Facebook Scanner - <AUTHOR> https://stalkscan.com/ <comment><USER2> (click the EN button in the top right corner for English)</comment>


Show HN: Remote Friendly: A website for finding and listing remote jobs - <AUTHOR> https://remotefriendly.work <comment><AUTHOR> I created Remote Friendly in part because there still aren't many places to find remote jobs (a few sites I've visited seem to recycle content from each other or StackOverflow). I've been teaching myself to code and I wanted a project that felt achievable which would also be useful. Creating Remote Friendly allowed me to learn a great deal about starting with an idea and seeing it through to completion.

</comment><comment><USER2> Please fact check this blurb and I will add you to a site where I am collating "gig" opportunities for the new economy:

 _Remote Friendly helps you find a new job at a remote-friendly company. You can subscribe to their mailing list to receive a weekly email of new remote jobs. You can also follow them on Twitter or Facebook to hear of new positions._

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks good to me, thank you!

<comment><USER2> [http://gigworks.blogspot.com/2016/11/remote- friendly.html](http://gigworks.blogspot.com/2016/11/remote-friendly.html)</comment></comment></comment>


The workspace-based, image-oriented programming paradigm - <AUTHOR> http://dpb.bitbucket.org/r0ml-on-the-workspace-based-image-oriented-programming-paradigm.html <comment><USER2> This is a note about editing a program as part of the state of the system running it (the "system image").

It is not about processing programs as pictures :-)

<comment><USER3> reading the title-even i was wondering about the same :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Isn't this how smalltalk worked?

<comment><USER5> And most Lisps.</comment></comment>


An iPhone Lover's Three Months Exile With Android - <AUTHOR> http://www.cultofmac.com/193178/an-iphone-lovers-three-months-exile-with-android/

<comment><USER2> Wow, I'm surprised that people like this actually exist.</comment>


Draw pixel art using CSS only Bye bye images. - <AUTHOR> http://kushagragour.in/lab/picssel-art/

<comment><USER2> This is getting ridiculous. If you wanna draw dynamically, use canvas or use data/base64 as the image src.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are you kidding?

You realise the CSS has to be requested right? With a seperate request?

And that you could probably optimise your individual pixel rendering css to some kind of binary format?

Like PNG or JPG?

<comment><USER4> i don't think the creator intended this to be something to actually use in a productive way - i more believe that he/she wanted to do something cool with the css3 - i think it's a pretty cool idea even if there is no practical use for it

<comment><USER3> I agree. I think it's awesome.

My comment was more in reaction to "bye bye images" in the submission title.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Print a 3D light field holiday card on your boring old 2D printer - <AUTHOR> http://www.lumiidisplay.com/holiday <comment><USER2> Seems interesting, but I only could read the text: All these videos playing in parallel, without a way to stop them, make the normal view of the page unusable for me (browser locks up).

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about that. I've added controls to the videos so you can pause them. Hope that helps!

<comment><USER2> Thank you, much better!</comment></comment></comment>


MariaDB ColumnStore on Intel Optane SSD - <AUTHOR> https://mariadb.com/resources/blog/mariadb-columnstore-on-intel-optane-ssd/ <comment><USER2> Does anyone use MariaDB in production? If so, why over the competitors?

<comment><USER3> Yes, because MariaDB support is excellent and relatively affordable. On the other hand, you have Oracle...

Also, we like the percona performance patchset that made it into MariaDB and isn't in MySQL proper along with the pt-* toolset from percona.

<comment><USER4> > the percona performance patchset that made it into MariaDB and isn't in > MySQL

Many Percona patches did make it into MySQL 5.7 and MySQL 8.0.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> To some degree this feels like "Fast storage turns out to be fast storage", but still, it's an interesting post and good to see some numbers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Poster here. The tweak here is that MariaDB tested the Optane SSDs with Intel Memory Drive Technology (basically presenting the SSDs as memory to the OS) and as fast storage. Pretty interesting stuff, and it's been fun to help developers get their hands on the tech and give it all a go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is the Optane SSD storage referenced in this article different from this Optane storage that GCP just announced support for?

[https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/partners/available- firs...](https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/partners/available-first-on- google-cloud-intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory)

<comment><AUTHOR> Disclosure: I help manage the lab (hosted by Packet) where we made available the hardware for this testing. If you're interested in testing and sharing your results, check it out here: [https://www.acceleratewithoptane.com/](https://www.acceleratewithoptane.com/)

Yes, they are different products but are both based on Intel 3D XPoint memory media. GCP announced support for Intel Optane DC Persistent Memory, which sits in memory DIMM channels (see [https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-optane-dc- persistent-m...](https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-optane-dc-persistent- memory-readies-widespread-deployment/) for a visual). The Intel Optane DC SSD referenced and tested in the posted article is an NVMe SSD but with different characteristics than NAND-based SSDs you can read about here: [https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state- drives/o...](https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state- drives/optane-ssd-dc-p4800x-brief.html).

GCP's announcement is pretty exciting, and as more and more developers get their hands on both types of products, we'll see more interesting usages like MariaDB ColumnStore, Memcached, RabbitMQ, Postgres, etc. We have our own ideas, of course, but it's been fun making this all available to developers directly and seeing new ideas come up.</comment></comment>


Placebo effects in cognitive training [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://www.pnas.org/content/113/27/7470.full.pdf <comment><USER2> At first glance this seems like a horribly flawed study. It seems misleading to call this a placebo effect when it is clearly the result of selection bias.

The paper makes it clear that this is intentional, but I'm not sure they've really shown anything novel here, just demonstrated what should already be well known. I.e., badly designed studies may contain bias.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is actually not a bad study.

First, the bad stuff:

\- Only 50 participants (they waffle about power, but its unconvincing) \- Over analysis of such a small dataset (they report testing lots of issues, and they presumably did a bunch more tests).

On the good side:

\- They showed a 1pt improvement on a good measure of intelligence (raven's matrices), as a result of a differing recruitment strategy (scroll through the paper, there's a half-page image showing these). \- All of the experimenters were blind to both study purpose and condition (which is sadly rare in psychology). \- This is a really interesting effect. It would be one thing if it were a social measure, but raven's matrices are an IQ test.

This would seem to support the notions around malleable intelligence (Carol Dweck et al), and is an interesting experimental effect.

That being said, the sample size was really small, and I probably won't believe this until I see it replicated a few times (though I've seen similar placebo effects on IQ tests before in past research, which I always thought sounded more like stereotype threat).

</comment><comment><USER4> I abandoned my cognitive training research plans after some piloting of a task. I had a number of data driven reasons for it, but a personal one was that I doubted that cognitive training would ever be more effective for the majority of people than spending that time exercising, and following better sleep habits. Sure one can do all three, but for many there are real time constraints (anyone with kids here agree?) and choices have to be made...and choosing to sit down in front of a computer for cognitive training is probably not the right choice.

<comment><USER4> Actually given the relatively ample evidence of the cognitive boost associated with exercise, an exercise condition would make an excellent active baseline to test cog training against. It would make a great study.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Please review my startup Ventoria.com - <AUTHOR> http://ventoria.com

<comment><USER2> Well, it seems you have a great service for Chamonix, and that's a good start. I live in Whistler, and have been somewhat affiliated with this market in the past.

From a usability perspective, your homepage didn't really make me want to click on anything. It didn't make me want to enter a search. You've got a great big photo of a mountain, and you tell me what you do, but I often prefer to be 'shown'.

Basically, i think you've got a bunch of text, and actually using the service looks to be somewhat secondary.

Once I actually go to the listings chamonix/accomodations page, the layout isn't super easy to browse through. I use a 3 column layout like you do for featured items, but find a list much more easy to read when you have lots of listings.

The accomodation view pages I really quite like. This is of course one of the most important pages on your site. It is very clearly laid out, and usable. Lots of pictures is good, etc.

what is your plan on spreading this beyond Chamonix?

i took a quick look at some of the top google results for 'find location properties', and the first few results were not very appealing, which is very surprising. you may have found yourself a good market here.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the great feedback. I completely agree with you that the front page is not exactly exciting and needs to be more inviting. For the search layout, I will probably give people the option to display the results in their prefered format.

Going forward I hope expand to other regions, once the usability kinks have been ironed out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I accidentally put in a date before today.. and it came up with results!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for checking out the site. The search functionality is pretty basic at the moment. The main purpose of it is really to filter for availability. I will look the bug you found in the next update.</comment></comment>


Open source distributed database with complex event processing - <AUTHOR> http://interference.su <comment><AUTHOR> What is interference?

A bit of history. Several years ago, as part of an internal project, we tried to create a data analysis service that meets the following minimum requirements:

\- as simple as possible integration with an existing java application \- support for persistent data storage \- indices support \- support for a distributed database and distributed operations, such as the ability to insert or modify data in a database from any of the available nodes \- the easiest cluster deployment \- transaction support \- basic SQL support with complex event processing and stream SQL support

One of the outcomes of this development was an open source product branch called interference. What can this service do?

Easy integration with java application. You include the library and then simply manage all the interference functions from within the java application using session methods, JPA annotations, queries and direct access to table objects.

Interference is a distributed service. This means that this service can be used within a distributed cluster, or you can build a distributed event-driven application based solely on this service, without any additional services like coordinators and so on.

Now, we suggest you use interference as a distributed platform when developing data analysis applications.

Interference is not an RDBMS in the usual sense. You do not use JDBC or anything like that to access the data. Instead, direct object-relational mapping is used that works directly with persistent storage and remote event transport mechanisms.

In the next time, we plan to publish an article with a detailed review of the service architecture and performance metrics.

Now, read the documentation for a detailed understanding. We are always happy to answer your questions.</comment>


Employee #1: Apple - <AUTHOR> http://themacro.com/articles/2016/07/employee-1-apple/ <comment><USER2> _One of the first projects they collaborated on was this huge sign of a hand with the middle finger raised. It was a huge cloth poster and they put it up on the roof of our school and weighted the ends with rocks, I think. This was the end of the building that all of the parents faced during graduation. And the idea was that during graduation they would cut some strings which would release this thing to roll down over the side of the building and it said, "Best Wishes, Class of '72!" and it was giving them the finger. [...] So that was like, their first prank together._

 _Sometimes, like when a student was entering the telephone booth, Woz would call the telephone booth and it would ring and student would answer it. Then Woz would say, "This is Ramar the Mystic. I see wetness in your future," and as the guy is saying, "What?" Woz would throw a water balloon at him from the second floor. The guy would be all angry and Woz would say, "Well, Ramar was only trying to help."_

These kind of remind me of those YouTube pranks where guys randomly kiss girls on the street or pick fights with people for "social experiments". Not really "pranks", just idiotic fun at other people's expense.

 _Jobs got a printed circuit board made and he figured out where to get all the parts._

Jobs often gets put down as just "the marketer" from Apple's early days, with Woz doing all the execution, but when you get deeper it sounds like Jobs enabled a lot of the logistics, supply chain, etc. Without him, Woz's prototype would have remained just that - a one off. In this light, Woz almost appears as the "idea guy" (where idea includes initial concept + first execution), whereas Jobs is the one who made it a viable product and company.

<comment><USER3> > _Not really "pranks", just idiotic fun at other people's expense._

The middle finger thing is really not at someone else's expense. It's a dumb prank. The water balloon thing is a bit more mean spirited, but it's still far more innocuous than assault or sexual assault "pranks".

<comment><USER4> A water balloon is mean spirited only because we've built roofs everywhere. Humans can get wet with very little to be afraid of.

<comment><USER3> It's still mean spirited to dump water on a stranger even if it doesn't actually hurt them. It's subjecting someone to something they don't want for your own amusement.

The claim that humans have nothing to fear about getting wet is also less true than ever now that people are carrying electronics with them constantly, but that's not really relevant for people Woz targeted in his 20s.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Look at the diversity in the first three employees: Jobs, half Middle-Eastern, Woz, a every-day American descending from mix of a handful of European countries, and Bill Fernandez, a Hispanic/Latino.

<comment><USER6> Even more interesting is how they were brought together largely by parents making decisions to learn technical skills and then being adept enough to obtain employment at a top company, choosing to live in the neighborhood they lived in near other technical people with access to surplus parts, and then making enough money to provide their children with the space, time and security to tinker.

<comment><USER7> Yes, their story is not without its share of enablers. It was the perfect setup, with the right people meeting to create something huge. Most times, if you read into the background of the big players, you'll see a common right place, at the right time theme. Imagine where we'd be as a civilization if everyone had the those opportunities.

<comment><USER8> > Imagine where we'd be as a civilization if everyone had the those > opportunities.

Exactly. You have to wonder how many Einsteins we've had over the centuries/millennia that never even learned to read.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9>
      Bill : Also, be prepared as either a founder or an employee to spend your life on it. Be prepared to
      give your life to the enterprise. Forget about family, forget about children, forget about your pets
      or your garden. It is going to be all-consuming and that's one reason why I'm starting my startup so
      late. I waited until I could neglect my children without harm to them.
      Craig : [Laughter] How so?
      Bill : They're out of the house now so I figured, "Okay, now I can do what I want."

I really like this attitude, and it's something that's on my mind too as I'm abandoning my kids by working 6 evenings a week to deliver my startup's first product. I hope there are a whole bunch of older entrepreneurs hiding in the wings, just waiting until their kids are young adults before jumping out into startup land with amazing ideas and a career's worth of experience to actually build them sensibly.

</comment><comment><USER5> Bill's story is worth the read: [http://www.techrepublic.com/article/apples- first-employee-th...](http://www.techrepublic.com/article/apples-first- employee-the-remarkable-odyssey-of-bill-fernandez/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I've always considered Job's advertising campaign - "Here's to the Crazy Ones" \- which announced his return and Apple's new direction to be such a masterpiece because it was so PERSONAL to Jobs.

A recognition of what it had taken to START apple and the recognition that to survive, and thrive, they would need to get back to those roots, toss the beige boxes to the wind, devil may care here comes the blue bomdi iMacs dammit!

Fernandez' quote puts a finger on it:

"It wasn't like this glamorous thing. It was this huge risk. Basically people would say, "Why would you quit Hewlett-Packard to go work for a couple of lame ass guys, you know, one of whom is like this hippy guy who wears Birkenstocks and torn jeans and dropped out of school and had to sell a beaten up VW van to just afford to get started on this. . . The short way of saying this, I guess, is there was no startup culture."

And as much of an egoist as Jobs was he nevertheless realized that he had to squarely define & embed that culture of "be crazy / think different" into Apple, and make it bigger than just more to the Jobs' mythos:

"According to Jobs's biography, two versions were created before it first aired: one with Richard Dreyfuss voiceover, and one with Steve Jobs voiceover.[5] In the morning of the first air date, Jobs decided to go with the Dreyfuss version, stating that it was about Apple." (1)

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

<comment><USER11> That slogan always bothered me. It was only 'Here's to the Crazy Ones who had Mainstream Success', and relied on Survivor Bias. There is no place in that sentiment for a person like Stallman, or from another angle, a person like Trump.

<comment><USER12> I disagree — there were hundreds of scientists working in the era of Einstein, and without them Einstein would not have reached the conclusions he did, despite them thinking he was destined to fail. His peers weren't crazy, they were the mainstream successes of their time. Here's to the crazy ones who flew in the face of adversity, success or not.

Stallman firmly fits within the statement: "And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do."

Stallman may not be popular, but you can't argue that he's not crazy, flying in the face of adversity, and has had a great influence on the state of computing today.

<comment><USER11> > _Here 's to the crazy ones who flew in the face of adversity, success or > not._

No. My whole point is that they only chose the proven (and famous) 'crazies'. There's only room for 'success'. No room for the 'or not'. Stallman is proven to a niche of techies, but outside that niche, people think he's a whack-job, despite his profound effect on computing as a whole.

I've got a high opinion of Stallman, but Stallman is very much the kind of 'crazy' that Jobs would want to hide. Not 'bankable' enough.

<comment><USER13> Listen to the whole message. It's about the crazy people who end up changing the world. Hence proven and famous.

(Meanwhile, from a storytelling perspective, it would be needlessly distracting to have to simultaneously educate people about some quiet unsung heroes. Your implied alternative version would be unworkable.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > The infrastructure was there so you could say, "I want sheet metal done. I > want a printed circuit board made." You could just go out and someone would > do it for you. "I want to buy parts," someone could do it for you.

The ability to reach out locally and have hardware components custom made seems kind of important for the small innovator in today's fast economy. The speed of revisions and product evolution and all that.

<comment><USER15> Today that is Shenzhen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> > many people, many engineers are really great at designing a product but > absolutely terrified to actually tell anyone about it or to promote > themselves or to say it's good. So marketing and sales are complete anathema > to them. But you're going to have to step up to the plate and do some of it.

I agree. There's always a lot of talk about how engineers neglect sales and its utmost importance to a startup's success. But I haven't seen lots of literature on encouraging engineers to come out of the shell to (rationally) "brag" about your product. Not all engineers have the confidence to do it or are just plain humble - Woz comes to mind.

A search for "marketing for engineers" only turns up content that explains marketing concepts and strategies to the uninitiated (inbound, organic, SEO...), but I'd like to see more on how to effectively step outside of your code editor, take pride and broadcast your technical creation to the world - for either economic or nonprofit motivations.

</comment><comment><USER17> Cool guy. His analysis of his economic situation is much different than we'd do today:

 _I figured that this could be pretty interesting and I was living with my parents and my car was paid off and I was very employable. So I figured that if this fell through that it would be easy for me to get another job and there's no big loss, right?_

<comment><USER18> Is it? I had the same thought process not too long ago.

<comment><USER17> Your thought process was, "I'm in good shape, my car is paid off and I'm living with my parents?"

<comment><USER18> Pretty much, except for me it was "It would suck, but I could always go move back in with my parents". The gist of it was that I wasn't risking much except for my time and a bit of pride, so why not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Technically speaking, Woz was employee #1 and Jobs was employee #2, although Jobs assigned himself #0 and always had 0 printed on his badge.

<comment><USER20> From Isaacson's biography of Jobs:

> _An early showdown came over employee badge numbers. Scott assigned #1 to > Wozniak and #2 to Jobs. Not surprisingly, Jobs demanded to be #1. "I > wouldn't let him have it, because that would stoke his ego even more," said > Scott. Jobs threw a tantrum, even cried. Finally, he proposed a solution. He > would have badge #0. Scott relented, at least for the purpose of the badge, > but the Bank of America required a positive integer for its payroll system > and Jobs's remained #2._

Isaacson, Walter (2011-10-24). Steve Jobs (p. 83). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

<comment><USER21> It's kind of unbelievable what a jackass he was in addition to being a genius. People are weird multifaceted creatures.

<comment><USER20> I actually never finished the book because Jobs, as a character, was just too inscrutable. And I don't mean in the interesting, complicated ways that humans generally are. The abrupt shift from brilliant leader and visionary to petulant asshole child is understandable, even at the start of Apple -- he was just 21, after all. But the emotional/personality swings pretty much continue through his entire life, and it was just too bewildering for me to fully empathize with Jobs. Maybe if other CEOs were as highly scrutinized as Jobs we'd see the same kind of inexplicable complexity? As it stands, I enjoyed iWoz (albeit it was written as an autobiography) much more than the Jobs' biography.

<comment><USER22> That's the fault of the biography, which refuses to ever analyze him and seems to not even notice when he's changed. Not the only thing it didn't notice - check out how often people are blatantly misquoted, like where Bill Gates supposedly claims a disk drive has "too low latency".

Seems like the actual event right before coming back to Apple, where he mysteriously becomes an amazing CEO, is when he met his wife.

<comment><USER13> Or indeed where Bill Gates claims that the purchase of NeXT technologies were just "warmed up UNIX" and was "never really used" by Apple. Isaacson failed to fact-check anything Gates said, and a lot of it was demonstrably, factually, objectively false.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> So what is his new company that he is starting?

<comment><USER24> Google Omnibotics?

Robot assisted surgery

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> FYI, "the Hamurabi game" links incorrectly to [http://themacro.com/articles/2016/07/employee-1-apple/[https...](http://themacro.com/articles/2016/07/employee-1-apple/\[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamurabi) which causes an error 404.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed. Thanks :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> > We became fast friends. I got him interested in electronics and so…

> Craig : Wait, really?

I don't know what is so surprising about think. Jobs was not an engineer or even really a geek. He was a visionary and a businessman. If he had gotten Woz into electronics, that would have been a big deal.

<comment><USER27> The surprise is that Woz isn't the one that got Jobs interested in electronics.</comment></comment>


Hazel for hackers - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/benjaminoakes/maid <comment><USER2> Is there a great advantage over standard shell commands, besides being in Ruby? For example, the following rule:

      rule 'Trash old temporary files' do
        dir('~/Outbox/*.tmp.*').each do |p|
          trash(p) if 1.week.since?(modified_at(p))
        end
      end

can be replaced with:

      #Trash old temporary files
      find ~/Outbox/ -iname '*.tmp.*' -mtime +7 -exec mv {} ~/.Trash \;

The maid script may be more readable if you don't know 'find', but on the other hand, this has only one line.

<comment><USER3> I used to use bash scripts and `find` for the purposes that you give. Maid came about when I was starting to add logging and a "dry run" option to those bash scripts. Ruby quickly became an attractive option then. But for many one- off tasks, I still find knowing how to use `bash`, `find`, etc effectively to be important.

There are other benefits beyond logging and an easy to invoke "dry run" option. For example, many of the methods in the DSL give back arrays and strings, any of Ruby's many Enumerable methods are available to you. If you have any difficult-to-express logic, that can be quite handy. Also, not every OS keeps its trash at `~/.Trash`, but Maid will do the right thing on OS X or Linux.

There are other reasons you might prefer Maid over shell scripts, but in general my hope is that Maid can provide a common framework for these types of scripts and also a community for people interested in automating tasks like this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> One of the areas where I disembark from the traditional Unix way is to replace "--dry-run" like flags with "--enable-destruction". That way I have to intentionally do the bad thing.

<comment><USER5>
        $ git clean
        fatal: clean.requireForce defaults to true and neither -n nor -f given; refusing to clean

<comment><USER3> That's something I'll definitely consider.

        maid clean
        # Give error message
        maid clean --noop
        # Show what would happen
        maid clean --force # or maybe --execute
        # Do actions

I'll be making an issue for this if no one has already.

<comment><USER3> This is now <https://github.com/benjaminoakes/maid/issues/78>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A nice feature that could be implemented on OS X would be to auto-organize files by the domain they're downloaded from.

Safari on OS X puts the source link of a downloaded file in the spotlight metadata, which can be accessed via "mdls" - an excerpt:

      $ mdls Inconsolata-Bold.ttf
        -- other metadata --
        kMDItemWhereFroms              = (
          "http://googlefontdirectory.googlecode.com/hg/ofl/inconsolata/Inconsolata-Bold.ttf,
          "http://code.google.com/p/googlefontdirectory/source/browse/ofl/inconsolata/Inconsolata-Bold.ttf
        )

Personally, I'd find that much more useful than the "all pdf's are books" example.

<comment><USER7> There's this example from the README which seems to do what you are asking for:

        Maid.rules do
          rule 'Old files downloaded while developing/testing' do
            dir('~/Downloads/*').each do |path|
              if downloaded_from(path).any? {|u| u.match 'http://localhost'} && 1.week.since?(last_accessed(path))
                trash(path)
              end
            end
          end
        end

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Something that I recently started to do that seemed to help me it to point downloads of FF and Chrome to /tmp. So if I downloaded something important I immediately moved it to where it belonged.

On reboot all the stuff you didn't care about is gone.

</comment><comment><USER9> I like it, but prefer something like guard-shell which is event-driven: <https://github.com/guard/guard-shell>

<comment><USER3> I'd love that as well. It's certainly something I'd like to implement... but as of yet, I haven't come across many use cases (personally) in which it's necessary.

That said, I would definitely accept help in adding event-driven rules!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've been meaning to try maid, I installed the gem but I've yet to do anything more. Thanks for posting this, as now I have some incentive to configure it.

</comment><comment><USER11> This looks interesting. I've been using Hazel on OS X for a long time.

Will have to give it a try...

</comment><comment><USER12> It looks great! yay! Now lets make something to take care of our rooms! :P

<comment><USER3> Arduino to the rescue? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Would be great to have a repository with rules for this.

<comment><USER3> I've posted some rules that I use as an example:

       https://github.com/benjaminoakes/maid-example

I hope it helps!

Ben

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is pretty much horrifying (to someone like me who likes to meticulously manage and know where things are instead of treating "Downloads" or "Desktop" like a flat-filesystem.

Is it really that hard to just, you know, delete a few files whenever you download something? Download X. Okay. Download Y, go to open Y, delete X while you're there.

Somehow I have 6 TB of data and it's all organized. I don't have any files on my Desktop or Downloads folder. Amazingly, I don't have to spend 4 minutes looking for something when I need to pull something up to look at it or send to a friend.

<comment><USER15> Good for you. Sounds like you don't need this program. Since you're aware that there are people who treat "Downloads" and "Desktop" like a flat filesystem, presumably you can understand why this would be useful to them and others.

<comment><USER14> I'm guessing the people that would really benefit from it have never heard of GitHub and think that Ruby is a precious gem. I don't mean to knock the work.

<comment><USER16> If you are guessing that all engineers who understand how to use the command line are well-organized, I can provide you at least one certified example of one who doesn't match your worldview. This is awesome.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Manned Orbital Laboratory: the Pentagon's cold war plan to put spies in orbit - <AUTHOR> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/31/real-story-of-the-secret-space-station.html <comment><USER2> The Soviet Union did put spies (and a gun) into orbit [1].

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

<comment><USER3> In b4 some one says that guns don't work in space, they do even your everyday firearms.

All propellants contain an oxidizer otherwise it won't work the amount of oxygen in the casing is miniscule and would not support any chemical reaction of note.</comment></comment>


Viacom pulls "The Daily Show" offline as a result of contract dispute - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/07/viacom-pulls-the-daily-show-offline-as-a-result-of-contract-dispute/ <comment><USER2> I find this "double-dipping" nature of TV networks somewhat offensive. First, 50% of the programming is advertising (20 minutes content, 10 minutes ads). Then, they make someone pay for the privilege of delivering that advertising to my house? It's completely nonsensical because DirectTV is providing Viacom with a valuable service: fucking satellites orbiting the earth! And then Viacom wants DirectTV to _pay them_. I just don't get it.

(My bank started doing the "double dip" thing too. Every item in my Bank of America statement now contains a "relevant" ad. I don't know why this bothers me, but it does. I already pay transaction fees and interest. Must you also try to show me irrelevant ads?)

<comment><USER3> The networks aren't "double-dipping". Your cable bill pays the cable provider and ads pay the content provider; different organizations, different sources of revenue. A much better explanation from a reddit commenter: [http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pz8kz/til_cab...](http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pz8kz/til_cable_did_not_have_commercials_until_around/c3tgl2g?context=1)

<comment><USER4> This is like the archetypical great long-form Reddit comment. Reddit has a lot of pointless craziness, but their highest highs are also way better than HN's.

I'm long since past the point where the words "Great comment explaining this on Reddit" will get me to automatically click something.

<comment><USER2> FWIW, the critical "97%" number is made up: [http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pz8kz/til_cab...](http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pz8kz/til_cable_did_not_have_commercials_until_around/c3thsy6?context=1)

<comment><USER5> If this image is accurate, it seems that a basic cable package is probably 1/5 fees to content providers. [http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2010/03/cable-sub- fees...](http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2010/03/cable-sub-fees.png)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is the sound of the old dynasty dying. These disputes are not uncommon, they are getting less uncommon as time goes on. Eventually the 'content' company like Viacom will demand so much money for their content there will be no distributor willing to distribute it (because they can't make any money doing so) and then folks like John Stewart's production company will have a pull a C.K. Lewis and drop the middle man. Welcome to the real world Neo.

<comment><USER7> If that happens I think we can say goodbye to expensive and well written shows such as Breaking Bad and the like. A show like that which has been designed to be played out for possibly years isn't going to ever get off the ground via a pay as you go per episode, or some type of piecemeal model. There needs to be a significant upfront capital in place to make it worth the time for everyone who would be involved. But if some other company somewhere out there can and will front the money instead, then by all means please do it!

<comment><USER8> I'm actually looking forward to that.

I read a lot of golden and silver age science fiction. One of the things I love about the oldies isn't that they're necessarily better than modern science fiction, it's that they're _short_. _Creatures of Light and Darkness_ , a fantastic book, is 192 pages. It's a stand-alone story which spans thousands of years, the better part of the universe, and builds such wonderful characters. And the author gets you from here to there in 192 pages.

Nowadays, you can't introduce a plot and two characters in 200 pages. 400, 500, 600 pages are the norm. Some of it is style. Sometimes you need 600 pages to tell a story. But a portion of it is that authors are told, by their publishing companies, they need to target a certain size to get their books published, because a book needs to have a certain heft or it will never leave the shelf. And it's a damn shame, because some of these 600 page monstrosities could have been a fantastic 200 page book.

Broadcast television also imposes certain constraints upon the show. Some shows work well with this format, for instance, if the show is episodic in nature. If the show is trying to tell a particular story, it works less well.

One thing that can go wrong is that not all stories that get turned into a TV show require 18 hours of video to tell. A lot of filler is added, episodic episodes which get dropped into the middle of the story arc to drag things out. If the show's producers and writers are good, they can use these filler episodes to flesh out the characters and the world. But they aren't always good enough.

A second thing that can go wrong is that you don't always know when to end your story. A show may get renewed for two or three or four seasons, and if you finished telling the story in the first season, you now have to come up with a completely new story for season two, or reveal that by a fiendish twist your story wasn't actually finished in the season finale like you thought it was. This isn't always as ... _satisfying_ as it could be. Other times, you have to keep putting off finishing the story at the end of each season, which turns entire seasons into filler. This carries the additional risk that you may get canceled in season three and never finish the story you started in season one.

I'm generally looking forward to the death of big media producers, because I think the quality of entertainment will go up once people are freed from the constraint of telling all of their stories in twenty to twenty-four 22 or 44 minute episodes.

<comment><USER9> I agree with you that there are stories that are better suited for alternate formats.

But I don't think the death of the big media producers has anything to do with that one way or the other.

The markets for that kind of thing aren't the same markets the big media folks, so the new markets can grow regardless of the old ones. Kickstarter and the like are the likely funding venues, online is the likely distribution mechanism.

Toes are being dipped. Jane Espenson just funded a season of her webseries on Kickstarter. Dan Harmon and Charlie Kaufman just launched a kickstarter for a $200,000 art film project yesterday. Those are some names who have enough clout to get things done otherwise. But maybe not enough to get the things they want done most (almost no one has that kinda clout). Kickstarter helps them get some of what they want.

Don't count on the big media producers dying out, by the way. They're smart, they're connected, and they are survivors. They've been through more startup like situations than almost anyone in silicon valley, and they're the ones that lived through it. Don't underestimate them. TV and movies won't be like the music business. They saw it, and they learned the lessons, even if you don't think they did.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> <http://thepiratebay.se/search/daily%20show/0/99/0>

<comment><USER11> For that matter, <http://thedailyshow.com>

Very strange.

<comment><USER12> Well, it appears that episodes are no longer visible through thedailyshow website. But... <http://www.hulu.com/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart> Seems to work fine.

<comment><USER13> Outside of US, hulu.com doesn't work at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Daily Show is on vacation this week anyway, and these things usually get resolved in a couple of days. A lot of posturing on both sides, with the consumer ultimately losing.

</comment><comment> mkr-hn There's a "your provider dropped your favorite shows" scuffle every six months. It's a negotiating tactic. This is no more newsworthy than the "suit is back" story: <http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html>

<comment><USER15> This _is_ noteworthy because of Viacom pulling down the show from the Internet, which impacts _everyone_ (well, everyone who would want to watch The Daily Show on the Internet) and not just DirecTV subscribers.

Usually I'm totally neutral about these sorts of spats, but Viacom crossed a line here. In the grand scheme of things, this is nothing to pull the pitchforks out over, but my opinion of Viacom is now far worse than it was before hearing about this and this issue wouldn't even otherwise impact me since I don't watch The Daily Show on the net and don't subscribe to DirecTV.

Bad PR move, Viacom. You should probably consider firing someone over this because whoever made this call is not good at their job.

<comment> mkr-hn I'm not 100% sure but I think pulling shows from the web is also a normal part of this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Seems like a lose-lose situation for two old media firms fighting for relevancy.

</comment><comment><USER17> Yet isn't this precisely DirecTV's point?

One of DirecTV's core claims has been that online streaming of TV content undermines the value proposition of for-pay television [1]. I get that having your most vocal, most internetty users channel their anger toward your opposition is a powerful negotiation tactic, but this seems like it has a strong potential to backfire against Viacom.

[1] [http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/directv- via...](http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/directv-viacom- dispute-may-affect-access-for-20-million-customers/)

</comment><comment><USER18> Off their website, you mean.

It's still on all the same torrent sites it's always been on. And that's the way anyone outside of the US and Canada has been forced to acquire the Daily Show for years.

Copyright is so quaint.

<comment><USER19> Full episodes on their website play fine in any country there's no local distributor making claims on the show. I've watched online episodes on their site in Greece, Japan, etc. Well, until now that is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> _"Viacom has decided to take a service away from all Internet users in its attempt to punish DirecTV"_

Thats the blindest, most ambitious goal you could possibly have with the internet. Lets all get serious for a sec: <http://thepiratebay.se/search/the%20daily%20show/0/7/0>

And besides, the Viacom streaming player is terrible and low quality. If anything, this is going to remind people of the Hi-def, no-ad world they could be living in.

</comment><comment><USER21> I don't really have an opinion on the underlying dispute, but, to me, this sounds unprecedented in a good way. Viacom expects to generate meaningful additional pressure on DirecTV using the people who watch the episodes online already plus the inevitable "DirecTV refugees". That's a marker of the growing significance of watching TV online. I'd say that's a positive development overall.

<comment><USER22> I think it's a boneheaded move. The "DirecTV refugees" have eyeballs they could be selling advertising to, cutting out the middleman (DirecTV). Instead they're turning those refugees away at the border.

<comment><USER23> Online advertising is such a small revenue stream for a network like Viacom that they have no incentive to put anything online at all. They only use online streaming as an experiment to test new forms of revenue. So far, it hasn't been showing itself to be a worthwhile endeavor anyway so why worry about the slight dip in revenue if it will help you accomplish your goal of getting more money from DirecTV.

<comment><USER24> Ah, but if everyone from DirecTV is coming online, there's suddenly a larger audience, and higher fees cn be negotiated.

On the other hand, that also increases costs for Viacom and it doesn't support the overall stable of shoes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This is kind of strange. Wouldn't it enhance Viacom's negotiating position if people are watching directly rather than through DirecTV? i.e. Viacom can point out that people don't need DirecTV and that will make DirecTV cave.

<comment><USER26> I doubt it. If Viacom is financing the hosting of the online content, then online viewers cost them disproportionatly more money than those who watch on cable and satellite. Viacom would have only the ads insertted into the streaming video to recouperate those costs and (maybe?) earn some profit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Wow. I started watching the show on their site about three years ago with ads which started to get targeted to my german origin about a year ago.

Guess what options i'm left with now.

<comment><USER28> Guten Tag, Dailishowfan!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> So first Viacom shakes down Netflix, now they shake down DirecTV, who wants to guess that in a few months dish or Comcast gets the same treatment?

<comment><USER30> Why couldn't they start with Comcast? Nobody would feel bad for them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> The videos are not pulled. The trick is to stop the browser from loading the popup -- similar to the nytimes.com popups.

<comment><USER32> You can close the popup after the announcement finishes and watch the excerpt videos, but if you go to the Full Episodes page, there is a notice that full episodes are not currently available.

<comment><USER31> Interesting. I am able to access the full episodes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> The title of this article is very linkbaity.

</comment><comment><USER34> Now imagine what would happen if these dinosaurs were allowed to charge different rates for different providers going through the internet.

</comment><comment><USER35> Personal Opinion: I'm going to call Comcast tomorrow and demand they do the same thing. I can't stand Comedy Central or anything Viacom has ever done. TV is for morons.

<comment><USER18> [http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/01/26/28-not-having- a-t...](http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/01/26/28-not-having-a-tv/)

<comment><USER36> > _Generally this makes them very boring and gives you very little to talk to > them about._ //

What I find depressing is that watching other people have lives is supposed to be interesting but trying to have a life yourself is "very boring"; I'm boring because I'm poor, socially inept and don't have time for leisure activities - not because I don't watch broadcast TV.</comment></comment></comment>


Reasons not to use Netflix - <AUTHOR> https://stallman.org/netflix.html <comment><USER2> Netflix is still way better than the video streaming services run by giants such as Google, Amazon, or Apple.

You won't see Netflix intentionally not working on Chromecast in order to sell their own dongles and tie users to its own ecosystem.

Their business is video streaming, so their motivation will be to make sure as many paying users can access their content as possible.

In contrast, the giants can just use their services as a way towards greater vendor lock-in.

<comment><USER3> The point is that even the best of "them" is still not helping the individual. Netflix isn't giving back to society, because we can't archive their works legally or lend them out at a public library.

<comment><USER4> That sounds like a criticism of capitalism rather than a criticism of Netflix.

For me personally, Netflix makes enough good content (and hopefully pays artists well in the process) that the amount I pay is worth it. I want them to do little or no harm, but if I only patronized businesses that actively give back to society, I'd never be able to buy most classes of goods.

<comment><USER3> Isn't it terrible that the best we can hope from the larger organisms is they don't harm us in the process of their daily activities.

I give this criticism knowing full well I pay for it and profit from it.

Holding ourselves and the best among us to higher standards does more than deriding the worst.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Netflix is a surveillance system: it demands customers identify themselves to pay, and thus records what each person watches. Protect your privacy — reject Netflix!_

He's complaining that you have to pay for content? Where is the money going to come from to pay people to produce it? Is everyone suppose to work voluntarily?

 _{DRM tirade}_

The usual argument against DRM is that you are buying content that you can't use as you please, with Netflix, you are explicitly not paying for ownership you are paying for access. Would anyone complain that you can't stay in a hotel as long as you want when you only paid for 3 days?

 _{Netflix doesn 't let you use what you bought}_

You haven't bought Netflix content, you rented it. I can't go out and sell a leased car.

 _Educators speak the mission of "socialization" of children, meaning teaching them to be good, cooperating members of their community. That includes being willing in general to give things to others_

So if he thinks other people should give away their work. Will he come over and cut my grass for free?

 _Netflix is parlaying its control of users (obtained through the wrongs stated above) into a grab for control over video entertainment. Every time you hear that some video is produced specifically by Netflix, it is be appropriate to feel a wave of disgust and resentment. Those feelings will help you refuse to watch it — refuse to feed the monster._

Netflix produces content I want to see, I give them money. They pay people to produce content. It seems like a fair exchange and a much less crummy business model than most internet based businesses like Google and Facebook.

<comment><USER6> While I share your views on DRM for rented media, I think the broader point here is if we continue to accept this form of access, the idea of "owning" [an indefinite, singularly transferable license for] media (eg a DVD) will evaporate.

I honestly don't have answers here but being reliant on a stack of third parties just to have continued access to my favourite films isn't a prospect I look forward to.

<comment><USER5> There are choices. You can buy content and spend more money or you can rent it. There is little video I care about owning.

True, in the perfect world you would have something like iTunes + Apple Music for video. Where you can buy DRM free music and subscribe to receive music with stricter rights and mix the two.

Microsoft back in the day had the perfect model for subscription music with the Zune. You subscribed to unlimited music and and you got credit to buy 10 songs a month that were DRM free.

<comment><USER6> Choice? You cannot buy mainstream video content without DRM. At all. If you want to buy-to-keep something Netflix or Amazon _makes_ , you have to wait for them to release a disc version, and rip it yourself. If they don't sell it? You're outta luck. What happens if they stop licensing something from its creator? Gone. What happens if nobody licenses it from its creator? You're stuck.

And as we head deeper and deeper into this chaos, further away from traditional distribution into digital only, our choices are going to become easier and easier to steer, and subvert.

RMS wants all media available without DRM. If that means fighting a slippery- slope of convenience, that'll have to do. This is, after all, exactly what he's been doing most of his adult life.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's very easy to say "don't use Netflix." It's a little harder to say "use X instead, it's a viable alternative."

<comment><USER8> In my city, there is a public library that offers a wide range of DVDs. People can watch them there or they can borrow them. It costs 15€ per year unless you're unemployed, retired or a student, in which case it's free. I've never used Netflix.

<comment><USER9> I would suspect Stallman would reject that as well - library keeps track of what you have rented out, and requires proof of residency to get a library card. Sounds like exactly the same arrangement (except my property taxes foot the bill).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to > display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was > such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in > this way.

I do respect RMS, but there is a sitcom contained in these two lines.

<comment><USER11> He does himself no favours with his compulsion to rename things - "media services" becoming "media dis-services", "Goober" for "Uber" and so forth.

Many of his arguments are strong and worthy of discussion, even if his overall stance is not always so - but the way he expresses them can border into childishness sometimes. It's a pity; it gives his detractors (of whom I am not one, to be clear) an excuse to dismiss him.

<comment><USER12> I agree. His points are usually very strong and he has led me to changing my opinions more than any other single individual.

But his way of communicating often leads to an initial impulse to dismiss what he is saying outright, much like I would dismiss a Microsoft criticism which referred to the company as M$ or an Apple criticism that kept calling it crApple.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I agree with everything in here but still use Netflix(and others). It's almost an addiction.

I remember originally ridding myself of cable, at that time the pain of spinning a disk or the fear of downloading a torrent limited the amount of video I watched in a day. Now I that I am unencumbered it has eaten into all of my other leisurely activities especially video games and music.

</comment><comment><USER14> RMS is gonna be RMS. I just wish he was a more realistic advocate of open content. Creative Commons has taken off while GPL v3 is rarely used.

<comment><USER15> Creative Commons and GPL are for quite different purposes, and FSF supports using CC for purposes other than software and software documentation.

[https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/cc-by-4-0-and-cc-by- sa-4...](https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/cc-by-4-0-and-cc-by-sa-4-0-added- to-our-list-of-free-licenses)

<comment><USER16> I think FSF actually modifyed their license to allow Wikipedia relicense to CC ([https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2008/11/amend...](https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2008/11/amended-fdl-will-allow-wikipedia-to-adopt-cc-license/))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Love it: "A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in this way."

</comment><comment><USER18> Apart from the morality of using Netflix or not (which to be honest had been taking off because it's a compromise made towards users of illegal downloading), it doesn't seem they have many shows of quality. The quantity and choice is good, but I'm still waiting for an interesting show to watch.

And frankly, requiring a fast internet connection is an added cost. I might want to watch something on my cheap Android, in a train, and fast internet on mobile is a no go for me.

Netflix is progress, but it's still a compromise. The fact that it doesn't have all existing catalogs shows that's it's not ubiquitous.

<comment><USER11> There's some genuine gold in Netflix's library, if you go looking. An awful lot of dross too, to be sure, but there really is quality tucked away in amongst the mediocrity.

That's one of the reasons I find this particular essay exasperating - there is a measurable amount of serious work being distributed on Netflix, clearly made with care and passion, both in fiction and non-fiction. Yet Stallman's stance says to deplore those artists' work for their distributor's business practices. It's literally shooting the messenger.

<comment><USER19> "There's some genuine gold in Netflix's library, if you go looking."

As an early adopter of the DVD program, my biggest hangup was the weighted catalogue that required me to click through many screens of often repeated listings(crap titles Netflix wanted me to watch more than I wanted to watch) & I was never certain I had perused all titles. Without an A to Z listing, it is obfuscating my options. I don't care for tailored shit that pushes others' weighted options.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I don't get it. I'm paying a monthly fee to have streaming access to videos. If the service becomes unvaluable to me, I will drop it. For videos I want lasting access to, I buy the disk. These are choices I make knowing how these markets work. If you don't like how these markets work, you're perfectly free to choose not to participate. It's not like anyone is confused or there is some kind of monopoly or even some kind of predatory lending scheme here.

</comment><comment><USER21> The comments here are eerily similar to the "before picture" in this xkcd:

[https://www.xkcd.com/743/](https://www.xkcd.com/743/)

Are we ready to look back on this thread with a bittersweet mixture of regret and yearning for our naïveté ?

I feel like we've been down this road before , and we don't seem to have learned much about weighing contemporary practicality against long term security of freedom. And our duty in _leading_ the development through our choices , rather than sitting back as ineffectual actors, choosing what works best for us, without regard for the effect of our choices on the proliferation of anti-freedom techniques.

Yes, Netflix works well now. That's not his point. There is no fully superior alternative. That's not his point. Our choices and boycotts can _effect_ an alternative reality. I can't speak for him, but, even if unwittingly, that's what he's achieving. It's a sacrifice we all make for the greater good to get out of a local maximum. It's about sending a signal.

Signed , a fervent Netflix user on an iPhone :/

<comment><USER5> So what's that alternate reality? That Netflix allows everyone to copy all of thier content for free?

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Netflix actively lobbied DRM to be included in browsers and as a result even smaller local streaming services are incorporating it into their businesses. The general populace doesn't know what DRM is and doesn't care. Have you tried to clarify to a computer illiterate person on what that even means? (you're basically a thinfoil hat by that point).

</comment><comment><USER23> "A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in this way." Did anyone think the op is intentionally mocking himself? or have I lost touch with reality

<comment><USER24> It's Stallman we're talking about, so yeah - this is him being 100% dedicated. I would be a bit more chill, because hell, we just want to watch a f*in movie.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Netflix is useful, I guess, but only if you're willing to compromise. I can't find there everything I'm interested in, and if you can afford only one streaming service, you're compromising your intellectual curiosity and allowing someone else control how wide your world should be.

There's no single company that can provide such a service and humanity cultural heritage should not be ephemeral. The possibilities digital archiving provides are huge and consequential and Netflix and other services like it are the complete opposite of what's in our own best interest.

In many ways, this is what American capitalism is all about. Containing and replacing everything with something that you can make people pay for. From natural food to cultural artifacts. That's why the USA is where it is today. They've been fed this myth of exceptionalism to cover for extreme and dangerous form of cultural poverty.

<comment><USER26> If you can't find what you want on Netflix there's nothing stopping you from using a different streaming service next month, or using no streaming next month and renting / buying a DVD, new or secondhand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Netflix is a positive force driving technology to delight its customers. It has breathed life into new product lines such as apple tv and roku and paved the way for others to use the subscription streaming model by example. The open and free media is great as its own idea and proper application but why conflate the two?

</comment><comment><USER28> I don't understand his drm and antisocialization argument. His comparisons are to purchased media. But Netflix is renting me access to all of those movies, with block buster I didn't have legal standing to reloan the video or copy it.

</comment><comment><USER29> I have great respect for Richard Stallman, but frankly this text seems a bit paranoid. So what if they know what I watch? Is it too bad if I can have a list "continue watching" to pick up where I left off? Is it that terrible, that they can suggest to me other content I may be interested in? Is it a crime that they want to know how their service is used in order to stay attractive? I think not.

</comment><comment><USER30> They produce content,they have an anti-competitive bias. That and I simply don't want to support production of arbitrary movies. I might avoid a particular studio or director so as to "vote with my dollar", but it is all too pointless with netflix since they also are the producer.

To me,netflix is like walmart and what it did to smaller stores and how the quality now is so generic and bland.

</comment><comment><USER31> It's is good we have someone as dedicated as Stallman. I admire his commitment but I have to disagree partly with him here.

I believe DRM in media you buy should not be allowed. But you aren't buying anything from Netflix, just renting.

I'd love a FOSS Netflix client and it doesn't require any loss in security.

</comment><comment><USER32> Offer me a better product and I'll consider not using Netflix. Once all the original shows I'm watching have been canceled of course.

</comment><comment><USER33> What's the alternative?

<comment><USER34> Spinning disks, I suppose

<comment><USER35> DVD and Blu-ray both have DRM, though. I guess there's always VHS.

<comment><USER36> DRM is not undefeatable.

<comment><USER37> The problem isn't defeatability. It's the principle of buying DRM-locked content.

It's a compromise I'm willing to make under certain circumstances, but ultimately one that bothers me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I really like the plain-textness of this site.

</comment><comment><USER39> just use the Netflix and TPB too

</comment><comment><USER40> _it is be appropriate_

Typos of this sort make me wonder how clearly the man is thinking. That's perhaps unfair, but that's what crosses my mind when I read something like this and on top of the general craziness of the position, it has gibberish of this sort in it.

The post rants a lot about justice, but I am failing to see where in this rant he allows for the ability of people creating videos to get compensation at all. This seems to posit that a streaming service just shouldn't exist, period. The assumption that end users have all these rights, but creators apparently have none -- that's basically the very definition of slavery, no?

A lot of these things he is protesting were created as some attempt to try to capture compensation for the people doing the work that makes it possible for the end user to get all the things Stallman is claiming is some kind of right of end users.

I'm not comfortable with the moralizing language here. I think we need to do a better job of making sure people can get their share of the wealth that they participate in creating, not because of morality or justice, but because when (for example) Amazon employees are homeless while Bezos is insanely wealthy, this is basically preconditions for bloody revolution. When the people you need to create that wealth hate you for how you treat them, this is not a good thing going good places.

It isn't that I think it is "immoral" for Bezos to make that kind of money. It's that I think he's a fool to think that bleeding his workers won't come back to bite him. When their behavior was objectionable enough, even Roman emperors were sometimes offed by the very guard unit intended to protect them.

There's an old DnD concept of "lawful awful." This is where you try to play an alignment 1 Lawful Good character who is so "good" and so rigid about various rules that they wrap all the way around to behaving like a Lawful Evil. This post sounds a bit like to me.

I have a fair amount of respect for the fact that he believed in certain principles enough to put his own time and effort into creating open source alternatives to the proprietary things he felt were inherently in the wrong. And it's fine if he doesn't want to watch Netflix and wants to layout his reasoning for it. But this post veers into trying to tell other people to also embargo Netflix. What I am not seeing is his proposed alternative. And that's a difference here between his past willingness to write the code and make it open source because he felt that mattered and this current rant.

If you have a viable alternative to Netflix that fits your high-minded morals, awesome. If all you have is a rant about how this thing is not good enough, I think that should stay in the land of personal opinion or personal preference and not veer into territory of trying to use his position of influence to get other people to embargo them.

</comment><comment><USER41> This is BS. Go Netflix.

</comment><comment><USER42> Is this satire?

<comment><USER23> Lol if it's not satire then I don't know what it is

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Once again, he is right and forward looking. What technology is becoming is must be clear to everyone nowadays. Having a democratic technology is a priority right now, and new IP laws as well.

I never even installed Netflix.</comment>


To My Old Master (1865) - <AUTHOR> http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html

<comment><USER2> The article is a little wrong to link to the Emancipation Proclamation, because Lincoln specifically exempted Tennessee from that. According to the easiest links to dig up on Google [1,2], Tennessee was the only state to free its slaves by popular vote and didn't do so until February 1865, less than six months before Jourdon dictated his letter and certainly well after he had left the farm, since the letter makes clear that was 1864 at the latest. That explains why Anderson (the master) shot at him when he was leaving: he hadn't actually been emancipated yet. What it doesn't explain is how he got his "free papers" in Nashville in 1864. Since Nashville was obviously in Tennessee too, why would he have been any more emancipated there? My bet is it had something to do with joining or supporting the war effort. Tennessee was under Union control.

Another thing I didn't know: the Governor of Tennessee at the time was Andrew Johnson, who became president after Lincoln was killed.

1\. <http://www.tnhistoryforkids.org/stories/emancipation> — this web page says it's "for kids"; one wishes all web pages were so informative.

2\. <http://www.afrigeneas.com/states/tn/>

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought he actually wrote the letter and was impressed how well written it was for someone who had no formal education.

<comment><USER3> It was dictated, so not written alone, obviously.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> This one is also worth reading. In fact, it's hard to forget.

<http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/11/wretched-woman.html>

<comment><USER4> Great, great read.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Priceless. He was such a gentleman on the letter.

</comment><comment><USER6> Was there ever a response?

<comment><USER6> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Anderson#Aftermath>

<comment><USER7> Wow, the relatives are still angry he didnt come back. What the heck is wrong with those people? :O

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> He asks for almost $12000, in a lump sum, with interest added, in 1865 dollars, which is roughly $200k in 2013 dollars.

As a lump sum.

<comment><USER9> In recompense for 32 years of chattel slavery, any dollar amount would be a laughable pittance.

<comment><USER10> Actually, 52 years since he is including 20 years for his wife as well. Comes out to $3846/person/yr in today's dollars if the above calculation is correct, which is _considerably_ lower than what I'd sell myself into slavery for.

<comment><USER11> But, and this is where it gets really messed up - $4k/person/year is significantly more than current global median income. Last I checked (around 2007), this is about $850/year. (Yeah, if you're reading this website, you are insanely lucky).

Of course, this doesn't take into account things like income disparity between countries and so on - that is, median income in Bangladesh is very different than the US today, but this was Antebellum south, at a time when America was still a developing country.

All this to say - maybe $4k/year was a "fair price."

<comment><USER12> I'm from a developing third-world country. $4k/year is our minimum wage. It's hardly a fair price for 32 years of service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why is this on hackernews?

<comment><USER14> Because it teaches you how not to treat your workers.

<comment><USER9> I think that any comparisons between wage labor and slavery are simply category errors.

<comment><USER15> Ok, many people think otherwise and have written at length about it. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery> You can't simply label something a category error and call it a day.

<comment><USER9> "I think". That many people think that there is a fruitful analogy to be drawn between chattel slavery and wage labor has _no bearing_ on whether I think it's a sensible comparison to draw.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Oracle to hand open-source Hudson project to the Eclipse Foundation - <AUTHOR> http://www.itworld.com/open-source/161775/oracle-proposes-giving-hudson-eclipse-foundation

<comment><USER2> This is an ugly desperate move and the Eclipse Foundation shouldn't take part in the fight and reject the project.

But I pretty sure Oracle will bind money to the offer and the foundation will say yes. Oracle aim is control through bureaucracy and the Eclipse Foundation is just the perfect match for that ...

<comment><USER3> It looks like the eclipse foundation will be happy to adopt hudson. From their executive director:

"In our view, Hudson is coming to Eclipse for all the right reasons. The Eclipse community is itself a big user of Hudson, and we all look forward to the growth in momentum, innovation and predictability that will result from this move. With the addition of the Eclipse community processes for development, release and intellectual property management, we're confident that the Hudson community and ecosystem will be thrilled with Hudson as an Eclipse project."

[http://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/hudson-now-at- ecli...](http://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/hudson-now-at-eclipse/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So it sounds from the article like the people who initiated the Jenkins fork already declined EF administration. That means it is unlikely that it would remove the fork. Also, something the article didn't explicitly call out.. Is the Hudson trademark also part of this proposal or does that stay in Oracle's sole control?

<comment><USER5> Here's my take: 1\. Oracle wanted full control of the project, which was clearly unlikely once Kohsuke left Oracle.

2\. Once the Hudson team started acting somewhat autonomously, Oracle tried to frighten them out of doing anything without Oracle's say by invoking trademark litigation.

3\. Rather than have a protracted battle, the Hudson team did actually begin talking to Oracle about taking the project to a foundation, such as Eclipse or Apache, to ensure legitimacy of process from both sides. Those talks broke down. I don't know any particulars, but I can believe that Eclipse was rejected and Apache favored. If Oracle was truly agnostic about it, Apache should have been fine. This makes me worried that there may have been (and still be) backroom deals going on to ensure Oracle gets preferential treatment. Your guess about keeping control of the Hudson trademark might well be something that got passed around.

4\. Oracle absolutely did not plan for the Hudson team walking away from the name, and were arrogant enough to believe that when they did, the Hudson brand would live on and Jenkins would fade away.

5\. Once is was clear that the heart of an open-source project is its developers, not its silent users (big surprise, right?), Oracle have tried to backpedal and have run into the arms of Eclipse to try and bring developers back.

It won't work, and like another commenter said, if Eclipse does take them up on it, it will just look bad on Eclipse. Sadly, the Hudson name is completely tainted at this point. And its not correct to say "Well, that's OK, because users don't really care about all this stuff" because the users _are_ developers, and they _do_ care about this stuff. The rabble-rousers on the sidelines, like Sonatype, also look like jerks, but at least Maven is under Apache Foundation control, so while I can hate Sonatype, I can still use their product without too much fear.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Hudson = moribund.

Check github. All the developers now do Jenkins.

<comment><USER7> Except for one of my ex-coworkers. When I asked him why did he chose Hudson over Jenkins, he murmured something about superior Oracle support.

<comment><USER5> If I was really desperate for "support" of a dead open-source project, I would have chosen Atlassian's Bamboo.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why did they fight the founders in the first place? Hopefully other projects will be treated differently from them in the future.

<comment> brown9-2 The short version is that the developers voted to move the project's source code hosting to github after several infrastructure problems with java.net, including unplanned downtime (there were some issues of the wrong groups notified for actual planned maintenance, etc).

The team at Oracle clamped down on this and said no, you cannot do this, all decisions regarding infrastructure are to be made by us, and claimed that a (silent) majority of the larger "user community" was not in favor of moving to Github, although why these people did not speak up on the developer list or why casual users cared where the source code was hosted was never explained. After seeing how hard Oracle was to work with on simple things like hosting, the core developers voted to fork the project rather than live under a situation where Oracle could make threats because of their claim to own the trademark to the name Hudson.

Longer version: <http://jenkins-ci.org/content/whos-driving-thing> and <http://jenkins-ci.org/content/hudsons-future>

<comment><USER9> Every time I see that name change, I mentally prepend Leeroy to the name Jenkins. Given how well known that meme is, I have to wonder whether it was intended at some level.

See <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkCNJRfSZBU> if you don't get the reference.</comment></comment></comment>


Tesla's Wall Street Romance Is Over - <AUTHOR> https://www.thedrive.com/tech/28169/teslas-wall-street-romance-is-over <comment><USER2> I keep hearing about the demise of Tesla due to its inability to deliver the $35k car.

 _Tesla 's inability to profitably build Model 3s at the projected base price of $35,000 means that sales volumes will inevitably fall short of projections_

The truth is, no one that's buying a Tesla Model 3 cares if it is $35k, $38k or even $40k, The Model 3 is an aspirational purchase. If their dream car of the future isn't available at the $35k price, the Teslarati will pay the extra $3k, $5k or even $7k to get one. This will actually help bouy Tesla's revenue numbers.

<comment><USER3> If you plan on driving a lot of miles the model 3 is close to the lowest total cost of ownership that you can get. Especially if you can get a bit of government subsidy. The Prius might be close as well but if it's a near toss up why not go 100% electric?</comment></comment>


Decision Trees In Games - An Introduction - <AUTHOR> http://www.solipsys.co.uk/new/DecisionTreesInGames.html?HN1

<comment><USER2> A side note, decision trees are also very important for functional programming languages - they are used to make pattern matching very efficient. Luc Maranget shows how the idea of necessity (taken from lazy pattern matching) can make particularly good decisions trees in this lovely paper that I've been pouring over <http://moscova.inria.fr/~maranget/papers/ml05e-maranget.pdf>.</comment>


Fish: A command line shell for the 90s - <AUTHOR> https://fishshell.com/ <comment><USER3> So somewhat unique experience. I'm a designer. I code. React and css mostly. I do use Vim which I guess is weird for a designer.

I love Fish. I'm likely not their target audience.

I've been using it for years. Since the early days in 1.x land for sure. The homepage has never changed and I still laugh at the tagline. I find it's auto- completion, history and niceties indispensable. I'm the person who asks you what the command is to rerun the tests. With Fish I never have to ask you again. I just remember part of it, and suddenly I've got it.

I find its scripting language much simpler to follow than bash. I don't have a lot of scripts, but the ones I do are easy to manage. The only hiccup I get into is when I have to look up something on stack exchange, and of course the example is in Bash. These days though, with Bass and fisherman and so many other tools, i have options.

Years ago I would explain to other code friendly designers, I'm weird, don't use this stuff. Go grab zsh. Lately though it's gotten very friendly. Really the only downside for a light scripter like myself is that need to convert bash examples to fish problem. Beyond that I feel it's actually a much nicer shell for new to terminal folks.

Anyways, just an anecdote to add to the pile. Thank you to the devs that have supported it over the years.

<comment><USER4> > With Fish I never have to ask you again. I just remember part of it, and > suddenly I've got it.

Are you referring to something other than cycling through history?

In bash, hit `Ctrl+R`, then type whatever part of the command to cycle through history.

You may choose to adjust the size of the history file in `.bashrc` as needed.

A good reference: [https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to- use-...](https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-use-bash- history-commands-and-expansions-on-a-linux-vps)

<comment><USER5> The Fish interface for this is much more convenient and elegant and ergonomic.

<comment><USER6> yeah agreed. If you have trouble understanding how it could be better just install fish and try it for 5 minutes and you'll see what we mean. There are attempts to emulate some of it in zsh, but it's still not as good as what fish comes with out of the box.

[1] [https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-autosuggestions](https://github.com/zsh- users/zsh-autosuggestions)

[2] [https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-history-substring- search](https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-history-substring-search)

<comment><USER7> oh my god, i tried it and my terminal turned into a christmas tree! How can people actually work with such kitsch colors?

<comment><USER5> Because we are able to extract useful information from colorized output, being as it is an extra dimension of information output; I for one don't get an urge to pass a sort of of societal judgement of the high/low artistic worth of the use of color which may further increase efficiency. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

<comment><USER7> Color is indeed very useful for terminals. But it seems to me that fish takes the use of color to an exaggerated, very unpleasant, extreme. It feels overwhelming to my senses. Like having blinking text here and there. It fills the whole screen with a mix of normal and reverse text in several colors, just for simple stuff like completing an argument.

<comment><USER8> You can customize the colors with fish_config

<comment><USER7> i've seen it, and it is indeed easy to tone the coloring down. The fish shell completion is amazing, I love it! Too bad the shell does not seem to support process substitution (at least not with the same syntax as bash or zsh), so I cannot use it for the moment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I want to love fish, but I get annoyed by the lack of true subshells. I love being able to write things like:

(cd dir; make) &

To start some stuff in the background, but with fish directory and variable changes in () don't stay inside the ().

<comment><USER10> This comes up every time Fish makes it to HN. It still bugs me too. So does up-arrow skipping the first matching history item and having to use right- arrow for the ghost entry that shows up. These two are 100% enough for me to change shells, and I will. Fingers crossed NuShell does well!

<comment><USER11> What's the problem with right arrow? I use ctrl+e (a la emacs) to accept the ghost completion.

<comment><USER12> Not OP, but I find myself attempting to tab-complete Fish commands all the time. It's just how I've been conditioned by every other auto-completion interface I've ever used.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Fish is great, and it brought about some great defaults such as autocompletion and autosuggestion. The only drawback is the incompatibility with bash.

The wonderful community made plugins that add these features to zsh (which IS compatible with bash), and it it's really great. My understanding is that there are still a couple fish features not implemented for zsh yet, but if you care about such things as bash compatibility then I'd suggest you give it a try instead.

<comment><USER14> > My understanding is that there are still a couple fish features not > implemented for zsh yet

I'd love to know which ones! I was a bash user for 10 years, ZSH defaults put me off and it wasn't till I ran oh-my-zsh that I really learnt what I was missing, the following make me feel like a 10x-er ;) :

\- zsh-autosuggetions \- zsh-syntax-highlighting \- colored-man-pages

Edit: And the `zstyle ':completion:*' menu select` autocomplete

<comment><USER13> I've not used fish extensively so I couldn't tell you. My statement is mostly based on impressions from other people who have also tried both. I should give fish another go and see how I like it, but the bash incompatibility is a deal- breaker for it to become my daily driver.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you install fish, you should also install ohmyfish so you can install a good theme. I like bobthefish:

[https://github.com/oh-my-fish/oh-my- fish/blob/master/docs/Th...](https://github.com/oh-my-fish/oh-my- fish/blob/master/docs/Themes.md#bobthefish)

<comment><USER16> To each their own - I'm so glad fish doesn't come with something like this out of the box! :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I've been using fish as my default shell for a long time and recently started using it with [https://starship.rs/](https://starship.rs/), which adds some niceties to the prompt without having to go overboard with customizing and configuring your shell.

</comment><comment><USER18> Can someone give a few prominent examples of fundamental differences from bash? I don't mean trivial things like having `config.fish` instead of `.bashrc`, or not using fi and esac to conclude if and case statements.

I noticed fish has:

* extensive syntax highlighting

* "global" variables shared by all instances of fish, persisting past reboots.

what are other important features?

<comment><USER16> Many great responses here.

I've considered switching from bash to fish (something I never did with zsh). The main reason I didn't is Stockholm syndrome, or that I'm too used to bash by now.

I _think_ you can get zsh to do most of what fish does out of the box. If bash is Ed, it feels zsh is emacs and fish is (neo)vim.

Zsh is huge and I always get a bit of a panic attack when someone has given me a ssh login with zsh as the default shell. And an irrational urge to maul a unicorn.

With fish, it feels more like a friend went and tidied up your apartment just to be nice.

I guess I'm so used to bash, that the limited support that comes from completions is enough - and I end up writing a bit of documentation and automation, and work on "foreign" (other people's) servers - and it helps me to work in a posix shell for that reason - with fewer surprises.

You might even find that fish does out of the box something bash (now) can too - just isn't enabled by default or in typical distribution's configs.

Ymmv - it's worth testing imnho. And more interesting than zsh, which just feels like someone was bored in it class in high school and added colors and tinkered with the prompt, and tried à million different ideas - but never really _liked_ working in shell.

<comment> yjftsjthsd-h >If bash is Ed, it feels zsh is emacs and fish is (neo)vim.

I would have thought fish=emacs and zsh=vim in this analogy, since fish isn't really compatible with bash but zsh is?

<comment><USER16> I was more thinking of how many(?) people will readily use a only slightly customized vim - and be reasonable productive in a standard config, vs emacs where the stronger trend seems to be building an ide on top of emacs - to the point were to users can't readily use each other's setup efficiently - <USER2> indeed use the standard distribution without customization.

<comment> yjftsjthsd-h Ah, okay; that does make sense. FWIW:

        $ wc -l ./.profile ./.vim/vimrc
        249 ./.profile
        173 ./.vim/vimrc
        422 total

...but I probably just forgot that I'm an outlier:)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I love the way it predicts what I will write, how attractively it presents the predictions, and how it understands commands and completions based on man pages.

But with decades of bash experience, I struggle with making even the slightest scripting in fish's own language for whenever I want to make a smart little addition to my environment.

</comment><comment><USER20> Love this shell. Sensible defaults make it so quick to get up and running too.

</comment><comment><USER21> This might make me a bit of a freak, but the one thing keeping me from trying out Fish for real is decent vim bindings. I know Fish has vim bindings, but I found the feature support pretty lackluster and the behavior of some keys like 'e' to be inaccurate.

I know some folks say that vim-style editing is overkill for a shell where you're often just submitting one-liners, but it saves so much time for me to be able to just jump right into the middle of a previous command and change one word without holding down arrow keys to get there.

Granted, it's been awhile since I looked into Fish's vim mode, so maybe it's improved. Last time I checked, it sounded like it just wasn't a priority, since Fish's selling point is the intelligent autocomplete and such.

<comment><USER22> If you are working on a complex, long command pipeline, in bash you can use Ctrl-x Ctrl-e to open your $EDITOR to edit the line as needed. The commands will be executed as soon as you save the file and exit.

<comment><USER23> Alt(Option)-e in fish does the same.

<comment><USER24> AFAICT this doesn't work if $EDITOR includes any arguments

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Yes, the only shell I actually enjoy writing scripts with. Bash is old and ad- hoc, and zsh is basically bash on steroids. Fish is something where actual language designers have sit and thought thoroughly how the shell language should work and look like.

</comment><comment><USER26> I feel like there is a big audience for fish with bash support.

This could be a nice project; lets call it "shark".

</comment><comment><USER27> Something not discussed enough is the competing concepts of shell as hyper customizable UI where fish wins, and shell as a light programming language for short casual scripting, where I kinda have to use standard uncustomized bog standard identical everywhere bash.

</comment><comment><USER28> As nice as fish is, it's not fully posix compliant, leads to some weird bugs here and there

<comment><USER29> For interactive shells do not matter if is not POSIX compliant. I use csh (the really old one) as interactive shell.

<comment><USER30> It matters a lot when dealing with default environment variables. Even when expanding $PATH fish will give you much headache.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I use it as my daily driver and I've also started writing some smallish scripts in it. It's actually fun whereas bash always seemed rather tedious. I love how easy it is to parse arguments with `argparse` and to add completions through `complete`.

Also fish utils like `string join` etc. are super helpful when writing small scripts.

Shameless plug: [https://github.com/cideM/fish- yvm](https://github.com/cideM/fish-yvm) yarn version manager written in fish

</comment><comment><USER32> Purely superficial comment:

Thought they were being ironic with the 90s / Netscape / glorious VGA comments but maybe these really haven't been updated in an age. They've got screenshots not updated since 2006 (based on the release date in GitHub for release 1.21, given version 1.21 is show in one of the screenshots! You can also tell they're older from the chrome on the Mac terminal title bars)

<comment><USER33> Fish was first released in 2005. They're being cheeky.

It looks like the project didn't start calling itself a shell for the 90s until 2013. At least on the project's home page. Compare

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20130420050628/http://fishshell....](https://web.archive.org/web/20130420050628/http://fishshell.com:80/)

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20130521005841/http://fishshell....](https://web.archive.org/web/20130521005841/http://fishshell.com:80/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> love fish. but love compatibility with bash most.</comment>


A 24-Year-Old Transport Engineer Is About To Free Her City From Car Ownership - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/interview-with-helsinki-transport-engineer-2014-7

<comment><USER2> Good luck to her! And I've always seen as Scandinavia as a leader in this area</comment>