Rethinking Hamming's questions - <AUTHOR> https://lemire.me/blog/2019/01/29/rethinking-hammings-questions/ <comment><USER2> Hugged to death. [http://archive.is/h9dih](http://archive.is/h9dih) has it.

>Tell smart people to work on what is important to them, but don't tell them (ever) what exactly they must do. Do not reward any of them visibly for any repeatable action.

Recapitulates the rather famous advice attributed, by way of Rayleigh, to J. J. Thompson:

 _" If you pay a man a salary for doing research, he and you will want to have something to point to at the end of the year to show that the money has not been wasted. In promising work of the highest class, however, results do no come in this regular fashion, in fact years may pass without any tangible result being obtained, and the position of the paid worker would be very embarrassing and he would naturally take to work on a lower, or at any rate a different plane where he could be sure of getting year by year tangible results which would justify his salary. The position is this: You want one kind of research, but, if you pay a man to do it, it will drive him to research of a different kind. The only thing to do is to pay him for doing something else and give him enough leisure to do research for the love of it."_

<comment><USER3> This may be an argument for PhD positions that include teaching vs pure research.

For me it psychologically good to have constant successes in teaching while seemingly not advancing in research for months. Of course the load shouldn't be high.

<comment><USER2> I'd be a lot better off, psychologically, if i had to fret about grants maybe once per decade, not twice a year.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've certainly seen this in biology. The rapid growth of molecular biology graduate programs in the 90s and early 00s lead biology to becoming a career path with a lot of mediocre talent entering graduate school. To keep research faculty happy and inexpensive hands at the bench, the historical filters for clarity of thought and careful logical analysis were reduced in qualifiers and dissertation defenses. Simultaneously, there was a shift from biological experiments designed to carefully test a hypothesis with a limited number of logical outcomes to genome-scale (e.g., gene expression) experiments that were more likely to lead to pattern matching and post hoc story telling exercises. This shift reduced the filter for careful thinkers even more. The overall trend lead to more hierarchy in the sciences, which has limited the number of topics, the acceptable answers, and the funding for carefully thought out, but non-mainstream research.

In biology, the complexities of the subjects are very high relative to physics, so determining the important questions is much harder. Studying bacterial immunity, which lead to CRISPR, was and is a very niche field, but led to a very important biological technology.

</comment><comment><USER5> The reasoning all starts with the supposition that people can't know what the important questions are. Whether this is true strongly depends on what field you are in.

Within a paradigm there will be agreement on what the important questions are. In any field of study with a shared paradigm, there will be rough agreement about what is important. The whole field may be wrong about that answer, but it is an answerable question.

How big an agreement is there?

Across math and the hard sciences, it turns out that not only does each subfield have its dominant paradigm, but people accept the paradigms in neighboring subfields, and overall paradigms across fields. Therefore when a result like the fact that neutrinos can flip types in flight was demonstrated, it was immediately recognized as important by all physicists, even ones in fields as far away as fluid mechanics.

This shows up in journals, where each little subfield has its own constellation of journals, with the best results going into a prominent journal that is shared across several subfields. And ditto at the next level, leading to a hierarchy that culminates in the most important journal of all, _Nature_. Which is where the most important results in all fields are announced.

This beautiful picture completely falls apart when you get out of math and the hard sciences. The problem is not that people are not doing scientific research, it is that the field hasn't agreed on a paradigm. The question of what the right approach is and what questions are important is a subject of debate, not agreement. Which immediately renders Hamming's advice questionable. Indeed this is so much true that the picture I have described is both obvious to someone who has worked in fields where there is such consensus, and sounds impossible to someone who works in fields where there isn't.

This shows up in a variety of ways. For example in journals, each school of thought has their own ranking of journals and they don't agree. Therefore no journal can ever attain the widely acknowledged prestige of top science journals. For another example, if you talk to two random psychologists about the 10 most important research results in psychology in the last 10 years, the one's list is unlikely to contain anything recognized by the other. However if you do the same with physics, the top results will have a lot of overlap. For example right now the top 10 list for both is likely to include the verification of the Higgs Boson, and the measurement of gravitational waves.

Anyways, long story short, I understand why this researcher would question our ability to know what questions are important. However for anyone in hard science, that is surprisingly achievable.

<comment><USER6> I think there's more to Hamming's advice than just parroting back what the consensus is in a given field though. Hamming did something that most people just don't do. He intentionally cross pollinated by having lunch with people in different academic disciplines. His harassing questions, "what's the biggest problem in your field?", and, "why aren't you working on it?", I think were first and foremost, meant to help him get a better idea of the broad strokes of the field in question (I'm sure he also got a certain amount of perverse pleasure in being a pest). But after that, if you look at how he writes about people's responses, I think he was also trying to get people to think about the big picture for themselves, and in this context, it doesn't really matter what your answer is to his questions, so long as you've given it some thought.

His observation, that people who tended to give satisfactory answers later tended to have more prominent positions (I can't remember if he also said anything about the importance of their direct contributions), really just lends support to the idea that it's important to step back and keep the big picture in mind. He made similar observations when he talked about people who work with their doors open vs those who work with their doors closed. And that those who kept their doors closed tended to find themselves working their way towards irrelevance in their field, despite much greater short term productivity.

Mostly I find he's got advice that seems generally useful in any career, which can be boiled down to be wary of working on something without regard to how it fits into the bigger picture.

<comment><USER5> There is indeed more to it.

But his reasoning starts with the assumption that it is possible to know what the big problems are in a field. Which assumption this article started by questioning. And I'm sure that in the author's field, this assumption looks more questionable than it did to Hamming.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Hamming believed that great scientists knew the important problems. I doubt > it. I'd call it hubris.

Or perhaps causality is just reversed. Perhaps it is the very scientists who happened to choose the important problems to work on that become "great" as a consequence of that choice.</comment>


UK cable on Tiananmen Square Massacre (1989) - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/UK_cable_on_Tiananmen_Square_Massacre <comment><USER2> Are there any illiterate or gullible armies left in China?

Are there other reports from different angles?</comment>


Mark Zuckerberg should at least step down as Facebook chairman - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/embattled-and-in-over-his-head-mark-zuckerberg-should--at-least--step-down-as-facebook-chairman/2018/11/19/de00c2d8-ebfa-11e8-96d4-0d23f2aaad09_story.html <comment><USER2> This got buried quickly but in case anyone is interested, I have a question.

From the article:

> Leaders — capable leaders — don't do what Zuckerberg has done in the face of > disaster that they themselves have presided over.

> They don't hide and deny.

> They don't blame-shift.

> And they don't insist on speaking in the worst kind of fuzzy corporate > cliches.

Is this just grandstanding or is this actually true? Is Zuck's behavior in this regard any different from the norm regarding large organizations?

<comment><USER3> It depends on how big a scandal you think this is. For very big scandals, sure, the CEO either resigns or becomes Chairman, but releases day to day control.

The top guy at Enron went to jail, but typically there is some level of scandal that is "in the middle" in that nobody goes to jail, but someone has to lose their job.

When GM almost went bankrupt in 2009, they fired the CEO.

Vikram Pandit was pushed out of Citi.

Les Moonves just got kicked out of CBS for sexual harrassment.

The right level of scandal should lead you through 3 questions:

1.) should they go jail?

2.) if no, should they be fired?

3.) if no, should they face any consequences at all? (perhaps move from CEO to Chairmanship)

<comment><USER2> Hmm. This implies there is accountability on the CEO's part that is imposed at a level below state judicial action. This obviously isn't true for founder- chairman-CEO dictator like Zuck.

In these cases, is there an accepted and agreed-upon standard of behavior for such a dictator in these cases? Because this looks a lot like uncharted territory which makes the journalist's claim look like mere grandstanding.</comment></comment></comment>


The Geek's Guide to Finding the Best Startups - <AUTHOR> http://bostinnovation.com/2011/04/14/the-geeks-guide-to-finding-the-best-startups/

<comment><USER2> tl;dr build your personal brand via social media, blogging, Q&A sites, and open-source. Communicate what problems and technologies you're interested. Get other people (recruiters, blog readers, followers) to look for new opportunities you'll be interested in and they'll reach out to you.</comment>


Could America turn out worse than Japan? - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.reuters.com/mohamed-el-erian/2011/10/31/could-america-turn-out-worse-than-japan-2/ <comment><USER2> Back in the 80's, the Japanese model was the ideal to which America aspired. Funny how thatturned out. During the 90s the US did manage to create a tighter alignment of government with industry and banking while ignoring the fact that the Japanese sun was sinking into the ocean.</comment>


COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator - <AUTHOR> https://www.gatesfoundation.org/TheOptimist/Articles/coronavirus-mark-suzman-therapeutics <comment><USER2> Edit: contact made, thank you!

If anyone is reading this with connections to the Gates Foundation: Please contact Dr. Robert Kruse at John Hopkins. [https://twitter.com/RobertLKruse](https://twitter.com/RobertLKruse). I have been trying to get in touch with people at Gates. This announcement unfortunately features no contact email address :(

Dr. Kruse is developing an extremely promising therapeutic, ACE2-fc, which will both neutralize the virus and treat the symptoms of the disease. It has been shown to work in vitro; variants have been tested in animals models; and its been through Phase II human trials for a different indication. A variant of the therapy, soluble ACE2, is being trialed in humans now in China.

Details on the approach can be found in his paper here:

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7029759/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7029759/) see "ACE2 immunoadhesin strategy"

<comment><USER3> For you know if the ACE2 genes mentioned with relation to coronavirus have anything to do with ACE inhibitors and ARB inhibitors?

<comment><USER4> This may be relevant: there's a recent (3rd March) _hypothesis_ due to Rami Sommerstein from Department of Infectious Diseases, Bern University Hospital [0] that ACE inhibitors are a potential _risk factor_ for fatal Covid-19 in those patients taking ACE inhibitors for hypertension/diabetes/cardiovascular disease:

>The largest Chinese study with 44,672 confirmed cases of Covid-19 shows a high overall case fatality rate (CFR) of 2.3% [2]. Important co-morbidities are hypertension (CFR 6.0%), diabetes (CFR 7.3%), cardiovascular disease (CFR 10.5%) and age >70 (CFR 10.2%) [2]. Similar co-morbidities were noted for the SARS outbreak in 2003.

> ...

>On the one hand, it has been shown that the Covid-19 agent (also known as SARS-CoV-2), uses the SARS-COV receptor angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) 2 for entry into target cells [4]. The interface between ACE2 and the viral spike protein SARS-S has been elucidated and the efficiency of ACE2 usage was found to be a key determinant of SARS-CoV transmissibility [4].

>

>On the other hand, it could be shown in animal experiments that both the ACE- inhibitor lisinopril and the angiotensin-receptor blocker losartan can significantly increase mRNA expression of cardiac ACE2 (5-fold and 3-fold, respectively) [5]. Further, losartan also significantly increases cardiac ACE2 activity [5].

Edit: thank you philipn for your twitter link.

[0] [https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m810/rr-2](https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m810/rr-2)

<comment><USER2> Please see my twitter account for lots on this. I'm in contact with a bunch of top researchers on this topic (renin-angiotensin system; ACE2/Ang 1-7/Mas axis; ARB usage for viral diseases) and will be posting a summary update soon:

[https://twitter.com/__philipn__/status/1235756671852589056](https://twitter.com/__philipn__/status/1235756671852589056)

It may be the other way around: ACEi/ARB may be protective. HTN without ACEi/ARB would be non-protective, potentially so much so that it skews the group fatality numbers. This is because people with HTN have a different renin-angiotensin system profile: more AT1R, less AT2R, more ACE, potentially less ACE2.

This is being looked at now. But the key is that in every study ever done on viral lung disease, etc, AT1R blockade was highly beneficial, and we know that ACE2-knockout basically screws up lungs, makes viral lung disease way worse, etc. Please see my twitter posts.

The virus eats up ACE2, downregulating it as it binds. This would have delirious effects. Check out the linked "essential reading" twitter post.

Will be posting a summary to my twitter soon.

<comment><USER5> A few days ago I started taking a low dose of an OTC ACE inhibitor in order to upregulate my ACE2 receptors. This is what the literature that was written before the current epidemic about surviving novel Coronavirus pandemics says to do, and the new evidence that comes out each day is actually validating this strategy.

It's only the scientists who didn't start studying Coronaviruses until two weeks ago who seem to think that having ACE2 receptors is dangerous.

<comment><USER6> If the virus is infecting a cell through the ACE2 receptor, wouldn't upregulating the receptor just increase the risk of infection?

As per the paper, you want to either block the receptor or down regulate it.

<comment><USER5> That definitely could be true, but from what I've read it probably isn't. One of the ways the virus kills people is by destroying their ACE2 receptors, which your lung cells need to function. If you blocked them all, your lung cells would die anyway. So as long as the virus can enter your lung cells, you might as well prevent it from killing them by making extra ACE2 receptors. That's the theory anyway.

There are also many other ways you can block the virus from entering your lungs that don't involve downregulating your ACE2 receptors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The Gates Foundation was on this early:

[https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press- Releases/...](https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press- Releases/2020/01/Gates-Foundation-Commits-10-Million-to-Global-Response- to-2019-nCOV)

[https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press- Releases/...](https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press- Releases/2020/02/Bill-and-Melinda-Gates-Foundation-Dedicates-Additional- Funding-to-the-Novel-Coronavirus-Response)

>The foundation will provide up to $100 million to improve detection, isolation and treatment efforts; protect at-risk populations in Africa and South Asia; and accelerate the development of vaccines, drugs and diagnostics.

That early investment is going to be so valuable. It's not so easy to get those six weeks back by spending 10x the amount the later.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm seeing a lot of unwarranted conclusions in this thread. In vitro work usually goes fast in drug development. The painfully slow process is human testing.

The article says nothing about shortening the time from in vitro discovery to first use in humans. As far as I can tell, it just promises $125 million for early stage work. That's a lot of money, but a drop in the bucket by drug development standards.

Good to know the effort is being made, just keep some perspective.

<comment><USER9> Part of the problem is that most people know very little about how drugs are developed, but they form a type of connection because they know the Gates Foundation. My hope is people gain a deeper appreciation of what's involved across many of these threads, but I feel like the opportunity will be missed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> How about confirming that Chloroquine works?[1] Yeah, it's a boring old out of patent drug. New uses for out of patent synthetic drugs is like the most unsexy thing in all of medicine. Even herbal cures get more respect, because they are from mother earth.

[1][https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016635422...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220301145)

<comment><USER11> This makes no sense to me : malaria is due to a bacteria and COVID19 is a virus, why choloroquine would work on both ?

<comment><USER12> Several EU countries in addition to China are already actively using chloroquine and hydroxichloroquine to treat COVID19 patients. And I mean outside trials.

For instance:

Here are the Netherlands treatment guidelines (in Dutch): [https://lci.rivm.nl/covid-19/bijlage/medicamenteuze- behandel...](https://lci.rivm.nl/covid-19/bijlage/medicamenteuze- behandelopties)

Here are the Italy treatment guidelines (in Italian): [http://www.simit.org/medias/1555-covid19-linee-guida- trattam...](http://www.simit.org/medias/1555-covid19-linee-guida- trattamento-01mar.pdf)

I think the anecdote on how they found out about the effectiveness of chloroquine in China is fascinating and has nothing to do with the in vitro efficiency study nor with the malaria usage but solely with the immunomodulator effect. They just noticed that there were no lupus patients infected with Covid19. And after investigating with the dermatology dept, they confirmed that indeed there were no reported lupus patients of that hospital infected with covid19.

Their common treatment was chloroquine...

Source: [https://www.jqknews.com/news/388543-The_novel_coronavirus_pn...](https://www.jqknews.com/news/388543-The_novel_coronavirus_pneumonia_has_short_term_curative_effect_on_the_treatment_of_new_crown_pneumonia.html)

It should be noted that as far as the Chinese are concerned, it doesn't seem like there is any debate about chloroquine usefulness for COVID19.

Sources:

[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32075365-expert-consensus- on...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32075365-expert-consensus-on- chloroquine-phosphate-for-the-treatment-of-novel-coronavirus-pneumonia/)

and [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32074550-breakthrough- chloro...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32074550-breakthrough-chloroquine- phosphate-has-shown-apparent-efficacy-in-treatment-of-covid-19-associated- pneumonia-in-clinical-studies/)

<comment><USER13> Why do these things take slowly in US but are much faster in the EU? Even though Italy and Netherlands are already using it, no patient in US is treated with chloroquine since it's not FDA approved. Why does FDA approval matter for a brand new disease, in an emergency situation like this?

<comment><USER9> It doesn't for many known medications. But, it's a factor for new and less well understood medications.

There is "on label" and "off label" usage of drugs. Just because this existing medication is being used in the EU, or has made its way into guidelines, does not mean that it would even make it through EU approvals. It's being used "off label" if it's used for a new condition.

I've personally been treated "off label" for a condition using a drug developed and FDA approved for a serious condition that you wouldn't immediately associate with my condition. It was weird being unable to find any substantive literature on that medication and my condition, but that's the nature of uncommon conditions, or being at the edge like we are with COVID-19.

US doctors will, based on the evidence available, make their own decision on whether to follow the treatments used by their colleagues in the EU and China. They are not going to be held up by FDA approval for off-label use, but they may find things that warrant FDA review and approval because they feel the outcome is not worth the risk. The impact on the US is trailing China and EU to some degree. This buys a little time for some very smart people to do some level of analyses of what's happening elsewhere. It'd be a little different if the early waves hit here first.

<comment><USER13> So a US doctor doesn't need FDA approval to be able to prescribe something like chloroquine or Remdesivir for a COVID19 patient as long as they believe it'll be helpful to patient, did I understand it correctly?

<comment><USER9> Yes, but in practice it is rarely the situation where a doctor is making this call on their own. The hierarchy from doctor to senior leadership should be involved in decisions like this because there are many more ramifications than just one patient.

From the doctor's perspective, at minimum this is a cover-your-ass move because they don't want to get blamed for an adverse event. The administration needs to manage the risk too, and find other experts to review the situation. They may also need to manage supplies, or costs. This is really no different from the usual medical bureaucracy in the US.

One item that I'll end with is that approval processes (FDA, EU, etc.) provide no guarantees. There are many drugs that have been approved and then removed from general use based on additional experience, or long-term clinical trials. It's obviously good to do more trials and get approvals, but patients and doctors really want the best possible outcome given the situation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Great to see people rallying around possible solutions and spreading the info.

Personal anecdote, I was looking up whether to stop occasional cannabis usage as a precaution for a while because it has been labelled an immunosuppressant and an immunomodulator. I don't understand enough of the science to decide, so I'm stopping, but what I saw in those papers suggested that it is good at preventing autoimmune diseases from getting out of hand. Any expert knowledge/opinion very welcome, as many people have access to this drug already.

<comment><USER15> The biggest problem about cannabis re: covid19 is if you smoke it, it's gonna impair the cilia which help clean out your lungs, also you're putting your lips on some dirty piece (especially bad if shared between multiple people as one person being exposed equals everyone else sharing the piece gets exposed)

Definitely avoid combustion with shared bongs. If we might get sick with something that's gonna impair our lungs, we ought to take action to increase lung function e.g. VO2Max (lactate threshold training / HIIT / Lung muscle exercises with incentive spirometers OR IMST devices) Not sure about the viral implications of systems biology of immune effects of cannabis, but it's an interesting topic

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> "The proposal is a biologic that blocks 2019-nCoV entry using a soluble version of the viral receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), fused to an immunoglobulin Fc domain (ACE2-Fc), providing a neutralizing antibody with maximal breath to avoid any viral escape, while also helping to recruit the immune system to build lasting immunity. The ACE2-Fc therapy would also supplement decreased ACE2 levels in the lungs during infection, thereby directly treating acute respiratory distress pathophysiology as a third mechanism of action."

</comment><comment><USER17> EIDD-2801 from DRIVE/Emory University is also looking extremely promising. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31578288](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31578288) They have a GoFundMe also to I guess try to get things ramped up: [https://charity.gofundme.com/o/en/campaign/end-pandemics- now](https://charity.gofundme.com/o/en/campaign/end-pandemics-now)

<comment><USER18> This needs to be its own post and shared as much as possible.

The above may yield a pill that patients can take at home, reducing further spread of infections that can easily occur in clinical settings. Without such a pill, hospital overflow will occur in any area with more than a few thousand cases. And there will be 100s-1000s of cities worldwide that medical resources could be overwhelmed within a few months.

We need to explore all avenues now. In only 3-4 months, there will be 100,000s of deaths worldwide, if an effective treatment that can be administered outside of hospital settings is not available.

<comment><USER18> For those who disagree, please study the coronavirus growth rate when no serious containment measure is implemented then try to provide evidence to the contrary (ie, either containment measures will be sufficient in most countries, or that my predictions above are flawed somehow.)

A scientist recently presented at the AHA meeting with these bullet points:

"- 4.8 million hospitalizations associated with the novel coronavirus

\- 96 million cases overall in the US

\- 480,000 deaths

\- Overall, the slide points out that hospitals should prepare for an impact to the system that's 10 times a severe flu season."

The figures are just for the US, not the world.

[https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals- pr...](https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-preparing- for-millions-of-hospitalizations-2020-3)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Does one acquire immunity after going through CoV infection? What about SARS/MERS?

If I understand correctly there are many strains of influenza and they mutate. That's why new vaccines are needed.

What about SARS/MERS? Did they mutate too?

<comment><USER20> Not a doctor or biologist.

From my understanding (I.e. someone who wasn't a doctor or biologist once told me), the flu virus is special in that it is very big for a virus and has something akin to primitive sexual reproduction: it is made of six(?) parts and if two strains of flu infect the same cell, the cell will give birth to viruses that have each part chosen at random from one of the two strains (e.g. aBCdEF or AbcdEf etc').

That's why there are so many strains of flu and the vaccine changes every year.

Apart from that, every virus mutates, and from what I've read there are already at least two known functionally different strains of nCov-2019 (one more aggressive than the other). However, I'd wager the same vaccines and medicines would work for both - to get resistance you need selection pressure or the amount of variance you get from sexual reproduction.

Edit: oh, and nCov-2019 attacks the immune system in a way that seems to lower or prevent acquiring immunity from reinfection.

<comment><USER21> There is no reason to believe that SARS-CoV-2 attacks the immune system.

The study that suggested ADE for this virus showed a very mild effect in vitro. However, antibodies still prevented infection. More crucially yet, a high number of viruses exhibit ADE in vitro, yet only two exhibit ADE in vivo. Moreover, even in vitro, infection of immune cells by the virus did not lead to viral replication. It's therefore unlikely that it shows ADE in humans, especially since its far less severe than viruses that do.

You might notice that for critical cases, lymphocytes counts are down. The issue is that lymphocyte counts are low, yet those patients show very high cytokine levels, and lymphocytes also exhibit exhaustion. Studies in a clinical setting have shown that indeed cytokine levels are a good predictor of lower lymphocyte counts. Thus this seems better explained by the cytokine storm.

Another thing that's good to know is that this coronavirus seems to have a very good exoribonuclease, which is an error checking enzyme. Mutation rates are also quite low, empirically. It is thus probable that this virus will not evolve too much.

Finally, the study that suggests that there are two lineages is deeply flawed. When you take into account the founder effect of international dissemination right before border controls are implemented, and the low mutation rate, you will find that the observation that led to the conclusions that there are two strains is not significantly more likely than the null hypothesis that this is simply a coincidence. Therefore it is not possible to make conclusions about the existence of strains, and certainly not possible to suggest they would behave differently in any way.

<comment><USER20> Awesome, learned a bunch of things, thanks!

(One of which was that biologists have a more specific definition of "virus attacks X system" than computer security researchers, so my wording seems to have been off there. I was trying to say "seems to do something against its effectiveness, because we see cases of reinfection after a short time")

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This study looks interesting [https://pharmaphorum.com/news/china-backs- roches-actemra-to-...](https://pharmaphorum.com/news/china-backs-roches- actemra-to-fight-coronavirus-complications/)

Actemra is a biologic approved in 2010 in the US for rheumatoid arthritis and tones down immune responses by inhibiting interleukin 6 (IL-6).

Basically it turns down the effect called a cytokine storm which causes your own immune system to attack your lungs. This kills a lot of people.

Also take Vitamin D3 (1000 IU a day) it's proven to help lessen respiratory illness if you catch the virus.

</comment><comment><USER23> While low yield, it would be interesting to look at fast-tracked whole genome data from infected patients, and see if there are any SNPs or mutations that could put you at higher risk for mortality.

</comment><comment><USER24> I imagine they are already in contact, given they are in the same state, but just in case:

[https://www.chulab.org/announcements](https://www.chulab.org/announcements)

[https://twitter.com/HelenChuMD/status/1235339042889359361](https://twitter.com/HelenChuMD/status/1235339042889359361)

</comment><comment><USER25> Combination lopinavir and ritonavir is used to treat COVID-19 in India/Thailand [https://www.telegraphindia.com/health/anti-hiv-drugs- given-t...](https://www.telegraphindia.com/health/anti-hiv-drugs-given-to- coronavirus-affected-elderly-italian-couple-in-jaipur/cid/1752505)

</comment><comment><USER26> Can someone please explain if I am currently taking Losartan should I switch to something else? I keep reading conflicting articles. Some say it could be a benefit and actually used in treatment of covid 19. But other articles are saying the opposite. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER26> Can someone please weigh in and say if someone who takes Losartan should switch to something else at this time? I am currently on that med and I am panicking after reading several articles. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER27> Funding and government initiatives aside, is there any tech platforms that facilitate scientific collaboration?

It mostly seems to be just dropbox equivalents that let you drag and drop test results and PDFs into shareable folders.

<comment><USER28> WWW: [http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html](http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html)

Though specific discussion of essential useful features and shortcomings of the basic concept might be helpful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Won't every person on earth in contact with other humans already be either immune by exposure or dead within 6 months?

</comment><comment><USER30> > And in 2017, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) was > created with nearly $650 million from Germany, Japan, Norway, Wellcome, and > our foundation. Since then, others have come on board, including the UK, > Canada, Ethiopia, Australia, Belgium, and the European Commission, to > dramatically reduce the time it takes to develop vaccines for emerging > epidemics, and ensure they are accessible, available, and affordable.

Such a shame that the US is not on that list of countries.

</comment><comment><USER31> remdesivir

[https://angrybearblog.com/2020/03/novel-coronavirus-and- bett...](https://angrybearblog.com/2020/03/novel-coronavirus-and-better- unsafe-than-sorry.html)

</comment><comment><USER32> " Epidemics introduce a paradox to the world. Viruses like COVID-19 spread rapidly but developing vaccines and treatments to stop them moves slowly."

That's not what a paradox is... sigh.

<comment><USER33> Don't know why you are being down voted. This is hard scientific and economic reality, not a paradox.

<comment><USER34> Because it's irrelevant pedantry?

<comment><USER35> Yeah, but irrelevant pedentry doesn't always get downvotes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Meanwhile, doctors in Germany begin to build their own protective suits because professional ones are hard to get:

[https://ais.badische- zeitung.de/piece/0a/f1/b2/8f/183612047-...](https://ais.badische- zeitung.de/piece/0a/f1/b2/8f/183612047-h-720.jpg)

[https://ais.badische- zeitung.de/piece/0a/f1/b2/8a/183612042-...](https://ais.badische- zeitung.de/piece/0a/f1/b2/8a/183612042-h-720.jpg)

<comment><USER37> Proof _one_ doctor build his own PTE suit. No proof they aren't available per se.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> CDC should require every lab and hospital screening for COVID19 to send lung CT and lab data to the government, and release it as a public dataset for AI developers to build screening models.

<comment><USER39> CDC too slow, non-reviewed papers already out:

[https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.09334.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.09334.pdf)

[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.25.20021568v...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.25.20021568v2)

<comment><USER37> Non-reviewed being the key here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Good news.

</comment><comment><USER20> Please fund clinical trials of zinc as COVID cure/statistical preventative:

[https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/03/02/coronavirus-links- spec...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/03/02/coronavirus-links-speculation- open-thread/#comment-859920)

</comment><comment><USER41> So I have a weird hobby of reading case studies, and today my curiosity lead me to wonder why colonoscopy doctors do not use UVC...

(UVC is a specific wavelength of light of the UV band - think UV lights in clubs - it kills bacteria and is now used in hospitals to sterilize equipment ) ...to cleanse the colon of both good and bad bacteria in the intestines in order to immediately cure patients with IBS (Irritable Bowel Syndrome) and Chrons, which are both caused by harmful gut bacteria that even the best probiotics unfortunately do not successfully treat. (Which lead me down the rabbit hole...) If you want to be as sick to your stomach as I am, here is the truth and I am happy to source over 8 case studies out of dozens on the subject which all say the same thing, UVC kills cancer cells as well as COVID-19 and also strong ionized oxygen can kill any virus on contact instantly. Those tiny tentacles of Covid 19 virus will be neutralized in a fraction of a second in contact with the ionized oxygen.

<comment><USER42> > UVC kills cancer cells as well as COVID-19

It kills _any_ cell, it's not discriminatory. Oh, and UV-C is carcinogenic. Once you understand that you might appreciate why we don't just shove a UV light up a colon.

<comment><USER43> Well, everything is carcinogenic. Given that sunlight has plenty of UV-C, it's probably okay to expose tissues to it briefly. (Of course, this is one of those treatments that definitely needs careful study.)

<comment><USER44> UV-C is completely absorbed by atmospheric oxygen and ozone - none reaches the ground.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Potential satellite smashup could spawn dangerous debris swarm - <AUTHOR> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/looming-potential-satellite-smashup-could-spawn-dangerous-debris-swarm/ <comment><USER2> > SpaceX's satellites will be able to sense and autonomously maneuver away > from potential collisions, Musk has said. (This didn't happen when a > Starlink satellite neared Europe's Aeolus Earth-observation satellite last > September; Aeolus performed the evasive action. A paging-system bug > prevented Starlink operators from learning that the collision probability > had increased enough to warrant a maneuver, SpaceX representatives later > said.)

So, the part about being able to autonomously perform evasive maneuvers is just a lie? If it isn't, why would a paging failure prevent an "autonomous" maneuver from occurring?

<comment><USER3> Conceivably, they could be _able_ to conduct evasive maneuvers autonomously but be _configured to_ seek control confirmation before executing maneuvers.

Or, maybe "will be" is the key phrase and its like Tesla full autonomy -- a feature planned to be implemented in software with the current hardware, but not yet done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is my biggest civilization-level fear, that we'll mess up and end up with a situation like the opening of Seveneves, full Kessler-effect

[https://www.space.com/23039-space-junk-explained-orbital- deb...](https://www.space.com/23039-space-junk-explained-orbital-debris- infographic.html)

How can we reduce the probability of this going forward? Is tracking and maneuvering enough?

<comment><USER5> Kessler can be mitigated by a civilization capable of launching enough mass. Pretty much all you need is to cancel out the angular momentum of existing debris. It would just cost a lot. However right now with our regulatory environment Kessler is not likely. Starlink is very low orbit and they decay without power in a matter of months if not weeks. Also every satellite launched is required to have a deorbit plan or a plan to move it to a parking orbit if it's a geostationary satellite.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Update: No collision happened.

</comment><comment> toper-centage Relevant video from kurtzgesagt: [https://youtu.be/yS1ibDImAYU](https://youtu.be/yS1ibDImAYU)

</comment><comment><USER7> It appears Aerospace Corp is calculating a 10% collision probability now...</comment>


Five different ways to handle leap seconds with NTP - <AUTHOR> http://developerblog.redhat.com/2015/06/01/five-different-ways-handle-leap-seconds-ntp/

<comment><USER2> Why not make leap seconds only apply to Stratum 0 devices. Everything else will just correct themselves as if they had drifted. Shouldn't there already be procedures in place for drift?

<comment><USER3> Maybe there should, but there aren't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> or make time constant and stop trying to keep it in sync with things.

<comment><USER5> Then you should be using TAI and not UTC.</comment></comment>


Tomorrow is the 25th Anniversary of the Robert T. Morris Worm - <AUTHOR> http://www.intelfreepress.com/news/lessons-from-the-first-computer-virus-the-morris-worm/7223 <comment><USER2> It is worth noting that Morris "started some companies" means that with his friend Paul Graham he cofounded ViaWeb, and then YC.</comment>


IRC + Threads make better communications - Pizzatimes.org - <AUTHOR> http://hozumi.github.com/2012/02/pizzatimes.html

<comment><USER2> This argument seems like it follows a fallacy. A chat room is simple. Threads are simple. Therefore combining them must be simple too!

</comment><comment><USER3> Honest feedback: The UI is extremely confusing, the whole site needs to be proofread for spelling/grammar, and the name doesn't really describe or even hint at what the product does.

It's a really good idea in concept, but the execution could have been much better.

<comment><USER4> Agreed. The UI is very hard to understand, especially, and the name makes no sense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> If i understood this correctly, then perhaps Convore does this exactly? <https://convore.com/>

But it's now pretty much defunct, due to scaling issues, and the founders concentrating on Grove.io it seems.

</comment><comment><USER6> 1\. Make a mechanism to allow up/down-voting of comments and allow the display of high karma comments in a static list that someone can scan right away... finding useful information in a chatroom is overwhelming and requires 100% engagement... irritating at least if the user multitasks while visiting your site

2\. Please no chatroom on the front page! ...it's overwhelming and annoying ...just a list of threads please.

(All in all cool idea, whether it takes off or not! ...at least it brings new genes into the selection pool for evolving better online communication tools and metaphors...)

<comment><USER7> Hey, I've been working on a similar concept that does exactly what you suggested. Take a look: <http://ec2-50-16-106-77.compute-1.amazonaws.com/0>

<comment><USER3> Needs a breadcrumb path and/or an intuitive way to go up a level, but otherwise that is pretty cool. :)

<comment><USER7> Thanks for the feedback! Yea, the breadcrumb path is actually the next feature I plan on implementing. Also, to go up one path, just click on the currently selected item.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Cool stuff T!

The nested threads idea is pretty neat, I've been working on something similar and it's also very alpha. (The site doesn't even have a real domain). Check it out here: <http://ec2-50-16-106-77.compute-1.amazonaws.com/0>

</comment><comment><USER8> We had the same struggles with IRC and built Ginger to deal with them. It's a threaded discussion tool with realtime capabilities. <https://gingerhq.com>

</comment><comment><USER9> I like the idea, but you MUST get people to sign up before they can post!

<comment><USER10> Agreed. Right now, there's a very low S/N ratio with all the anon posts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Well, looks like a plain old forum with auto-refresh to me. Except that I can see only one thread at a time. And that the UI is pretty horrible...

<comment><USER12> The novelty I see is the ability to indefinitely nest threads.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> <http://chat.stackoverflow.com/>

</comment><comment><USER14> Sounds like 4chan but with a better interface.</comment>


Microsoft adopts Mantle but calls it DX12 - <AUTHOR> https://semiaccurate.com/2014/03/18/microsoft-adopts-mantle-calls-dx12/

<comment><USER2> Paywall alert!!!</comment>


Server room photos - <AUTHOR> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Server-Room-Fans-and-More-Server-Room-Fun.aspx

<comment><USER2> At a client's (more like a prospect in fact), the "server room" is just a regular office where they put their machines and switch boards.

Since there is no air conditioning in the building, they put an air conditioner in the room, with the tube of hot air coming out of the door and into the lobby. The door of course stays open at all times.

This company is in the information business and absolutely relies on its IT infrastructure to survive...

</comment><comment><USER3> The fact that I shrugged and said "meh, standard" when I saw these confirms that I really need to be looking for a new job.

I do tech support for a range of small biz and I expect to see something this bad once or twice a week. Easy.

Trying to convince clients that paying someone over time (so its completed out of biz hours) to "fix" something which "works" is close to impossible.

</comment><comment><USER4> Having worked in a small data center, I can remember once or twice that we had to improvise when an emergency struck like a heat related power failure of our entire block, or a leaky roof. But, wow, nothing like this!Maybe a large fan or two plugged in pulling out hot air and in cool air, or a tarp for maybe an hour or two.

</comment><comment><USER5> I've been to a "server farm" that was in a burnt-out storage facility. The "walls" were welded wire mesh and there was a group of old rusty ventilator fans attempting to cool a pile of hardware that looked like a piece of set deco from the last Matrix movie. This was in the Philippines.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'd rather see the OCD, state of the art rack setup.

</comment><comment><USER7> Is there a site for server room photos showing off well-designed rooms? Kinda like Houzz, only for networking geeks?

<comment><USER8> <http://as.reddit.com/r/CablePorn>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Is it just me or is this nowhere near the worst? I've seen much worse over the years, at least.</comment>


What the Public Knows About Cybersecurity - <AUTHOR> http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/03/22/what-the-public-knows-about-cybersecurity/ <comment><USER2> Non-IT friends tend to see me as somewhat paranoid when they notice me using 2FA or VPN's, but I was actually surprised people knew this much.</comment>


Why The Boston Globe may be shutting down - <AUTHOR> http://alek.posterous.com/a-stab-at-why-the-boston-globe-may-be-shuttin

<comment><USER2> The layout of their web site is a symptom of the problem, but absolutely not the problem itself. The problem is the economics of news delivery, plain and simple.

As Doc Searls put it recently (and I'm paraphrasing): If you came to me today with a business model where you would cut down lots of trees to make paper, create content to print on this paper on huge presses, and deliver this content 12 to 24 hours after it was written to its consumers at their homes once or twice a day, I'd call you crazy.

So, the longer as the Globe keeps their presses running, the more their ultimate demise is sealed.

<comment><USER3> Oh, the economics of news delivery are wonderful. Its the economics of paper delivery that suck.

<comment><USER4> The problem is that you can make ads that people want to pay for in print (big, lush, informative), while online advertising tends to be a little image box that some smart guy blocks with Firefox. Who wants to pay up for that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> i live in boston. other than occasionally flipping through a dead copy in a coffee shop, i never by a newspaper. i consider boston.com more or less a tabloid site, or a good place to answer "what was with the fifty police officers storming the common yesterday?" type questions.

among many others, i do read nytimes.com quite often. it's a pretty well laid- out online newspaper.

too bad they won't share with their subsidiary.

<comment><USER6> The "Big Picture" is the exception. It's generally awesome: <http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/>

And they reached an agreement with the last union this morning: [http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jkzBYoal_s...](http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jkzBYoal_s1ms77Fzrfv3jMppZggD980Q1I01)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> And before I got to the ad-filled Boston Globe site, I was hit with a full page ad.</comment>


How the THX Deep Note Creator Remade His Iconic Sound - <AUTHOR> http://createdigitalmusic.com/2015/04/thx-deep-note-creator-remade-iconic-sound/ <comment><USER2> I always thought the THX sound was a cheesy rip-off of the opening from legendary Blues guitarist Gary Moore (RIP), to _" Nuclear Attack"_, _" Dirty Fingers"_ album recorded in '81\. [0]

Listen to the sound here ~ [https://youtu.be/5XpKaitVy_E?t=19m8s](https://youtu.be/5XpKaitVy_E?t=19m8s) You can see a live version in '83 with the synthesiser in action here (Pinkpop Holland 23.5.1983) ~ [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIw4RqENjDc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIw4RqENjDc)

        to synthesize it in real time, in 1983,
        took 2 years to design and build a 19"
        rack full of digital hardware and 200,000
        lines of system code to run the synthesizer. [1]

Creating sound using DSP is hard so you need somewhere to start. Is this Gary Moore track the start point? Make up your own mind.

Reference

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

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

<comment><USER3> > Is this Gary Moore track the start point

The Gary Moore sound is a simple pitch-down of a single (rich) synth patch. There are no rising harmonics in it. Further, it wasn't actually released until '83 at the earliest.

The Deep Note uses a whole bunch of cello patches, each following its own pitch envelope, and resolving on the final 5th. IIRC Moorer generated a large number of versions to demo (as it used a random initial starting sound) and the winning version just happened to have a bunch of voices start on a similar pitch shifting down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Tip: Deep Note makes an excellent alarm clock. Gradual crescendo, makes you feel pumped up to get going...

<comment><USER5> Tip: Whatever sound/song you set your alarm to you will grow to hate.

Right now that Deep Note has good feeling by association, it will grow to be your nemesis as your alarm. Then movies will remind you of your alarm. :(

<comment><USER6> I have one of the more obscure iPhone ringtones as my alarm. My wife was trying new ringtones yesterday and when she tried the one I have as alarm I literally shuddered.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> previously on HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4030149](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4030149)

<comment><USER8> [Edit: As pointed out by logn, the parent comment is actually a link to a different but realted post, even though it came across otherwise. Leaving the below for context.]

Things often are. That doesn't mean everyone here has seen it, or that it isn't still interesting - especially in this case when it was posted nearly three years ago.

<comment><AUTHOR> Note too this article is about the making the second version of the sound just released ([http://www.thx.com/consumer/movies/120832135](http://www.thx.com/consumer/movies/120832135)). Also he clears up a myth he started about the original code being 20K lines.

I also agree with joshuapants sibling comment and appreciate the context.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The final chord in the new version still has an odd tuning -- sharp for D major, but flat for E flat major. I can't be the first to have noticed. I wonder why he didn't fix that.

<comment><USER10> Likely because it isn't a mistake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> That really brings back memories. That sound means all the phonecalls, parking and standing line is over and you get to actually watch a movie as it was meant to be seen.

The engineering of the "noise" also had a practical purpose. It sweeps by most every frequency, including the entire vocal range. So it was impossible to continue any conversation without noticing that the movie was about to start. The seconds after that sound were always the most quiet of the entire evening.

<comment><USER12> You mean you get to watch a bunch of forced ads with the volume turned up to eleven and get told what a horrible criminal you are and then maybe you get to see the movie if your ears are still functional.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Interesting. I _think_ my smallest synth (Dave Smith mopho) has an emulation among its 384 patches, but i can't find it.

_________________________

Those years, 1983-84 were golden years for (now) cheap hardware, Dave Smith demo'd MIDI interoperability, the yamaha DX7 came out in 83, roland juno 106 in 84.

They were preceded by E-mu Emulator (1981) and PPG Wave (1981). PPG is the predecessor of Waldorf, Emu and Ensoniq got swallowed up and force merged by Creative Arts.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesizer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesizer)

</comment><comment><USER14> I implemented the THX sound in 100 lines of javascript using a web tool made by substack. [http://studio.substack.net/thx](http://studio.substack.net/thx)

Some browsers aren't fast enough. It helps to move the first slider all the way to the right.

</comment><comment><USER15> I currently wish streaming services will implement Dolby Atmos which is 3D sound. However there is a much simpler easier way to get realistic sound it just uses headphones it's called Binarual audio.

To experiance real 3D sound with head phones Google for Binaural audio videos!

</comment><comment><USER16> I remember something about the first version of the THX sound being lost because some variables were generated randomly, so they had to try and come up with the original values (or similar ones) by trial and error.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'd love to see those 325 lines of code open sourced on github, ported to javascript and tweaked into a super awesome sound explosion of until now unheard proportions.

<comment><USER17> Every EDM song from Guetta to Avicii and Prydz would propably use tweaked versions of the sound to get that extra rise before the chorus kicks in with full bass.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I had the pleasure of sitting next to Dr Moorer's wife on a flight recently. Was really cool talking to her about her husband's work for a few hours.

</comment><comment><USER19> I always felt that 20 KLOC never made sense to me.

</comment><comment><USER20> What the heck is a Dell W3 laptop? Did he mean Lenovo W5x0?

<comment><USER21> Given that there is a photo of him using a Lenovo laptop, you could be right.</comment></comment>


Universal currency sign - <AUTHOR> http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1234-universal-currency-sign <comment><USER2> Unfortunately nobody recognises the universal currency sign, so from a usability standpoint it doesn't make much sense to use it.

<comment><USER3> And thus, by definition, it is NOT universal! (sorry, couldn't resist)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why is it 3d? That makes it really hard to figure out what shape it is.

</comment><comment><USER5> From <http://ascii-table.com/pronunciation-guide.php> (They, too, stole it from somewhere):

In the socialist countries, they used and are using all kinds of IBM clones (hardware + software). It was a common practice just to rename everything (IBM 360 → ESER 1040, etc...).

Of course the "dollar" sign had to be renamed - it became the "international currency symbol" which looks like a circle with 4 rays spreading from it: ¤ Because it looks like a (small) shining sun, in the German Democratic Republic it was usually called "Sonne" (sun).

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm one of those few people who knew what this symbol meant: the character was a standard symbol in the "MacRoman" repertoire before the introduction of the Euro replaced that code point (high-ASCII code 219, or shift-option-2) about the time of Mac OS 8 or 9.</comment>


Why don't all cars look like Ferraris? - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@amitassaraf/why-are-there-no-middle-class-cars-shaped-similar-to-ferraris-fff99dd8d285 <comment><USER2> " _As you can tell it is not so simple to point out why I can't tell the difference between a Civic and a Volkswagen in the streets of Ramat Hasharon in Israel._ "

I beg to differ.

The reason Civics and Volkswagens look the same is that most vehicles are designed under the same constraints, particularly maximizing interior space while reducing drag. And most makers are using the same techniques to solve those constraints.

Ferrari tosses out the interior space constraint and adds others.

Fieros and Solstices and such were actually pretty crappy. (The MR2 just doesn't do anything for me.) S2000s are still reasonably popular, and the MX-5 is a periennial best seller.

<comment><USER3> Also, safety systems and laws dictate some of the shape similarities. Its an expensive game to come up with a new shape.

Plus, some of us find Ferrari to not look as good as a Jaguar E-Type or a Porsche 356 speedster. I'm pretty sure there are people whose heart sings when they see certain Chevy, Fords, Hondas, etc.

<comment><USER4> This is an area where I get pretty excited about EVs. You don't have to hinge a literal block of metal downwards so it doesn't end up in passenger's lap. The sled design provides a ton of lateral rigidity that's hard to match.

It's no wonder that Tesla destroyed the competition on safety. There's also probably still improvements to be made given how new EVs are yet.

<comment><USER5> Yes. My Nissan Leaf has great room. At 6'5", I have several inches of head room, and can put the seat all the way back with adults behind me.

<comment><USER3> Weirdly, the non-electric Smart Car can actually fit some big people, but it does suffer a bit in the gas mileage department.

I am enjoying driving a hybrid for the weight distribution the batteries provide. It does help winter driving to have some balance in weight on the back wheels.

<comment><USER5> Compacts tend to be taller. For some reason, as they make cars longer, they make them shorter. Though my Leaf is still several inches taller than a Volt, with about the same length. The Volt is horrible for leg room.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Kinda like asking why isn't there a single "best" brand of car. The answer is fairly obvious in that "best" is hugely subjective and governed by many variables including a particular individual's needs or preferences. This gives rise to many "local maxima" in the subjective preference function, allowing a variety of car types to exist.

</comment><comment><USER7> because Ferraris and other supercars are built to go fast at the expense of literally everything else.

The overwhelming focus on aerodynamics results in a sterotypical look, but it's just one that happens to be horrible at carrying groceries or more than two people.

</comment><comment><USER8> At least in the US they make good looking but affordable car like the mustang, camaro, corvette,...

In europe it's really rare to see a car that doesn't look like a potatoe.

</comment><comment><USER9> The other thing is that because of CAFE standards, there is convergent evolution towards maximally aerodynamic blobs.

<comment><USER10> Pedestrian safety standards make them converge towards aerodynamic blobs with tall hoodlines.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> None so pretty as Crockett's Daytona. (Even though it was really a kit-car based on a 70s Corvette.)

</comment><comment><USER12> What makes cars design look different is related to intellectual property.

Literally this month GM patented new designs for it's cars of the future.

</comment><comment><USER13> The Toyota MR2 was a failure?

<comment><USER14> Yea I wondered that too. I mean I'm super biased, I owned a 2L Turbo 1994 MR2. I loved that car, I was so sad when I sold it. But it was impractical (limited space), somewhat uncomfortable and hard to repair (mid-mounted engines are much harder to work on)

It certainly was a car appreciated by many, but I guess if you asked 100 people what an MR2 was, only ~20% of then would know, so I guess in that regard it was a failure.

<comment><USER13> When I see the occasional MR2 MK2 around today, I still consider looking to buy one in decent state.

>It certainly was a car appreciated by many, but I guess if you asked 100 people what an MR2 was, only ~20% of then would know, so I guess in that regard it was a failure.

I wouldn't regard that as failure, it was never intended to compete with a Yaris for example - it wasn't exactly a mass market car, but I think used to elevate the brand among enthusiasts.</comment></comment></comment>


NetBeans 6.7 Released: New Interface for Mac OS X - <AUTHOR> http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/NewsItemView?newsItemID=1399

<comment><USER2> What I hate about NetBeans is that they ship the OS X version as a .mpkg. Why not simply a disk image that has a NetBeans.app? I don't trust installers.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are there screenshots of the new Mac OS X interface available somewhere?</comment>


RcSim - A Model Flight Simulator - <AUTHOR> http://picolisp.com/wiki/?rcsim <comment><USER2> Only tangentially related to the article, but if you're planning to get started with RC, a RC flight sim is a great option, and can save you $100s or $1,000s on crashed planes.

One of the biggest early obsticles in RC flying is training your brain to know which way to push the stick when your plane is in various positions relative to you. E.g., "My plane is coming back at me. I want it to go to my left, which way do I pull the stick?" Obviously easy to figure out given a few seconds, but often you don't have a few seconds to figure it out. You have to train your brain to intuit it.

RealFlight[1] is the 500lb gorilla in the RC flight sim space, and a good piece of software. But they also have a history of expensive and frequent upgrades, and charging for new models. I prefer Phoenix[2], which so far only has free (and frequent) updates, includes models from my favorite RC manufacturers and lets you download new models for free. Absolute RC[3] is the only current RC flight sim that runs in OSX, but I still prefer Phoenix in Parallels or Bootcamp.

You're going to spend $100-$200 on a simulator and controller, but it's well worth it for being able to practice in a pretty realistic setting before you start flying real planes.

1\. [http://www.realflight.com/](http://www.realflight.com/) 2\. [http://www.phoenix-sim.com/](http://www.phoenix-sim.com/) 3\. [https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/absolute-rc-plane- sim/id5349...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/absolute-rc-plane- sim/id534915930?mt=8)

<comment><USER3> Having something that works with a proportional joystick controller (e.g. - Logitech clone of Sony style game controller), if not an actual RC controller, is essential as well. Keyboard controls are horrible for practicing flying. (I believe the packages you mention come with an RC controller mockup, as well as usually supporting a PC-to-transmitter patch cable)

Alas, the big boys are Windows-only software :-(

There is at least one inexpensive RC simulator out there that runs on Android (and has pretty good glider simulation), which lets you use a PC USB controller for the sticks. You need a USB "On The Go" (OTG) adapter cable to plug the full size "PC end" of the controller into the micro USB socket.

I had a free simulator that worked on Mac, but I forgot its name after it stopped working.

<comment><USER2> I actually learned on an Xbox 360 controller originally, not nearly as good as a real transmitter, but much better than a keyboard.

Both Phoenix and RealFlight come in packages either with a controller, or a cable to plug in your RC controller.

<comment><USER3> Interesting. Isn't the XBox controller "asymmetrical", in that the left joystick is above the D-pad, further up and to the side than the right joystick is? (much like a Nintendo Gamecube controller)

transmitter vs controller images:

[http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/280927693588-0-1/s-l1000.jpg](http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/280927693588-0-1/s-l1000.jpg)

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/PlayStat...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/PlayStation3-Sixaxis.jpg)

[http://gaming.logitech.com/assets/47832/f310-gaming- gamepad-...](http://gaming.logitech.com/assets/47832/f310-gaming-gamepad- images.png)

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Xbox-360...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Xbox-360-S-Controller.png)

[http://www.gamechoiceclub.com/image/gc_controller_black.gif](http://www.gamechoiceclub.com/image/gc_controller_black.gif)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is a fantastic example of Lisp, I'm really enjoying learning the details of flightsim as a Lisp'er would do it - a true bit of heritage software.. Thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I am not an RC hobbyist. I was interested in the programming aspect of it. I have been playing with PilOS, which is PicoLisp made bootable on hardware, or Qemu or KVM. Alex Burger has been developing and using PicoLisp for decades. It has built-in Prolog, database and other amenities. The Rosetta code examples are telling of the language. I love PicoLisp, since I can tackle learning everything from the ground up. It's also very small, and very embeddable.</comment></comment>


Y Combinator's Demo Day Gets Supersized - <AUTHOR> http://allthingsd.com/20120327/y-combinators-demo-day-gets-super-sized/

<comment><USER2> After getting cut off (and testing my brakes; they work nicely) this morning by two idiots on cellphones at the same time, I wish everyone would use sonalight (the voice SMS thing). It probably has te highest external benefit of a large group of startups, even bigger than the personal beefit to a user.

<comment><USER3> Are they coming out with an iPhone version anytime soon? This seems useful.

<comment><USER4> Hopefully they figure out something that works on the iPhone. It can't work exactly like Sonalight on Android works, because the iPhone doesn't yet support launching a third party app based on just a voice command. (Even Siri, a native app, requires you to hold down a button to activate). Sonalight works just by having you just start talking even if the phone is in your pocket.

<comment><USER5> It seems like launching the app with a button push on iOS would be a good enough trade-off to get the benefits of the rest of the app.

The iOS market for this is going to be huge and someone is going to do it eventually regardless of whether you need to push a button.

<comment><USER2> My car has a steering wheel push button to do make a call; I should test how it works with an iPhone 4s and Siri.

I wonder if a bluetooth 4.0 low energy steering wheel slipcover would make sense. You could have a bunch of buttons to do chorded input.

The main problem I have now is that my iPhone locks after a few minutes, even in the dock. I want my phone to remain unlocked while in the car, since entering a long pass phrase on the screen is quite unsafe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> After looking at the venturebeat.com list, I am always excited whenever I gain a new awareness of some of the innovative ideas of other upstarts. As for the All Things Digital article, the opportunities coming together for the Y Combinator groups of the future are growing. It's nice to know that there is a real hunger out there among investors to invest in the advancement of innovation.

As demo day grows, it no doubt provides evidence that Y Combinator is giving investors comfort in knowing that those individuals in which they are investing have been first selected and then have taken them through the process of mentoring them for several months in a tech company "graduate school" type of training. I am sure that an added benefit to investors is also knowing that those in which they invest will also receive an ongoing mentorship support that can only serve to aid stability and growth. That's a win-win for everyone involved.

</comment><comment><USER7> Some of the companies presenting are listed here: [http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/27/y-combinator-demo-day- marc...](http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/27/y-combinator-demo-day-march-2012/)</comment>


Broad Arrow - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad_arrow <comment><USER2> Funny what turns up on HN. You notice these _everywhere,_ if you keep your eyes out.

All over the UK and the world on survey points, church spires, old chimneys, apparently random walls - anything that could once have been prominent enough to be a trig point or benchmark [1]. I've bumped into OS survey plates, complete with arrow, in India, Malaysia and Brunei jungle without trying. There must be billions of the things!

It used to turn up on _every_ piece of military stores. Every shirt, rifle, bullet, knife, teaspoon, jerry can and tool. There's at least 3 in my kitchen cutlery drawer, and a few more in the garage. :)

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benchmark_(surveying)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benchmark_\(surveying\))

</comment><comment><USER3> > Acts of Parliament in 1711, 1722 and 1772 (Timber for the Navy Act 1772) > extended protection finally to 12-inch-diameter (300 mm) trees and resulted > in the Pine Tree Riot that same year. This was one of the first acts of > rebellion by the American colonists leading to the American Revolution in > 1775, and a flag bearing a white pine is said to have been flown at the > Battle of Bunker Hill.

I've never heard of the Pine Tree Riot before. Life, liberty, and property. Where in this case property would have been a tree in your woods that stood as a symbol and constant reminder of a lack of both liberty and property.

What constitutes as ownership in this context when dealing with nature is interesting.

<comment><USER2> Can't remember how far back it goes, but the UK had long restricted timber suitable for masts to make sure the Navy got first pick. Wouldn't be surprised to find timber restrictions in the UK went back to Henry VIII or Elizabeth I. Trouble was all the good ones were felled first, and much of Europe wanted their own masts too. So Spain, France and UK often had to look to colonies by the 1600s and 1700s for big timber.

<comment><USER4> I once went on holiday in Croatia, on the dalmatian coast. It's gorgeous, but the peaks and upper slopes of the hills facing the Adriatic are arid bare earth and rock. In some places it look like a moonscape. Apparently all the trees were felled by the Venetians to build their merchant fleets and the hillsides have never recovered. Scotland used to be covered in forests – all those heather-covered uplands were stripped of trees, largely for shipbuilding.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Didn't realise the connection with the OS Benchmarks - there's one on the wall next to my garden gate.

Thanks for posting :-)

</comment><comment><USER6> Is that a neo Armstrong jet cyclone Armstrong cannon?

</comment><comment><USER7> Cool. Why did you post it to hn though?

<comment><USER8> A quote from the Guidelines: "What to Submit

On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."</comment></comment>


Email Marketing Benchmarks by Industry (mailchimp data) - <AUTHOR> http://www.mailchimp.com/resources/charts/email-marketing-benchmarks-by-industry/

<comment><USER2> My Hacker Newsletter (<http://www.hackernewsletter.com>) has been killing those averages with about a 55% open rate and 35% click rate, so it really depends on your audience I think.

<comment><USER3> Last campaign I sent for a client had 60% open and 32% click rate. I've also seen much worse than those stats.

It really depends what you are doing. On a strongly qualified list with content relevant to the users you should be able to do quite well.</comment></comment>


Iron Rivals: Fantasy-themed strategy game powered by football statistics - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/iron-rivals-fantasy-themed-strategy-game-powered-by-football-statistics/x/2552055

<comment><USER2> I'm not interested in American football, but I do like the idea of an MMO where players control some sort of land area.</comment>


Etherpad Goes to Google - Just Another Silicon Valley Soap Opera - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/etherpad_goes_to_google_-_just_another_silicon_val.php

<comment><USER2> A zero-content article, trying to capitalize on the news for traffic. Attempts to create drama where non-exists and fails miserably.

<comment><USER3> Wah wah wah. A stupid comment from a fanboy. I don't try to capitalize on the news for traffic, I report on the news in unique ways that ad value - sucka.

<comment><USER2> Calm down.

I am sure you're trying to look at things from a different perspective, but the tone and timing have struck a chord with me, and I am sure many others.

Stop creating drama where none exists. If you're worried about a few big companies gobbling up all innovation in silicon valley, please take the time and research the problem, give us figures, explore all the angles.

Right now what you're doing is mini-me Techcrunch. A cynical tabloid interpretation of the news of the hour. You're not the only one: Mashable betrayed this community by taking someone's casual words and putting it in dramatic head lines.

If all your insight and "unique" analyses are only applied to the current breaking news, you're, in fact, a provocateur, not a thinker. It takes wisdom to avoid the crowd and see the big picture.

<comment><USER3> Dude, check Twitter and the Etherpad blog post. Both are FULL of comments from people who feel very similarly. I'm reporting on this from a perspective that a lot of people share. Looking at your comments on TC's coverage linked here I can see you've said things like "it's better to know we have successful developer colleagues who sold to GOOG than it is to complain about your inconvenience as a user." So that's your perspective, you identify with the developers who sold the company. I'm reporting from another perspective.

Also, don't compare me to mashable if you want to have a civil conversation, that's just fighting dirty.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Beijing Property Market Plunges - <AUTHOR> http://imarketnews.com/node/29203

<comment><USER2> I am currently negotiating* a commercial (office) lease in Beijing and I can honestly say the market is ridiculously overpriced.

I have put in offers on a number of buildings in Beijing's Financial Street district[1] and there is literally no space available. There are tons of brand new, A-grade office buildings but they are all owned and less than 20% occupied by China Life, People's Life Insurance Company of China and other monolithic State owned enterprises that let the space sit idle and they leave the lights on all day and all night.

The best office building in Beijing[2], was leasing office space at 300-400RMB/sqm per month less than 12 months ago and now they are turning you away if you offer less than 750RMB/sqm. The wierd thing is, some random domestic Chinese "investment" firm will actually pay that rent and happily move in.

I do believe there is a major correction due, but the government does control the media so its hard to say how hard or soft the landing will be and how much we will hear about it.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Financial_Street>

[2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_World_Trade_Center_Tower_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_World_Trade_Center_Tower_III)

* hence why I am posting anonymously.

<comment><USER3> To be honest though, 750RMB/sqm is still only not even 80 euros (115 USD). That's a discount price for office space in a remote industrial park in a provincial town here in the Netherlands. If that's considered widely overpriced in the top spot in Beijing, there's room left...

(Anyone have recent numbers on the price of office space in Manhattan?)

<comment><USER4> Please don't compare prices by just converting directly to another currency. It's too simplistic.

You have to take into account taxes, salaries, property prices, the economy and a lot of other things. IMHO

<comment><USER3> To a certain degree you're right, but when comparing economies that have roughly reached parity, a dollar to dollar comparison can give a rough estimate of the merit of valuations; and otherwise, it can be used to estimate the distance between economies. What I meant with my comment is that if the most expensive (? I'm assuming that here) real estate in Beijing is only a fraction of similar real estate classes elsewhere, the Chinese economy still has room to catch up with the real estate prices. It's not a particularly wise idea that the Chinese economy isn't up to par with the US and European economies of course, it just shows that maybe what is considered so heavily overpriced may not really be so in the medium term, if only the rest of the economy can keep up (which I doubt it can, but that's a different discussion).

<comment><USER5> "over-priced" is always relative to supply and demand. When supply exceeds demand and there is no correction, the economy moves in a distorted and irrational fashion, preparing the way for larger corrections in the future.

The parent had hard evidence supply seriously exceeded demand.

What do you have in that department?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Every boom (90's internet, 2000's housing, oil, eventually China) always seems to be wrought with fraud and held together by matchsticks and glue. People thought oil prices were purely demand driven until we found out they were being bid up traders.

<comment><USER7>
       > People thought oil prices were purely demand driven
       > until we found out they were being bid up traders.

Do you mean "bid up by traders"?

You're suggesting that oil prices are high because of a conspiracy? If so - no.

That's a "turtles all the way down" argument.

Prices need to be sustained by demand. Traders may make money via moves on the fluctuation. But buying a lot of oil in order to push the price up is not a business model. You have to store it (expensive), transport it, and then when you come to sell it the price will decline again. Not to mention the risk you incurr by holding it, and the opportunity cost of not using that money to do something else at the time.

An idea that does the rounds regularly is that a conspiracy of evil speculators permanently distort markets. I've never seen a situation where that was true. There may be periods where the market does odd things, and market manipulation does exist, but unless it's a locked-up market (like diamonds) or a true conspiracy of all the players (can't think of an example) it will eventually have to revert to the mean because the traders will start calling bluff.

Usually when you see people blaming speculators it's someone trying to cover up ineptitude or corruption by picking an easy target.

When this kind of talk gets momentum the results can be bad. A common target during collapsing bubbles is short-sellers (people who borrow stock, and sell it, with the promise to re-buy it and give it back to its original owner at another time, possibly tomorrow). Short-sellers contribute to price discovering in markets, and this is a good thing. But during bubbles, people who know about shorting can do well when others are doing badly, so they're an easy target.

US regulators stroked this theme during the economic crisis and introduced measures that limited short-selling for a period. In doing so, they contributed to the crisis because short-sellers provide a lot of the liquidity behind money markets. Cuffing short-sellers removed their liquidity pool from money markets, which was already under strain.

<comment><USER6> >Usually when you see people blaming speculators it's someone trying to cover up ineptitude or corruption by picking an easy target.<

I lived through the California energy crisis and there was no crisis. It was a gigantic manipulation. Videos of energy traders laughing their butts off at grandmothers dying of heatstroke. Oil doesn't need to jump into the hundreds every time someone screams in the Middle East.

Analysts in every profession know the whims of their markets. Some of the movements are reality based, some are based on perceptions. Commodity trading (specifically oil) is highly profitable. It can be hacked by the people who know the ins and outs. They'll never tell you, but it can. Most everything can be hacked in some way. I highly doubt the few who are able to profit from the ignorance of millions will confess that some troubles in the Middle East don't significantly impact the supply chain. Or that the price of oil shouldn't jump as wildly as it does. Or even that the oil price seems to reflect the greed of traders chasing historical highs. Not buying it.

<comment><USER7> I don't know about the Californian energy crisis, but maybe this is an example of a situation where the players are in alignment.

Spikes in oil prices can be caused by panic in an industry. For example, if I ran an airliner maybe I'd seek to lock in fuel prices via forward trades. There's a risk I'd pay a high premium for the period, but I'd judge that as being bettter than the risk that I'd go out of business.

And spikes can be caused by speculators. But my point was that in liquid markets things will revert to a mean that is backed by whatever the real demand is. Pushing prices up by buying and holding oil is not in itself a business model.

<comment><USER8> >For example, if I ran an airliner maybe I'd seek to lock in fuel prices via forward trades.

I was under the impression that airlines are already always buying fuel via futures regardless for planning purposes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks like the policies* are starting to work. Good. Hopefully they can avoid "The Bubble Which Will Dwarf All Other Bubbles"

[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/14/us-china- property-...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/14/us-china-property- policy-idUSTRE73D48820110414)

<comment><USER10> Thanks, was wondering if this was good or bad news!

<comment><USER3> There is no telling just yet! The Chinese property has been heavily inflated for a few years already, propped up with extensive government intervention and perverse incentives for local administrations to drive up land prices. There is no telling yet if this decline is

a) real (government-issued numbers are one thing, reality is another);

b) driven by the policies (or just the bubble bursting);

c) permanent. It may be a spike caused by the timing of a measure, or a financing roll-over, or whatever.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Brief points on wiki are pretty insightful: [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Chinese_prope...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Chinese_property_bubble)

</comment><comment><USER12> Can anyone qualified/familiar with the situation comment on what the probable effect the (likely) QE3 in June will have on the Chinese housing market and consumer buying appetite?

</comment><comment><USER13> for someone that lives in shanghai, this is great news. housing in shanghai + beijing are ridiculous, i don't know why a house in shanghai (1000 sq ft/92 sq m) would be more expensive than a house in sf, nyc, seattle, boston, etc of similar dimensions. the running rate in a decent part of shanghai would be roughly 566,153.00 USD (for 1000 sq ft/92 sq m). this isn't even the nicest part of town, for that you'd be looking at 707,692.30 USD. take the average income of a person in shanghai which is about 461 USD /month, who could afford this?! it would take this person 38 years to save up to pay the 30% downpayment (if considering 0% inflation over that time period).

i know for fact that the government's recent policies have played a big factor in this drop in prices because they now limit people from buying a 3rd house and have finally decided to add property tax.

hopefully this trend will keep up--buying opportunity!

</comment><comment><USER14> It's worth noting that month-on-month price fluctuations are prone to noise and are fairly poor indicators of a more general price trend. This is why the Case-Shiller housing indices are a three month moving average.

That said, no doubt there are declines to come in the Chinese property market.

<comment><USER7>
       > That said, no doubt there are declines to come in the
       > Chinese property market.

I'm interested when I see predictions like these, because it's possible for people to make money on them.

You have no doubt - have you taken a position in order to profit from the certainty? If not - is it possible you have doubts?

<comment><USER15> That raises an interesting point. How would you take advantage of such a conviction? Can you short the property market in China, for instance?

<comment><USER16> You short commodities. A sharp downturn in the chinese housing market will cause a lot of Chinese to lose their savings which are tied up in property, causing a recession, and sharply reducing commodity prices.

This is something that the Chinese government wouldn't mind too much either because the rise in commodity prices beyond a certain point (and we're getting pretty close) will cause political disruptions- which is the absolute last thing that the government will accept.

There was a confluence of factors that drove the unrest these past few months in the middle east, but one of the biggest was the sharp increase in commodity prices, especially food and basic supplies.

<comment><USER15> I think the link is too far, so you'll be exposed to a lot more than just the housing market. In finance, if you have a certain bet, you bet on that (and hedge against all other changes), in order for your returns to be based on your bet.

That's why hedge funds outperform on average.

<comment><USER16> Interesting... what about being long gold? I imagine that a housing crash in China would drive investors into precious metals due to the lack of options available for chinese savers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Will be interesting to see if this goes to other markets both within China (I can't imagine Shanghai is 'decoupled' from Beijing) and where it trickles over to (Sydney? Vancouver?).

<comment><USER7> Great point. lindsayrgwatt has picked examples from Canada and Australian - the two developed markets which some see to be overpriced and which haven't yet had a painful correction.

Australian housing might have jumped the shark already - there's been lots of noise about this over the last couple of weeks. [http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=australian+housing+market&#...</a></comment></comment>


How to Win a Currency War - <AUTHOR> https://www.lynalden.com/currency-war/ <comment><USER2> I love that Lyn's articles are getting top billing on HN. She's got very good analysis of the macroeconomic situation. In times like this, very important to educate yourself on these topics.

<comment><USER3> Honest question...If you aren't educated on the topic, how can you tell if there is good analysis or not? (Versus just reading and believing random cranks). Is there any way to test her hypotheses against reality?

<comment><USER4> I have no idea who the OP is but a lot of the stuff is not accurate (I saw the previous post that was linked here). It is a slightly less factual ZeroHedge.

For all it's faults, ZeroHedge actually gets the mechanics roughly correct (although often doesn't get the interpretation right leading to odd conclusions).

But a lot of the OP is just...not correct (as an example, the OP says that countries were on the gold standard in the 1920/30s and devalued as a response to the crisis...wrong, they were on the gold exchange standard and devaluation wasn't the response, it was suspension of convertibility) and vague (all these posts are very wordy, poorly written, and seem intended to reach a conclusion that was arrived at before any evidence was examined).

I don't know why people are so fascinated with the idea that their currency is worthless. In the US, I assume it is related to the fact that much of America has German roots...where this "currency crash literature" is also a fetish. But if you are worried about inflation, own gold, own inflation linkers, and own good businesses. That is it.

Also, maybe the dollar will fall in value but if you are in the US and have USD liabilities, it makes no difference to you. Stuff that cost $1 will still cost $1.

<comment><USER5> > But a lot of the OP is just...not correct (as an example, the OP says that > countries were on the gold standard in the 1920/30s and devalued as a > response to the crisis...wrong, they were on the gold exchange standard and > devaluation wasn't the response, it was suspension of convertibility)

I believe that you are incorrect. The US, for example, suspended convertibility at $20/oz, confiscated holdings of gold (!), then changed the price to $35/oz, and resumed convertibility. That's not just suspension of convertibility, it's _also_ devaluation.

<comment><USER4> I would read what I said more carefully. I did not say that countries did not devalue.

<comment><USER5> Well, OK, then you said that in response to the crisis, they suspended convertibility. But the US suspended convertibility, devalued, and resumed convertibility, long before the crisis was over. That means that the point had to be the devaluation, not the suspension of convertibility. (Or else they were incredibly stupid in how they did it.)

<comment><USER4> Right, and I said "in response" to the crisis not "before the crisis was over"...again, you are continuing well after the point of logic. Read. Carefully.

And the key point was most certainly not the devaluation. I can only suggest you read more about the Great Depression to understand why (there was the small matter of most banks in the country failing, devaluing your currency does not help with that, suspending convertibility does). Basic. Basic. Basic.

<comment><USER5> You might try speaking more clearly. And you might actually give some data instead of just dripping condescension. So far, all you've said is "I know, and I'm right", which is a really worthless conversation.

Oh, yeah, you said "read up on the Great Depression". Well, there's rather a lot that could be read on that. You _might_ be a bit more specific, if you wanted to be helpful rather than just smugly condescending.

And so far, you haven't said anything to make it possible to tell whether you're a really knowledgeable guy I should listen to, or whether you're just a loudmouth crackpot who's sure that he's right and everyone else is wrong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Ok so sell USD to buy what?

EUR? How about after they figure out Italy

JPY? More debt than US and lower rates.

CNH? Ha

Gold? Sure, but it's not a currency

<comment><USER7> That argument is literally called out as "the biggest push-back I receive" and the largest section of the article is devoted to addressing it.

<comment><USER8> But she misses the demographics. The US has some of the best demographics of the G20. Germany, Japan, and China all have much worse demographics, and will change into net spenders (i.e. retirees) instead of net savers.

Within about 4-10 years (depending on the country), they will be producing less and less for export to the US.

Heck, Germany's GDP is roughly 50% exports. That's unsustainable.

US policies are turning more inward, and countries that rely on exports to us will suffer.

The dollar will be strong for the foreseeable future. It may go up and down a bit, but overall it will be very high. The dynamic driving currencies is very different from even 5 years ago.

As production moves out of China, they will get weaker. We have already seen peak China (and US voters will insist that drugs and PPE are produced in the US so we don't run into a supply chain issue like we've seen over the past two months.)

The EU banks (well, certainly the German ones) are basically insolvent. They were never recapitalized after 2008, and have limited power.

So there is nobody around to challenge the US. As well capitalized consumers, the US controls their future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks like everyone has figured out the game or illusion.

There are 5 tiers of the world: 1\. US 2\. US allies 3\. Developing non allies 4\. Enemies 5\. Underdeveloped countries.

One of the major reasons developing countries aren't rising faster is because they are not in the ring of US allies. Thus, they don't receive the first bite in newly printed US dollars.

Since the US is not the majority importer, I wonder what happens if a significant majority of the importing developing non allied world runs out of dollars.

</comment><comment><USER10> Lyn's entire blog is worth reading. Very in-depth analysis and actionable conclusions. She builds mental models using data. I've never seen economics content like that anywhere.

For just one example, and a great backgrounder to the currency wars article, check out:

[https://www.lynalden.com/global-dollar-short- squeeze/](https://www.lynalden.com/global-dollar-short-squeeze/)

</comment><comment><USER11> What I really disliked about this analysis was its lack of discussion around core PCE, something the fed watches very carefully when it comes to managing its monetary policy. It talks about "dovish", but really perhaps the fed isn't being dovish at all and is just desperately trying to maintain its 2% price inflation rates.

</comment><comment><USER12> A few problems - ok, so the there are more problems in the USD but:

a) What is the alternative? This is a relative game. Is the US going to fall harder than the EU? Probably not.

b) In an uncertain world ... people want greebacks even more for the structural reasons implied.

c) This trade deficit thinking is odd because it doesn't include _surpluses_. If sells something for 50 cents that would otherwise cost $100 in the US, and there is no other trade, then it still makes sense for everyone to buy said things for a long time. So China has to get _something_ back for it, maybe it ends up meaning those XMen movies are going to cost them a lot more than they thought. Or the iPhones, or the US companies they buy or whatever else.

</comment><comment><USER13> Japan has $1.2 Trillion worth of U.S. treasury bonds. I wonder what will be their next move if the U.S. dollar weakens.

<comment><USER4> There is no other move. The reason they own that much is because USTs are deep and liquid. There is virtually no other market in the world where you can deploy $1trn (certainly no market outside the US).

<comment><USER14> Sometimes the only winning move is not to play :-)

At _some_ point it becomes irrational to keep holding USTs. I'm well aware it seems right now there aren't any other good options, but that can definitely change quickly.

<comment><USER4> I don't think you understand.

I am not saying there are no other good options, there are literally no options.

You understand that having $1trn isn't like your TD Ameritrade account. Thought experiment: they put the money into Japanese banks. First, the JPY starts trading at 50 against the USD. Japanese industry is over. Second, Japanese banks literally cannot pay the interest on these deposits because they can't find enough people to lend to.

There aren't enough European govt bonds. They aren't enough corporate bonds (and they aren't liquid enough). Literally, there is no asset class in the world large enough for them. The only other asset class that was large enough was MBS...which some people feel skittish about since 2008 (but which Japan and China do own large amounts of...again, because there is nothing else).

Just as an example: in the 1970s the oil crisis caused a huge boom in earnings for Middle Eastern nations. Most govts there weren't financially sophisticated, they had no idea what to do with all this money so they started depositing it in US banks. These banks had no idea what to do with it either. They couldn't find enough borrowers (rates were pretty high then) so they started lending to govts in emerging markets. This trigged a decade-and-a-half long financial crisis from 1980 when these borrowers started defaulting (in 1980, Citibank was effectively bankrupt because of these loans). Again, this isn't like your Ameritrade account...when you have a lot of money, you start changing how financial markets fundamentally work. So you have to be very very careful.

Hopefully that makes it clear.

<comment><USER14> I'm aware of the impracticability of everyone divesting out of USTs right now. Your points are entirely valid and are the reason the system is still being held together.

My point is there exists some set of circumstances in which that assumption changes.

As an example, at _some_ fed balance sheet level + inflation level, your options are either: 1) Do nothing and end up with nothing 2) Do _something_ and end up with more than nothing

I've lost count of total fed pledges at this point, something on the order of $8T? Say things drag on and that goes to $12T+? And say inflation takes off, is the fed really going to fight inflation? It can't.

You start seeing high double digit inflation while the fed is printing money and keeping rates at zero, and at _some_ point you have to move your USTs into _something_. If you don't, you'll be left with nothing.

I realize this is incredibly hard to imagine given the current system, but things that can't go on forever wont'.

<comment><USER15> The level is when we switch to a food, guns, and ammo economy. USTs are so deeply interwoven into the very fabric of the world economic systems the only way to get out of it is for the whole system to fall apart.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Maybe the libertarian party is awful at campaigning but they are absolutely correct on economic policy.

Or rather predicting the outcome of current economic policy.

Buy Bitcoin</comment>