be there. You are a New Yorker when what was there before is more real and solid than what is here now."

I suspect that same sentiment speaks to quite a few HN'ers as well.

</comment><comment><USER8> It's funny. So many people come to HN to get their daily dose of commoditized inspiration. And yet, when it's their turn to help someone out and give _real_ inspiration, they do things like this.

I don't think HN is getting worse, really, but I do think it's getting faster. Sometimes posts get lost in the flood of new stuff. Or sometimes posts just get stuck with a bad crowd who happened to click.

And it is a bad crowd, too-- it's one thing to give bad feedback; it's another to actively go on a site to misuse it only to insult the creator. Who does that?

That said, _most_ of the time you still get the usual HN crowd, the good crowd, when you post things like this. And maybe those things boil down to "Your site sucks," but it's delivered in a helpful, constructive fashion.

<comment><USER9> Change what you can change, and stop worrying about what other people do. Trolls will always exist. Maybe we all need some small change in the algorithm to make things slow down...

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If you think this is bad, go visit proggit (programming.reddit.com) sometime. It's a cesspit. Not only do I not post/comment there anymore, I don't even read it.

Submissions can't really expect more than a 4:1 ratio of upvotes to downvotes. Say anything negative about Python (even things that are demonstrably true like the performance degradation of CPU bound tasks on multi-core machines because of the GIL on CPython) or positive about Apple (even something demonstrably true like "the iPad is a successful new product launch") and get downvoted into oblivion (sadly, HN is starting to get a few knee-jerk Apple haters /sigh).

Someone posted a "Physics of Angry Birds" post here in the last week and someone took the time to post a snide, self-righteous "this doesn't belong here" comment, which is similar to what you're talking about. Frankly I don't understand this attitude at all: if the post doesn't interest you, move on. 3/4 of the HN posts are of no _personal_ interest to me. That doesn't make them objectively bad.

<comment><USER11> "sadly, HN is starting to get a few knee-jerk Apple haters /sigh"

I'll have you know I've always been a knee-jerk Apple hater, and I've been here for years.

<comment><USER12> Look, even if you're joking, is that the sort of attitude you want represented here?

Knee-jerk hate might be a beneficial strategy if you're trying to survive in Darfur, but we safe people should try to minimize it for the benefit of our own minds. We learn and grow by studying things, especially the things that rub us the wrong way. The other benefits of arbitrary hate like feeling you belong to an in-group seem out of place on HN, a site mostly devoted to curiosity (from what I've seen).

I'm not saying you should or shouldn't feel or act a certain way, but for all of our sakes lets keep it mental and not bring that sort of thing into the public light here where it might be perceived as community endorsement of that point of view.

<comment><USER11> "I'm not saying you should or shouldn't feel or act a certain way"

But, that I shouldn't _say_ it at Hacker News?

I'm disappointed. First, I'm disappointed that you've suggested that my comment, whether a joke _or_ sincere (I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader as to whether I intended the former or the latter), is unacceptable speech. Second, I'm disappointed that 12 other HN readers agree with you.

I now have to conclude that, as others are talking about, HN is losing the culture it once had, and that saddens me.

<comment><USER13> I agree with you that it should be fine except that you are joking about it while we're talking about critiques of HN itself. He was talking about how posts get voted into oblivion for saying good things about Apple (which could be a serious problem with regard to addressing intellectual conversation) and you downplay the importance of that by making a joke.

<comment><USER14> A joke which has as part of it's humour a reflection on how there is a tendency to glamorize the past. A joke designed to purposefully downplay that critique.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It might have been marked dead because both developers posted a submission for the site. The other post is at <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800422> and contains some constructive comments.

<comment><USER16> If that's true, I wish whoever flagged would have left a comment on the thread explaining why they did so. Much more helpful than just flagging.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Interesting.

I posted an article a couple of weeks ago. The point of the article was that get-rich-quick-by-blogging stories are a dime a dozen, when the formula is really very simple: write for yourself, make friends, and keep doing it.

Because it was so simple, I thought it was cute to do a 1 or 2 paragraph format. Here it is

[http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2010/10/how-to- make-a...](http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2010/10/how-to-make-a-m.php)

Of course, it only got one vote. (Thanks mom!) But the weird thing was that somebody from HN came by my site and took the time to add a snide comment along the lines of "Why did you post this on HN?"

To which I (logically enough) replied: then don't vote it up.

Seems to me we are getting a fair share of drive-by trolls, downvoters, and flaggers. Ten guys hate you that are on HN all the time? They can zap your article no matter what it is.

Why folks from here would visit blog submission sites and berate the blog authors is beyond me.

That's not reddit, but that's definitely a change in the atmosphere.

<comment><USER18> If there really is 'vendetta downvoting' going on, perhaps it could be negated by limiting the number of times a user can downvote another specific user's comments/submissions within a certain time frame. Eg. you can't downvote the same person more than twice a day, and if it's a submission you can't downvote two in a row

<comment><USER17> I hope I didn't come off as making sweeping generalizations. I think 99.9% of the folks on here are awesome. If anything, I think this is just a problem of growth, as I said on another thread today:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800252>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Weird, I saw it before it was [dead], seemed like an OK project, if a bit unpolished. I was going to make some suggestions (sort results by rating, etc).

Here's the url: <http://www.notanewyorker.com/>

One thing I would suggest to the OP: use a more descriptive title. Instead of "Are you a New Yorker?" maybe something like "Show HN: My one-day GAE project for New Yorkers".

<comment><USER20> I didn't see it before-hand, but I suspect that it was inspired by a recent episode of "How I Met Your Mother", in which they were debating the qualifications necessary for being a New Yorker.

Because of that episode, I immediately recognized the purpose and intent of the website, though I'm certain it was far less obvious to those who didn't see it.

Of interest, the criteria they came up with were:

You're not a New Yorker until: \- You've stolen a cab from someone who needed it more than you, \- You've killed a cockroach with your bare hands \- Seen Woody Allen and, \- Cried on the subway, oblivious to what anyone else thinks

<comment><USER21> Yes! 20 minutes after watching that episode I conned SimCop into doing the front-end for me. I was dismayed to see that RateMyTeacher already has _real_ websites. :) We've been rapidly reiterating the site based on the comments from the thread here (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800422>), and other feedback. We got a rated view about 2 hours ago because everyone kept asking for it, and some UI changes. =)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Similar behaviours and reactions can be seen on a lot of otherwise professional internet forums. I think its the difference in the following kind of people

\- A highly skilled professional

\- A highly skilled, non-professional

Just because someone has a very well developed skillset, it doesn't necessarily dictate good conduct. Most art / illustration forums suffer from this problem - to generalize, they will have a subset of highly skilled people who ultimately aren't professional in their conduct and reply with some severely inappropriate responses.

It's the same scenario too - when a user submits content that is significantly below the general quality standard of the community (in earnest, being a legitimate effort on their behalf), two responses are generally provided due to the difference in these groups:

\- Professionals tend to ignore the content or provide some indicators of which basics to cover

\- Non-professionals flame and attack the user due to their level of ability

It's regrettable but the latter often has quite a negative effect. If you can look at someones work and recognise that they are highly skilled, but not understand that they are of poor professional character, you will take on board what they say as being correct or fair.

It's the kind of conduct that stunts a lot of people who aren't thick skinned about their trade.

<comment><USER23> Yes, I think you are correct. Downvoters have to be people with otherwise insightful comments (they need certain amount of karma to be able to downvote). Newcomers cannot downvote.

On a side note: I think that too many people misunderstand the purpose of voting. If you agree, upvote. If you disagree, do nothing. Downvote only if a comment is trollish or completely off-topic. If you think that the commenter doesn't understand the topic, help him overcome his ignorance, don't downvote him.

<comment><USER24> As I see it, "upvote = agree" increases the danger of groupthink. I try to downvote complete wastes of time or detractions from the discussion, and upvote thought-provoking contributions even when I disagree.

<comment><USER25> groupthink is a state where people self-censor in fear of rejection or repression. Only down-voting when disagreeing can cause groupthink since people who disagree with the consensus will stop posting disagreeing comments to preserve their karma.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> it does seem like moderators are taking a heavy handed approach. But then again, take a look at the new page and see how much crap they have to deal with.

personally I think, HN needs to put some filters in place to stop newly registered spammers. Even a simple 200 point requirements to submit new posts should be enough to trim the "check out the awesome prices on this nikes!" posts.

<comment><USER27> I could certainly get on board with a better filter system, but I think a 200 point minimum might be setting the bar a little high. I've been moderately active on HN for about 2 years now and just barely have 200 karma. If I would have been unable to post anything during that time, the utility of HN would be greatly reduced.

Then again, perhaps it would just encourage me to be more active in discussions.

<comment> mkr-hn I've been lightly active for two months and am approaching 200. Maybe your writing style doesn't quite click with HN's readership.

People are weird.

<comment><USER28> Or he could be a night owl, or live in a timezone that doesn't match prime upvoting hours.

<comment> mkr-hn I don't see how a comment's upvote-worthiness changes with time of day.

<comment><USER29> > comment's upvote-worthiness changes with time of day

You have fewer people around to upvote you.

<comment><USER30> Another issue is that if you read HN through the RSS feed, you will almost always be commenting on older submissions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I don't know about the disgusting submissions but I believe my post was marked dead as my friend had also submitted a very similar post here that I was originally unaware of, so no hard feelings there.

</comment><comment><USER32> No one group of drive-by downvoters, flaggers, or downbeat commenters is representative of the HN community as a whole -- especially over weekends and times of thinner attention.

So it's fairly common for some initial votes/comments to be negative, and occasionally even legitimate articles get auto-killed by a group of grumpy flaggers before sufficient upvotes arrive. But then in time, the sentiment rises as other more good-natured people pass by. (It seems harder to reverse a hair-trigger auto-kill, though -- maybe upvotes are no longer counted and it requires an admin intervention?)

Some of the grumpiest people have the most time on their hands, so can constitute the first unrepresentative wave of downvotes/flags!

</comment><comment><USER33> For what it's worth...

I was at the Tokyo hackernews shindig. Everyone was quite supportive of each other and everyone was willing to offer constructive criticism.

Your princess is in the castle but you do have to squash some gombas to get there. It's just an unfortunate reality.

</comment><comment><USER34> Was the original post listed as an "Ask HN/Review" type thread which theoretically invites constructive feeback, or just a "check this site out" submission? I'm wondering why it went dead.

<comment><USER35> It was a dupe.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1801814>

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> If we're being honest.. what percentage of people with accounts on HN are actually bashing together applications, pushing them live, and posting for feedback? A mammoth minority, I'm sure. For me this community is about putting in hustle, and having the guts to take ideas public. The submitter's post deserves encouragement.

</comment><comment><USER37> The people who made the nasty posts aren't representative of the HN community in any sense.

I didn't see the posts you describe, but, if they did say what you're describing, good riddance at them being removed. Moderators exist for a reason, although its better when they don't have to do anything.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, my original post wasn't clear. The comments I mentioned took place on the submitter's site (notanewyorker.com), not on HN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> As HN's population grows, the social motivation for "let's help is each other make stuff" shrinks. Maybe there should be a dedicated subsection (or a different site) devoted to that.

<comment><USER39> It has always seemed to me that "let's help each other make stuff" is the agreed-upon "definitive purpose" of HN. The news, and the articles, and everything else posted here are just tools and information we share to help each other make stuff. In fact, I would _define_ a "Hacker" to be "one who makes stuff." This is not Slashdot, and we are not "nerds"; we are makers all. Thus, shunting the "part" of HN that focuses on helping hackers (i.e. all of it) somewhere else wouldn't leave anything (except perhaps TechCrunch articles.)

If we want to keep HN purpose-focused, then perhaps we should just _stop growing_ (or perhaps shard/undergo mitosis evenly, rather than dividing along topic lines and creating us/them enmity.)

<comment><USER38> As much as I'd like to be part of a community like that, you are wrong. The closest official definition of on-topic is "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." Many people come here simply because they're smart and bored.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Clickable: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800925>

</comment><comment><USER41> I remember reading the same post and Instapapering it to give feedback when I got home. As the community grows (I'm still relatively new here, 1 year) this will become a bigger problem. I just hope we collectively solve it.

<comment><USER42> Thanks for the reference to Instapaper; hadn't heard of it before. Nice app.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Someone is probably going to have to make a site for HN refugees to become the new good HN. As things become more popular and better-known, their userbase tends more toward the average just by the nature of popularity. In most cases involving online communities this is a bad thing.

</comment><comment><USER44> I hate the, uh, hate on the internet sometimes.

I posted a self post on Reddit about my startup, and the first comment was "Go F*ck yourself". The second comment, QED.

I ended up deleting the post. Not cool. :(

<comment><USER45> Reddit is pretty much lost at this point. At one time, it was a community of college age people with above average intellects. These days, if someone posts something like "Did everyone stop caring about the oil spill?", the top comment will be something like "I never cared lol". Offensive racist comments end up with a positive vote balance.

You just have to pick your communities. It takes a bit of evaluation to see just who is on the other end of a forum.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I think it's all about anonymity. I suspect there is a non-empty subset of HNers who like doing destructive things on anonymous basis.

<comment><USER47> Anonymity vs. Real Identity is a very influential variable in online communities. While I used to be a big fan of anonymity I've come to review that opinion in the last year or so. Maybe it's time for HN to start rewarding people who put their real identity on the line?

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> I agree with calling out what happened, but I don't think it's good to make a big assumption using just one instance of a bad event.

</comment><comment><USER49> HN your feedback would be very supportive if you get the chance, <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1801861>

</comment><comment><USER50> When the hell did HN turn into Digg? Or 4chan, for that matter?

<comment><USER51> "If your account is less than a year old, please don't submit comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. (It's a common semi-noob illusion.)" - <http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

<comment><USER52> HN is turning into reddit.

<comment><USER45> Seems like a natural progression; after all Reddit's transformation into a combination of Digg and 4chan is nearly complete.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> He should have linked to his website instead of putting the link in the text area. It's not OK to put the URL in the text field where it's intentionally not clickable, without a good reason. If you want to do commentary, either post a comment or make a blog post and submit that url.

<comment><USER2> I've seen that done hundreds of times and nobody ever made an issue of it, usually it gets reposted as a comment by someone else. That's insufficient reason for a flag or a deletion. Apparently it was a duplicate submission.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is YC's anti-portfolio? - <AUTHOR> Definition of anti-portfolio - https://www.bvp.com/portfolio/anti-portfolio
Previous thread in 09 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=806407 Would be great to see a few prominent examples. I mostly ask this out of curiosity.<p>It also helps new entrepreneurs who tend to take rejections very seriously/personally - even after all the explanation that YC gives in their rejection emails. The main lesson being that application to YC should not be the be-all and end-all of your startup - examples really help to bring things in perspective (especially emotionally which tends to completely override rational thought in these situations). <comment><USER2> PG answered this question on video once, though I can't find it. His answer was -- circumspect -- let's say, but implied "look at TechStars' successes for our anti-portfolio". Example: RM apparently rejected Return Path's application out of YC with the comment "SPAM PROVIDER", which is why now all applications are reviewed by two partners instead of one.</comment>


Walking While Black - <AUTHOR> https://lithub.com/walking-while-black/ <comment><USER2> This was a wonderfully written piece and a lot of it rings true to me even as a white as you can be person in a smallish state university town in the midwest. But maybe being 6'2" with a big unkempt hobo beard is almost as scary as being black.

I too love walking the streets at night. And I too have to not be myself and behave in very conscious ways to avoid being hassled and detained by the police. Police just assume that if you're out at night you are a criminal.

So much of his descriptions of having to learn to dress a certain way, behave a certain way, and literally go out of my way to avoid scaring people rings true. I get detained by the police a handful of times per year just for walking or being in places at times that most people aren't. I particularly get the police called on me if I walk through in rich neighborhoods. I've had firearms pulled on me just for photographing trees in a public park (at night).

I tried to take up jogging for half a year but I quit and bought a bike after being stopped by police for being suspicious three times in as many months. Apparently jogging while not wearing a joggers uniform means I'm up to no good. No non-criminal jogs in cargo pants and a t-shirt. And that was in the day time. I wouldn't even consider trying it at night.

I'm not trying to marginalize his message that skin color is the cause. But it's certainly not the only cause. The root of the problem lies with the police, and society, villifying anyone who isn't diurnal.

<comment><USER3> Sometimes it really is a thin line.

In my country (The Netherlands) police sometimes check all cars passing a temporary checkpoint. They check if you have open fines, paid your taxes etc. When really expensive cars pass those checkpoints they verify that the owner actually has a job to afford cars like these and if the owner doesn't they can impound the car on suspicion of being paid with criminal money.

Statistics have shown that the highest "risk" group of those crime paid cars is with young foreign male drivers.

A few years ago a (black) rap artist was stopped at the side of the road by police and they basically admitted that this was racial profiling.

The artist made some fuss about it on social media, and it appeared in all news broadcasts and talk shows. People were expecting some big commotion about it; but it turns out that the majority of people actually approved of this method.

It wasn't racism at work here, it was statistics and people were fine with it. It is a thin line though, because to the people on the wrong end of the statistics it really can feel like racism. So where should police draw the line?

<comment><USER4>
      A few years ago a (black) rap artist was stopped at the side of the
      road by police and they basically admitted that this was racial
      profiling.

      The artist made some fuss about it on social media, and it appeared
      in all news broadcasts and talk shows. People were expecting some
      big commotion about it; but it turns out that the majority of people
      actually approved of this method.

      It wasn't racism at work here, it was statistics and people were
      fine with it.

Your conclusion is incorrect. Yes it is racism, and furthermore, the majority of people in a society being fine with it is not only irrelevant as to whether it's racism, it is what makes it structural racism. Something that everyone is fine with never seems questionable to members of the set of people who think it's fine.

Now let's explain why it being statistics doesn't mean it can't be racism. I have used this analogy before:

[http://braythwayt.com/2016/03/30/racism-is- injustice.html](http://braythwayt.com/2016/03/30/racism-is-injustice.html)

A woman is murdered in her home. Statistics tell us that when a woman is murdered in her home, it is nearly always her partner. So, why don't we merely arrest the partner and march them off to jail without gathering evidence, following pesky rules about having a lawyer involved, or examining the burden of proof?

Statistics, one might say, reverse the burden of proof. Why isn't it up to the partner to prove that they're innocent?

We can A/B test this application of statistics: Let's say that 9/10 times, the partner did it. In test A, we lock 100 partners up without trial. Presto, we have the right person in prison 90 times, and have an innocent person in prison 10 times, but being right 90% of the time feels pretty good, and we saved a lot of money and bother. Everybody who isn't the partner of a murdered woman feels pretty good about test A.

In test B, we arrest 100 partners, but then we gather evidence and have trials, even though "everybody knows the partner did it." Good news! Of the ten partners in test B who didn't do it, nine are set free. One, alas, is wrongfully imprisoned for a crime the did not commit. But one wrongfully imprisoned person is better than ten, right?

Well, it's not so simple. Of the 90 people who did do it in test B, the evidence wasn't always solid. So in ten cases, they cut a deal for a reduced sentence. In six cases, they "beat the rap in court" and were also set free, despite having done it. Three cases didn't even make it to court for some technicality or other.

So test B is much better for the case where someone is innocent: There is only one person wrongfully imprisoned, instead of ten. But it's worse for the case where someone is guilty. Instead of ninety guilty people receiving the full punishment, Only 71 receive the full punishment. Then get a reduced punishment, and nine guilty people walk free!

In pure, bloodless statistics, A is better than B. A is right 90% of the time, B is only right 80% of the time. But if we want to talk about _justice_ , B is better than A. In terms of justice, one person wrongfully imprisoned is worse than 100 guilty people set free. False positives are abhorrent to a just society, and false negatives (not to mention costly trials) are the price society is willing to pay to ensure justice.

So back to statistics and stopping cars. If statistics tell you that black men are more likely to be illegal immigrants, or have unpaid fines, or whatever, and you use that to stop every black man driving a car, but you don't stop white men, that is unjust for the same reason as locking up the partners without trial.

You have imposed a consequence--not being able to drive without being stopped by police--on some number of innocent black men--because they belong to a class of people who statistically are more likely to have done something wrong.

One can argue that being stopped is not the same thing as being jailed without trial. But it is. When travelling, you might be asked if you have ever been detained by police. Same when applying for a job. In some countries (cough, USA, cough) this perspective on statistics starts with stopping cars, and ends in gunfire.

Even in civilised countries, people reason that if it's ok for the police to stop every black man because black men have statistically committed more crimes, it is ok to not rent to black men, or not employ black men. And if asked, they will say, "I'm not a racist, I'm a statistician.". Law enforcement choices send a strong message about "what everyone thinks is ok."

At some point, though, it comes down to justice. Justice is not imposing consequences upon someone without actual, inspectable evidence. Injustice is imposing consequences upon someone because somebody else who has something in common with them broke the law.

And racism is using statistics to impose injustice on someone because of their race. It's that simple.

<comment><USER5> The partners are always the first SUSPECT and the police do their due diligence to RULE THEM OUT. Even on the 1/10 where the weren't the murderer, the police still intrude on them to try to find the truth. Being a SUSPECT != SENT TO JAIL. The rapper in the story was a SUSPECT, they weren't SENT TO JAIL which makes your analogy not an analogy at all, because well, they aren't anologous. If anything I feel your arguement argues for pulling the rap artist over.

<comment><USER4> Ah, you are correct that there is a missing element to the analogy, and this is it:

The woman lies dead in the murder case. When the rapper was pulled over, there was no case of a Ferrari stolen by a dark-skinned man. The police were not acting on a tip that the rapper was smuggling narcotics in his car. They stopped him for driving while black.

If we want to add the missing link, we then say that the police, knowing the statistics of men who assault and/or murder their partners, stop men at random in society and ask them to provide evidence that their partners are safe and sound.

When put that way, the case is even stronger against stopping the rapper on a "fishing expedition." If men were stopped at random to check whether they had assaulted their partners, nobody would be shouting that "SUSPECT != SENT TO JAIL."

Society would not stand for the notion that all men are suspect for the actions of a few, whether or not the statistics show that men are disproportionally more likely to kill their partners than women, or that the leading cause of violent death amongst women is men.

The very notion of all men being permanent suspects of a crime would rightly be considered abhorrent. And so it is here with people of colour.

<comment><USER5> I also think your explanation here isn't exactly what happened, at least from what I gathered. What I read it as whas "We stop all people in expensive cars at this checkpoint and validate their income." So society wasn't ok discriminating against him because he was black, they were ok discriminating against him because he was in a nice car.

<comment><USER4> Stopping all cars is absolutely a different thing. Of course, if it only happens in certain neighbourhoods, one might pause, but here in Toronto, for example, we have drinking-and-driving sweeps where the police set up checkpoints and stop all cars regardless of occupant or car.

That seems reasonable.

Of course, here in Toronto they also like to "card" people in certain neighbourhoods of certain colours, and there is an ongoing set of protests against how they choose to implement this practice.

But I am personally ok with a certain amount of checkpointing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I would identify as how the author describes, someone who's slightly nervous at the sight of a black male walking towards him at night. I try to suppress this feeling, and try to act normal, at which point I'm really overthinking. And I'm sorry. I am sorry that this has happened to you and to black people in general, how as a society we have fucked up so much. I am suddenly reminded of the book "The Lathe of Heaven", in which when the protagonist wishes a world without racism, and everyone turns grey-skinned. I wish there were immediate solutions, and a way to not let this drag on for generations.

<comment><USER7> Thank you for saying this.

The fact is, as a black male, I sometimes feel prejudice against black males while walking at night. And I'm someone who is affected by that very same prejudice. I see all the same media as anyone else, which constantly portrays black men as a menace to society.

Is a random black man actually more dangerous than a non-black man, in real life? I have my doubts. But for argument's sake, let's say it's true to a slight extent. That still means a given black man bares very little actual risk. Yet, what sort of psychological damage is done to us by being repeatedly subject to this treatment? It's an invisible tax we pay. I've been fortunate my whole life for so many reasons, but I have my own stories, like most other black men I know.

I feel other types of prejudice too. I think step one is knowing this, step two is empathizing, and step three is advocating.

<comment><USER8> In the area where I live there aren't very many coloured people. When I (rarely) walk at night I find myself estimating the social category of people. If I see a young man in sweat pants and a baseball cap, I think 'possible Chav' (low class white person here in the UK) and I'm wary. Low income young men are more likely to be a possible source of trouble.

I think in the UK and US since black people are far more likely to be in a low income category than not, race becomes a proxy for that.

Funnily enough, when I see a black person in the street at night here I'm more likely to have a positive attitude. Most of the coloured people living round here do so because they are quite successful. Also because there aren't many black people, such a person is perhaps more likely to feel out of place or potentially feel threatened or need help.

<comment><USER9> > aren't very many coloured people

Highly recommend using "people of colour," instead.

<comment><USER8> Fair enough, but that's more of an Americanism. It's not really used here in the UK.

<comment><USER10> It's pretty unusual to say "coloured people" here in the UK, too. I usually phrase it something like "people who aren't white", clumsy though that is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've spent time in remote Australian communities, where it's quite common to be peppered with 'white cunt' imprecations if out at night, especially anywhere near the canteen (bar). I found that quite confronting (occasionally frightening) in the moment, but it didn't have a big effect -- the people concerned were usually drunk and in a mess (you'll know what I mean if you've been in such places), I was a kind of foreigner (outback communities are not really 'Australia' in anything other than an bureaucratic sense), and clearly representative (whether fairly or not) of an oppressor. And, importantly, I could leave. A few hours drive, and I'm back in a nation where I'm 'the norm', and the indigenous Australian would be the outsider.

I'm trying to imagine the generalised life trauma that might ensue were I subject to this kind of suspicion and/or hatred all the time, in my own country (I do realise the author of the piece wasn't from the US). Many of course will rise above it more-or-less unscathed, but exceptional individuals are a poor indicator of most people's life chances.

Australia is similar to the US in this respect. Indigenous Australians stand little chance unless they happen to get lucky and land whatever weird combination of genes and upbringing that creates exceptions. In some ways it's worse here, as denial about causes is very close to universal -- there's no real equivalent to the US North/South divide. Our whole nation is locked into a kind of determined fluffy antebellum fantasy, where we didn't have a nation- founding war, but just a kind of sloppy de facto displacement of savages by imported middle-class suburbanites, regrettable certainly, but all too natural (so inevitable).

What a total stuff-up humans have made of everything.

<comment><USER12> It was more like a genocide. In fact, in many parts of Eastern and Southern Australia, it was a genocide.

>Our whole nation is locked into a kind of determined fluffy antebellum fantasy, where we didn't have a nation-founding war, but just a kind of sloppy de facto displacement of savages by imported middle-class suburbanites, regrettable certainly, but all too natural (so inevitable).

It becomes very obvious whenever someone stirs up the hornet's nest. The last I can think of was when Adam Goodes [0] tried to express his cultural ties.

0\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Goodes#Controversy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Goodes#Controversy)

<comment><USER11> > _more like a genocide. In fact, in many parts of Eastern and Southern > Australia, it was a genocide_

Certainly. Sports & genocide are Australia's top 2 talents (Tasmania must rank among the world's most classically perfect examples of genocide).

The exact form of the stuff-up varies per domain: genocide here, ecocide there (everywhere). But _that_ humans stuff up everything they touch seems to be a universal. Crap species.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> In addition to shedding light on the author's experiences, this is also an excellent piece of writing. It's not what normally shows in HN, but I'm glad it did.

</comment><comment><USER14> What are peoples thoughts on a guy walking behind a woman. Not intentionally, just it's late and you end up walking up behind a woman on a darkish street.

I always feel I either need to slow right down, so i'm not closing the gap (don't want to speed up as that might seem really dodgy..) Or just cross the road entirely.

I feel we're in this weird place where every guy is perceived as a potential threat, so I understand that I should cross the road or just hang right back from her, but then that makes me feel bad because I'm not a threat to anyone and why _should_ I have to cross the road or change my pace. I just want to get home too.

<comment><USER15> > I always feel I either need to slow right down, so i'm not closing the gap > (don't want to speed up as that might seem really dodgy..) Or just cross the > road entirely.

I usually try to overtake them very quickly, so they can see me. It helps that I'm a very fast walker.

<comment><USER16> I do the same. I walk quickly and as far to the side of them as I can, making a decent amount of noise. That way they can hear my location and be less alarmed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> A good but disturbing read. This just stopped me in my (white, European) tracks:

 _" When he dropped me off and I thanked him for his help, he said, "It's because you were polite that we let you go. If you were acting up it would have been different." I nodded and said nothing."_

Even the officer who made the effort to be fair, still expected submission.

<comment><USER18> Isn't that what all police expect, from everyone? Cops here in Ireland are generally friendly, but the best path to a frictionless interaction with them is to demonstrate you already know who's the boss, so they don't feel like they have to demonstrate it to you

edit: Having read now the article, I take that back. You've gotta be submissive with cops everywhere, but what this person describes is pretty extreme

<comment><USER17> > Isn't that what all police expect, from everyone?

Honestly, I don't know. I've been fortunate to have never had a bad interaction with the police, and when I have had dealings with them they've been helpful and professional. I hope that I know enough about my rights that I would be polite and cooperative but firm if the situation demanded it, but I don't really know whether I could do this in practice.

I live in the UK and we supposedly have "policing by consent" [0] here, but there is abundant evidence that the police tend to exploit the power asymmetry. Armed police who consider themselves "the boss" are one of the reasons I am unlikely to ever visit the US.

[0] One of the "Peelian Principles": [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by- conse...](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by- consent/definition-of-policing-by-consent)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> >> A lone woman walking in the middle of the night was as common a sight as Sasquatch; moonlight pedestrianism was too dangerous for her.

Mnyeah. Also known as walking alone while female after nightfall.

I used to do that when I lived in Athens, Greece. There were two distinct periods of it, because I went through a phase where I had a decidecly gender- ambiguous appearance (short hair, combat boots, jeans and t-shirt) and another when I dressed more typically feminine (think your mom when she goes to the hairdresser's).

When I looked like I could be a boy with weird hair, I thoroughly enjoyed my nighttime jaunts and I never felt threatened or harrassed. I walked around the seedier parts of town, where the drug-dealing and the sex-working happened- because that was the point, to see the night life that crawls out of the woodwork when all the decent people are safely sleeping at home. Despite all that I never got into trouble. I guess I looked like a bit of a freak so folks probably assumed I was out for a fix or something. But who knows?.

When I looked my most femme, the situation was completely reversed, even though by that time I was bored of the sleaze and stayed firmly in the better- lit, higher-income parts of town. People would stick their heads out of moving cars and yell obscenities ("Hey baby, are you making house calls? MWAHAHAHAHA"). If I stopped, like to sit at a bench for a few minutes, shadows would detach themselves from the background and slowly amble towards me, nonchalant like, until I felt insecure enough that I had to get up and march away. Every single man I met would consider it their obligation to hit on me, one way or another- tell me how pretty I was (in the dark, sure) offer a ride, offer to buy me a drink... strangely enough, nobody ever offered to buy me a souvlaki which is what I actually was after most of the time.

Note that this was Athens city in the period between 2000 and 2005, long before the immigrants started coming in. I'm just saying. Those people who made it a pain in the ass for a woman to walk alone at night? Plain, middle- class white guys in a country with a rate of violent crime among the lowest in the world.

Well anyway. There you go. It sucks to walk while black, it sucks to walk while female, also- or at least, while recognisably so.

<comment><USER9> Relevant from the article:

> (And it is not lost on me that my woman friends are those who best > understand my plight; they have developed their own vigilance in an > environment where they are constantly treated as targets of sexual > attention.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I can't find it, but I first read a piece about _Walking While Black_ when I was still homeless. It was a different piece, written by a successful American man, a lawyer iirc, whose car broke down not too far from home. So he walked home into his upper middle class neighborhood to his own home and was harassed by the police about it.

I got some very small taste of such treatment while homeless. Walking while homeless is another reason for well off people to call the cops on you or for police to generally assume you must be up to no good.

I don't know how to fix this, but I am glad to see it getting more attention and I am glad to see such compelling writing on the subject.

<comment><USER21> [http://jay.law.ou.edu/faculty/Jmaute/Lawyering_21st_Century/...](http://jay.law.ou.edu/faculty/Jmaute/Lawyering_21st_Century/Paul%20Butler.pdf)

<comment><USER20> Thank you very very much.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> When I was growing up I remember the pride our educational system tried to instill in us and it seems so fake in retrospect. It's impossible to be proud of a nation that is only a land of opportunity for those who are white and middle class.

Its not that I'm not proud to be an American so much as I don't consider myself one I'm just a person who happens to reside here because I don't have better options.

<comment><USER23> Even though there is racial disparity and studies show discrimination in housing, jobs, loans, etc. I wouldn't go so far as to say that only White people can get ahead.

Yes I'm Black, live in the south and think I'm doing pretty well. I have quite a few friends who would also disagree.

<comment><USER24> I don't think he meant there is no opportunity for black people, but that it's truly a "land of opportunity" only for whites (more specifically white men).

Like, I grew up in a lower-middle class family and flunked out of college due to my f-ups. I squandered a lot of opportunities through my 20s, and yet still ended up in a position where I could teach myself to become a software developer, and make good money today. I got a lot of extra chances, chances that people of color don't necessarily get.

<comment><USER23> If you look at income mobility in the US, statistically it's not the land of opportunity for anyone who comes from a poor household. ([https://hbr.org/2014/02/what-we-know-about-income- mobility-d...](https://hbr.org/2014/02/what-we-know-about-income-mobility- depends-on-how-we-define-it))

Example:

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/05/25/the-s...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/05/25/the- shocking-number-of-americans-who-cant-cover-a-400-expense/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> North America's attitude towards people of colour, absolutely disgusts me. I simply do not understand why that a country that was founded on on the principles of freedom continues to act this way. The fourth amendment clearly states that all citizens should be treated equally if suspected of a crime, yet this simply does not happen.

Yeah, the UK (my homeland) has it's problems, but in the main, racial in- equality is not one of it's major ones. Every country does have 'ghetto' type areas, where things aren't as black and white as they should be (no pun intended) but, come on America, you need to do better than this.

On the article itself:- A well written piece, and an real joy to read despite it's content. Things I had to look up, though:

Clark's Desert Boots: [https://www.clarksusa.com/desert- boots/c/o203](https://www.clarksusa.com/desert-boots/c/o203)

Half Pint's 'Greetings': [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2UdEasSWP0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2UdEasSWP0)

<comment><USER26> You should visit Latin America. Everyone is judged by their skin tone. The darker you are, the more you are regarded as "the help." Parents are excited when their children are born with light skin. My in-laws are all Mexican and I can say that they are far more racist than any US citizen I've met.

I'm not even sure it's really "racism." But I do know that it's considered completely normal to think of others this way.

<comment><USER27> It's completely racism, dark skin color is an indication of non-European (priamrily either African or American indigenous) ancestry, and what you describe is a outgrowth of racism in which Europeans are favorered and the other two groups disfavored.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> great article. Very happy to see this on Hacker news even though it isn't the typical story found here.

</comment><comment><USER29> So the societal patterns this article describes are true, and they are not acceptable. As a white male who lives in this society, I have one question: _What can I do to help change this?_

<comment><USER9> This is a common question, but as a person of color, I would push back on it - this question has the effect of adding more work on the backs of the marginalized, underrepresented, and oppressed to educate you.

My personal answer would be to ask that you read, make it a habit to educate yourself before relying on the labor of people of color, and keep an open mind whenever you have kneejerk responses to anything racially charged.

<comment><USER30> I acknowledge your point. And yet, I would suggest you should reconsider, for two reasons:

First, it feels (to me, at least) like someone is genuinely wanting to be helpful, and you throw it back in their face. Your point is valid, but you could be turning away potential allies.

Second, you are opening the door to people thinking, "Right, we white people will figure out how to solve all the black peoples' problems" \- with all the paternalism that implies. I recognize that you are very much _not_ saying that. But it seems likely that someone will take it that way, either because of malice or just because they are bent toward taking it that way.

<comment><USER9> I will not reconsider telling people that they're asking victims for additional emotional labor. The very attitude is poisonous. Instead of "take over and solve the peoples' problems" it is, like UX research, mostly an act of listening to people of color, not of declaring themselves the arbiters of the solutions.

All it takes is letting go of one's ego to center the conversation around listening to people of color instead of deciding to take control of the conversation or of their "salvation."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The article and this thread explicitly call out racism. The terms race or racism show up a dozen times (now more), but sexism only appears once.

In terms of criminal justice, men are treated significantly more harshly. The man's sex seems at least as important as his race, but it seems we don't see or talk about that bias as much.

Are we blind to sexism when it hurts men? How can we do anything about it if we don't talk about it?

<comment><USER32> Perhaps the conversation you are looking for is the one about what's known as "intersectionality"

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Not hacker, not news.

<comment><USER34> That goes for plenty of articles here, I've always felt that Hacker News was for any articles that people in tech might find interesting. I thought this was a great piece, and really well written, I'm glad it was posted here.

<comment><USER35> I second that. Also, as a bonus it was through this article that I found out about lithub.

<comment><USER36> Same. I'm also cynically surprised GitHub hasn't sued them for trademark infringement...

<comment><USER37> They'd have to prove marketplace confusion -- that an ordinary consumer might buy some LitHub services and believe them to be GitHub services.

If GitLabs changed their name to 'GitHlub', they'd be too close. But a shipping company named GIT-HUB might be totally ok if their logos and ads were distinct.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Tech's Most Unlikely Venture Capitalist - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@pejmannozad/tech-s-most-unlikely-venture-capitalist-bb002488f297#.i0as6zadl <comment><USER2> This is the fifth link to that article: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Tech%27s%20Most%20Unlikely%20V...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Tech%27s%20Most%20Unlikely%20Venture%20Capitalist%20&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

I start to wonder whether medium.com has a policy of spamming HN since I almost _never_ encounter links to medium.com elsewhere...

<comment><USER3> The recent deluge of dupes is because medium.com and a few other sites add a unique hash to every URL, which bypasses HN's dupe detection. We'll fix it.</comment></comment>


An Interview with Mahbod Moghadam of Rap Genius - <AUTHOR> http://getwakefield.com/2013/02/12/an-interview-with-mahbod-moghadam-of-rap-genius/

<comment><AUTHOR> The more I read about this kid, I'm baffled that a16z would invest such a large amount in the company. The product can be duplicated and currently only has a stranglehold on the rap-lyrics market - i.e. annotation for any other segment is still up for grabs and can be done by a duplicate product.

Having said that, the stability and reliability of the founder must have been taken into account in determining the value of the venture. $15/16 million or whatever the amount was seems crazy high considering how much of a loose cannon he appears to be. Wouldn't surprise me to see them slowly diminish his role.</comment>