What papers should everyone read? - Theoretical Computer Science - <AUTHOR> http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read <comment><USER2> Anything written by Leslie Lamport is worth the effort.

Time, Clocks and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System (seminal paper which won various awards): [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/lamport/pubs/p...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/lamport/pubs/pubs.html#time-clocks)

That link actually takes you to a complete list of Lamport's works.

<comment><USER3> I wish I could upvote twice. Lamport's writing is _very_ accessible ( at least to this college dropout ) and I really enjoyed reading Time, Clocks and the Ordering of Events. Paxos Made Simple is another favorite: [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/lamport/pubs/p...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/lamport/pubs/pubs.html#paxos-simple).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is a great list. I would add:

* The stable marriage problem (D. Gale and L. S. Shapley: "College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage", American Mathematical Monthly 69, 9-14, 1962.), <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_marriage_problem>

* Knuth's Dancing Links algorithm [http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/papers/dancing-color...](http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/papers/dancing-color.ps.gz)

</comment><comment><USER5> "A tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and selected applications in speech recognition" (by Lawrence Rabiner) - blew me away.

link: [http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/Faculty/Rabiner/ece259/Reprints/tuto...](http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/Faculty/Rabiner/ece259/Reprints/tutorial%20on%20hmm%20and%20applications.pdf)

I'll also add "Design and Implementation of the Sun Network Filesystem" (by Sandberg et al.) - fantastic read.

</comment><comment><USER2> Brewer's CAP Theorem

The first link is the paper which constituted the proof of the theorem, the other two provide more context and background.

[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.20....](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.20.1495&rep=rep1&type=pdf) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem> [http://www.julianbrowne.com/article/viewer/brewers-cap- theor...](http://www.julianbrowne.com/article/viewer/brewers-cap-theorem)

</comment><comment><USER6> There is one set of papers that applies to multi-areas...information Theory

Paper and Journal article list is here: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory>

Its one of the most important theories of the modern science age of the 19th/20th century

<comment><USER7> Shannon's original paper is still a surprisingly good read: [http://cm.bell- labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pd...](http://cm.bell- labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf)

<comment><USER8> Seconded; imo this paper is a pretty good introduction to the basic concepts and motivations of information theory even today. Impressive for a 63-year-old paper.

<comment><USER9> If you want a reminder of what a stud Shannon was, remember that his masters thesis (A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and Switching Circuits) proved that you could use boolean algebra and boolean arithmetic to analyze the circuits and relays used in the telephone networks at the time. It then went one step further and proved that the inverse was also true, you could use relays and switches to perform boolean logic operations -- this was the key insight that made digital electronics possible. Not too bad for work that did not even get him a Ph.D. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Something on quantum computation like, Shor's algorithm: <http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0010034>

<comment><AUTHOR> That's already there. Did you read the linked item?

<comment><USER10> Ouch. Really sorry about that. Wish i could delete it. I would also add any paper by David Deutsch on quantum communication like this: <http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/quant-ph/9906007v2></comment></comment></comment>


Write iPhone apps with Mono - <AUTHOR> http://www.mono-project.com/MonoTouch <comment><USER2> I was wondering whether output is statically or dynamically linked to the Mono runtime, since last I checked, Mono runtime is LGPL. I found this info:

<http://www.mono-project.com/MonoTouch_Beta>

Caveats

We consider MonoTouch feature complete, but there will be bugs lurking in this beta release. We will be issuing new builds every few days to correct bugs that developers will be running into, so please report these issues to the email@example.com mailing list.

The beta does not come with a license to redistribute the code beyond testing. For that you will need to wait for the official release in the first two weeks of September to buy the real product version.</comment>


Beijing is Silicon Valley's only true competitor - <AUTHOR> http://www.recode.net/2016/5/13/11592570/china-startup-tech-economy-silicon-valley <comment><USER2> It must help Chinese startups that many SV companies are blocked from competing in China. For example no competition from Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, Youtube, Gmail, Dropbox, Vimeo, SoundCloud...

more info: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_mainland_C...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_mainland_China)

<comment><USER3> I've been told that the great firewall is actually more about protectionism than censorship. They know they can't really contain information, but they can block or degrade foreign services to favor their own. Of course this does serve a state censorship and surveillance agenda indirectly since home grown services can be more easily controlled.

As much as I can't stand Trump and could never vote for him, I do think he's one of the few candidates raising the issue of how unfair our trade relations are with China. The WTO limits tariffs but the Chinese have found tons of indirect ways to implement protectionism: the great firewall, manipulating their currency, making it hard for US firms to take payments in China, etc.

<comment><USER4> Interesting point, but to be fair China is not the only one to find ways to implement protectionism. The F35 program or even Nasa contracting SpaceX could be seen as examples of the US implementing some level of protectionism.

<comment><USER5> Every nation has protectionism. _Every single one_. _What 's important is the degree of protectionism_. So pointing out examples of a nation engaging in protectionism contributes little to the discussion unless you _compare_ it to other nations.

<comment><USER6> > What's important is the degree of protectionism

The US complaining about China's protectionism is hypocritical. Let's talk about America's farm subsidies. How is that not competing unfairly? It leads to American agricultural produce being dumped on foreign markets at subsidized prices, destroying entire countries' agricultural base. What would you say is the _degree_ of protectionism here?

<comment><USER7> Farm subsidies is not only about business, it's about national security: you subside food industry so that when you suddenly find yourself in the big war with trade routes cut, your population doesn't starve.

I'm not saying that these subsidies are necessary; I'm just saying that they should be analyzed with a different framework.

<comment><USER8> That's true but even more so when applied to the computer network. Nowadays, in case of a war, closing emails or zombying all Windows pcs could do more harm than food supplies.

<comment><USER7> And that's why for countries who aren't US closest allies it makes total sense to base military infrastructure on open-source operating systems and software (because let's be honest, Russian or Chinese military most likely won't be able to produce their own modern OS of comparable quality from scratch).

However, software and hardware on one hard, and internet on another, aren't the same thing: I don't see how one can seriously make the same argument in favor of great chinese firewall. It's only effective against general population, and doesn't seriously negate any cyber-threats, as far as I understand.

<comment><USER8> Why only military infrastructure? Image a war between, say the USA and Russia, and imagine that the USA manages to shut down or cripple all Windows machines in Russia, this will probably put the enemy on the kneels, even more than weeks of airstrikes. And it may also be better PR as it do not directly "kill" anyone. I have always thought that Microsoft holding 95% of PCs in the world is extremely dangerous, and can't get why American, with their admirable foundness of personal freedom and security, do not decide to put a stop to this anomaly. (Imagine, if 95% of world's oil was provided by one company?)

<comment><USER7> Because unlike oil, computers running on different OS create difficulties for users and developers. Apart from the point of national security, I think it's reasonable to assume that in an alternative world, where 20 operating systems competed on desktop market with more-or-less equal market shares, everybody would suffer from neverending compatibility problems, we would have worse applications, a lot of businesses would never succeed and a lot less value would be created in IT industry overall.

Hell, we don't even have to imagine — remember testing JS on every browser around 2007?

<comment><USER8> 20 different operating systems would have shown the necessity of a common open protocol for the filesystem being it, and would have given much more space to creativity on the computer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Funny, I gave a tech talk at the Chekku (Garage) cafe a few years ago, and even then it had a pretty impressive energy in the place. The host that set it up expected maybe 15 people to show up, over 150 did.

China was and still is lacking some very important infrastructure for successful business development: a stable legal and contracts system, strongly enforced property rights, institutional access to capital, investment focused on demand rather than supply (see also ghost cities), and a well regulated stock market more based on revenue than pure speculation (not that the events of the last 10 years in the US stock markets haven't shaken my opinion on their strength).

Chinese entrepreneurs make up for these business problems the same way people that lack resources do in the states: through hard work and sheer tenacity. They're hungry for progress, and at the end of the day, that's what builds an economy.

I met some great people at Garage cafe that night, and they left a strong impression on me that Chinese entrepreneurs are going to do some really impressive stuff over the next ten years.

If you're ever in Beijing, I highly recommend spending an evening there. It was the highlight of my trip.

<comment><USER10> It's cool to see Cheku mentioned on here, they just celebrated their 5 year anniversary a month or so ago. Does seem like a lot of the cooler projects have left for greener pastures though, and the people that are left, ah well.

<comment><USER9> There's an endless supply of people to fill in those that leave.

Mind you, the greener pasture might just be Shanghai. Shanghai looked a lot more developed than Beijing, but I was only there for the day, so I didn't have time to really explore the city. It reminded me a lot of Hong Kong in many respects. I'd love to spend a month deep diving into the tech scene there.

<comment><USER10> From what I've heard the more mature startups with interesting end up moving to Shangdi for cheaper office space. That kinda leaves the has-beens and never-will-be's behind, but I guess that's to be expected. Even the founder of the place has started another venture a bit down the street.

We met some interesting people during their anniversary party, but then we met an equal share of idiots, so my guess it's 50/50 right now. The was this one guy drilling us on the market for phone cases in the US/Europe (f..k if we know, you're trying to compete with local retailers or something?), who didn't understand the concept of stealth mode, for example.

Not to say that there aren't promising founders out there, they just don't go to the events. Probably better that way, since the C2C attitude isn't just restricted to copying from abroad.

<comment><USER9> > We met some interesting people during their anniversary party, but then we > met an equal share of idiots, so my guess it's 50/50 right now.

Oh there was plenty of that when I was there, but that was part of the fun for me. Easy to write off the dude I spent half an hour talking about Chinese punk rock bands with as a goober, but maybe he's the one that kicks off the Chinese version of Sub Pop records.

I gave up a long time ago on the idea of ever knowing who's going to do the awesome stuff. Almost more often than not it's the people I thought were the idiots and the lunatics.

Actually what I really liked about the people I met was that they were real characters with a lot of personality. I expected a lot of blank faced marketing pitch lameness but didn't get much of that (I'm sure it's there though).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Actually, if we count unicorn companies per capita, the number two after silicon valley is stockholm.

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/knowledgewharton/2015/11/11/how-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/knowledgewharton/2015/11/11/how- stockholm-became-a-unicorn-factory/#1a4c8944634b)

<comment><USER12> Stockholm has produced a few successful startups, but it's not a competitor to SV. It's is a global competitor in telecom systems and games (though I guess many game companies are now owned by US companies). Spotify is basically the same service as when it started, just with more users. Stockholm has no real momentum in building something of their own.

<comment><USER13> There is a huge difference between the valley - home of the whole industry and Stockholm, which hosts a few niched companies.

Compare the hiring. In Sweden there is no demand for CS skills, there is no immigration programs for techies, etc.

Also, which is also important, Sweden is traditionally a consumer of technology, not producer (with exception of Ericsson, of course) - MS land where Linux is frowned upon outside academia and almost nonexistent in the market.

There is not even a dim analogy to what is going on in the valley.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> the title is clickbait. If we are looking at Asia then India is the more relevant competitor. With a huge Valley-returned entrepreneur community as well as being open for Silicon Valley to do business, I am betting that India will grow faster. Indeed Ola and Flipkart's senior management comes from Facebook and Google at this point ... and were forced to innovate faster and harder when Amazon and Uber entered India. This happens across all categories of startups. Sure China has a larger customer segment than India at this point, but that is not something that is going to continue for long.

Oh and fundamental freedom and democratic rights go a long way to attract talent. Its not for nothing that talent chose to settle in the extremely vibrant and tolerant San Francisco area. Pretty much the exact same reason why Delhi and Bangalore drive most of the tech ecosystem in India.

The biggest problem I see with India is lack of infrastructure at the same level as China. That I admit, is going to be a make or break.

<comment><USER15> Valley-returned entrepreneur community doesn't mean anything in terms of innovation. App-powered logistics companies are no longer innovative; the wave was in the realization that commerce can be driven through smartphones and the internet, and that logistics can be massively improved by a combination of location-aware devices with abundant cheap labour from under-privileged population (not a value judgement). We are still a long way from doing ground- breaking scientific research. Innovative business models can only take us so far; fundamental progress has always been driven by the courage to think new thoughts, and that typically comes from the scientific community, not the business world.

<comment><USER14> That is where you are wrong. There is already fundamental work happening around vernacular linguistics, robotics (especially Grey Orange) and fintech.

People misunderstand how much technology needs to be built to be able to reconcile something like cash on delivery.

We are definitely far away from valley level innovation, but having people germinate the ecosystem with management styles and culture is extremely important.

What is fundamentally broken is somewhere else - the investor ecosystem. Indian investors are young, barely out of college and are professional MBAs without a lot of experience in a startup. It is very hard to explain the value of technical debt, innovation etc...when we can chase copycat business models without innovation. It's been extremely hard finding bthe right culture fit in investors. Combine that with the fact that most entrepreneurs have not become billionaires in India...so you don't have that savvy, experienced angel investors with deep pockets (the Paul Grahams or the Peter Thiels of India).

That is what needs fixing. China already has a couple of Jack Ma who are being the second wave of investors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Interesting article but I feel it's light on actual hard data comparisons.

One fact is wrong though.

> Startups can achieve massive scale quickly, because the domestic market is > 1.3 billion people, which is four times the U.S. or European population.

I don't know what definition of Europe (Western maybe?) gives you 300 million people. Demographically Wikipedia says Europe had 70 million people in 210 so presumably it's over 3/4 billion now.

I feel like people don't appreciate that Eastern Europe / Russia is Europe too for a lot of definitions of Europe. The E.U. includes a lot of Eastern European countries and Balkan states and Slavic states but not all. Ukraine and Russia _are_ European in many respects, be it ballet, opera, classical music, theatre, cinema, religion, architecture, you name it. Arguably modern Turkey is the least European _culturally_ because of the influence of Islam and Arab culture but geographically Istambul is closer to Rome than London is and when the Western Roman Empire fell the seat of power shifted to Constantinople and continued on for another, I don't know, more than _500_ years anyway.

Wikipedia say Europe had 300 million people in _1916_ , midway during the First World War (sorry world!), exactly one century ago.

side note: I have to chuckle to myself when some point out that air pollution in China will be a limiting factor. It didn't stop the industrial revolution in the UK or US so why should it stop China? And it wasn't _that_ long ago that air pollution was a real problem for London and LA, for instance. Judging by history air pollution will be a thing of the past within one generation (25/30 years) in China. You can quote me on that.

<comment><USER17> > side note: I have to chuckle to myself when some point out that air > pollution in China will be a limiting factor. It didn't stop the industrial > revolution in the UK or US so why should it stop China? And it wasn't _that_ > long ago that air pollution was a real problem for London and LA, for > instance. Judging by history air pollution will be a thing of the past > within one generation (25/30 years) in China. You can quote me on that.

I can think of a few factors that make Beijing different from the industrial revolutions of the US/UK.

(1) In 2016, the brightest can move to pollution-free zones which don't really exist in urban China

(2) Environmental policies were spurred on by environmental activism which was enabled by free speech. It's not clear this will happen in China. They keep saying the air quality will get better, but each year is worse than the last, and more and more rivers are no longer usable due to intense pollution. I think there's something to be said for the whole country being responsible and being able to protest about local conditions.

That said, I wish China luck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> It don't know if the author noticed that the news out of China for the last year has largely signaled the disintegration of the Chinese development model, with the state relentless intervening basically everywhere to prevent the collapse of the stock market, prevent capital flight, prevent the massive bankruptcy of various firms, prevent worker unrest from economic dislocation etc.

With contradictions of the Chinese economy now becoming visible to the rest of world, even if the Chinese state continue to distort it's statistics, the idea that the Chinese tech sector is oh-so-vibrant-and-healthy seems much less plausible. The tech sector depends on the Chinese internal market and that just doesn't look good or healthy or competitive - especially not competitive. Western companies are shut out but it's pretty clear native companies need connection to stay healthy too.

</comment><comment><USER19> I lived/worked in Shenzhen 2011-2012, and even then, young companies, founded by westerners and locals alike, had started targeting the domestic market. Companies in the hardware/manufacturing space had realized there was no need to spend time and energy pursuing western clients when there was such a large, underserved demographic locally.

</comment><comment><USER20> It has struck me that the real key to American tech dominance is NASDAQ and the American stock market in general. It values tech and especially young companies a lot higher. In biotech, an IPO on NASDAQ will be valued at 2-3x one on Euronext. Frankfurt is even worse, which is why even German biotech firms don't IPO there.

The value that the American stock market sees in tech in turn drives investment in startups that can expect a more lucrative exit.

Ever wonder why so many European tech companies are bought by American ones? It's because any young European tech company will be valued higher as part of an American one listed on NASDAQ than it will be when listed on its national exchange, even with the conglomerate discount.

So much in the world depends on funding.

</comment><comment><USER21> A better title would be, "The unspoken dread of Silicon Valley". Or else , "Yes they're coming for your job also". Possibly why this article has no previous comments

</comment><comment><USER22> Spend 3 weeks in China, and maybe it is clear that it is, but spend 8 years in China, and it is overwhelming clear that it is not.

> Yes, they clone where they can. But cloning is starting to reach its max — > there are just not enough successful ideas to clone. In addition, clones > often fail in the local market due to different consumer behavior and needs.

China is still fairly closed, startups here in Beijing are 99% focused on the local market. Release a product with Facebook integration? Who even knows what Facebook is, is it like WeChat? Even in surrounding countries in China's sphere of influence that are just ramping up on the Internet now, like Cambodia, Vietnam, and Myanmar, Facebook and YouTube rule, while Chinese services are completely missing. Business models in China are oriented at copying business model X that has shown to work outside of China, and adapting it to the local market. Not because Chinese lack creative (believe me, they have plenty!), but because the VCs see it as low hanging fruit, a more pragmatic reasonable investment, especially since many of the big players are locked out.

Perhaps the low hanging fruit has been picked, but it is hard to see startups actually pivoting towards innovation, especially in the Beijing scene (maybe Shenzhen?).

> In China, there is a company work culture at startups that's called 9/9/6\. > It means that regular work hours for most employees are from 9 am to 9 pm, > six days a week. If you thought Silicon Valley has intense work hours, think > again. For founders and top executives, it's often 9/11/6.5. That's probably > not very efficient and useful (who's good as a leader when they're always > tired and don't know their kids?) but totally common.

This. A colleague recently transferred to a big e-commerce company in Hangzhou. They expect a lot of face time, in the office 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, but this doesn't correspond to productivity at all. It is very ridiculous. It isn't about "hunger or drive", but simply an old-fashioned throwback to the pre-00s when 6 day work weeks/12 hour days were expected from everyone, regardless of whether they were productive or not.

> The recent generation of Chinese entrepreneurs is driven too much by money > and financial success ("get rich fast").

A lot of people are in it for the money, they aren't really technologist. Additionally, engineers who are decent run to and are pushed into management roles way too quickly, given that (a) your success is judged by how many people are working for you and (b) China really lacks good leadership/management. This means that practicing engineers are mostly very junior, which has its own problems.

> Finally, Chinese startups lack clean air.

San Francisco/Bay area is attractive because it is a good place to live, and was initially attractive because it was cheap (garage startups in the valley). Beijing has none of that...the housing bubble means even a small apartment costs $1 million, the air is incredibly horrible, the traffic...maybe if Beijing cleaned up its act, it could be an international draw, but that is a long way off. Beijing also has a shockingly low expat population, something like 40K in a city of 20 million.

> And, yes, China has massive issues, from freedom of speech (The Great > Firewall) to competition that can get out of hand in terms of business > practices.

I always find it funny when people come to visit and expect to use Facebook and Google docs. Even VPNs are seriously under seige lately, with the internet situation has gotten noticeably worse over the last two years, which I didn't think was possible.

<comment><USER23> It's not clear if many of these things are good or bad or if they're any worse than silicon valley. I wouldn't count any of them as serious obstacles for Beijing tech success.

Focused on the local market. I often run into SV companies that I'd like to use as a customer but can't because they only serve America. Either because of IP restrictions, money transfer, shipping, or they just haven't figured out other countries yet.

Having people in it for the money is a sign that something's really happening. It's not just hobbyists doing it for fun. I'm sure most SV startups are in it for the money too. Nobody really things a pick-up laundry service for rich people is altruistic or fun.

Young smart engineers getting management responsibilities. Sounds like every startup with a 25 year old CEO.

Lack of good leadership? Maybe they're effectively doing flatter organization structures. That's a cool trend in SV.

High cost of living. SV is famous for its wildly inflated house prices but that's not stopping it.

Bad internet: Crippling if you're a foreigner and depend on foreign services. Hardly noticeable for locals using Chinese services. American's equally have no access to major Chinese internet services because of the language barrier yet that isolation isn't stopping them.

Underhanded business practices. America has patent lawsuits which a big company can use to stomp out pretty much any small software company they want. Everyone's infringing somebody's patent but they mostly survive because they're too small to matter.

Long hours and no time for family. SpaceX is famous for that and they're doing pretty well.

<comment><USER5> You're rebutting almost all of seanmcdirmid's arguments by essentially saying "it's not a problem because some SV startups/companies do it too." But:

1) You don't become the next Silicon Valley through cargo-cult entrepreneurship.

2) SV is successful _in spite_ of those things, not because of it, because SV is starting from a position of strength and inertia. SV succeeds in spite of its current problems because of the massive self-reinforcing feedback loop and culture it developed decades ago when these things were not issues.

When SV was becoming a startup hub, most of what you and seanmcdirmid talked about were not problems. Housing was cheap, software patent lawsuits were not prevalent, many people were hobbyists, and so on.

<comment><USER23> Well yes, I suppose you're right. I think I'm just a bit jaded seeing every positive story about China filled with comments like "they'll fail because they're not doing it like us". There are plenty of ways they're different and most of them probably seem bad. Maybe most of them really are bad, but somehow they're still doing pretty well. It must be a complicated combination of factors. I don't think it's fair to predict failure just because some things are worse. They do have much stronger protectionism provided by the government, which is surely a massive advantage over American companies. They also have a cheaper yet well educated workforce.

<comment><USER22> This is how the Chinese press takes criticism: be insecure, claim it is an instruction to do things like the west, be like the west, then handle the criticism with some convenient what-about-isms. Everytime I go and read chinadaily, it's the same technique over and over again, everyday.

At anyrate, the topic is inherently comparative (BJ is the only next SV!), and no, it really isn't. Maybe you can just brush it off to "BJ isn't SV because they aren't doing it like SV", but even then, al, the criticisms are valid and, if improved, could make the city much better irrespective of any comparison.

I guess then that is also it: they seem to be really good, the pollution hasn't caused an economic implosion yet, people are somehow still alive, and someone is willing to spend 1 million $s on that bland 90 sqm apartment. It's like 2006, my friends are laughing at me because I'm saying real estate is definitely in a bubble to the retort "if it's a bubble why hasn't it popped yet?".

The companies are completely protected, yet China keeps wanting more access into our markets, and we give it to them. Truth is, reform is all to China's benefit, while the west benefits greatly from the messed up status quo where China strives to be involved in global high value work but fails, and still derives most of their income from low value production, basically destroying their environment for our benefit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Unless there is no air pollution in Beijing. One of my colleague just moved from Beijing to Bay Area because of the severe air pollution of Beijing.

</comment><comment><USER25> Native Beijing guy here. I'd like to answer any question about the city or the startup ecosystem.

<comment><USER16> Is Beijing the biggest tech hub in China? Silicon Valley is really a long corridor of tech between two cities, SF and San Jose. Is there something similar in China? Would you say that China has multiple tech hot spots or is Beijing it? Is Beijing more like New York in this respect? Do you see what I'm driving at?

<comment><USER22> Beijing is more like the DC area, but even then the comparison is flimsy. As a long time Beijing resident, I would say Shenzhen and Shanghai have more to offer. Beijing's importance is mostly driven by the government.

<comment><USER25> Beijing's importance is not driven mainly by the government (although open- mindedness of the government definitely contributed to this), but by the ecosystem: best universities (Peking University and Tsinghua University among dozens of others) and best research institutions (the Chinese Academy of Sciences and research centers of big companies), most big VCs, IT communities/media, and most important, entrepreneurs.

In Beijing, if you have time, you can attend some interesting IT meetup everyday. It is what you can not see in Shanghai or Shenzhen.

Talk to somebody in Shanghai or Shenzhen startup community. You will have the insights.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> He needs to spend way more than 3 weeks in Beijing before jumping to conclusions.

<comment><USER27> I'm curious, where exactly do you think his conclusions are wrong?

I lived and worked in Beijing for over 5yrs and I think his conclusions are in general pretty accurate. Which is fairly impressive for spending only 3wks there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I lived in Shanghai and worked in the startup community there from 2012-2013. Im happy to answer any questions people might have. Very interesting space. The government is taking a very active role at developing startup "infrastructure", but it looks incredibly different from anything in the West.

<comment><USER29> _The government is taking a very active role at developing startup "infrastructure"_

Could you elaborate on this statement? Are you referring to financing of startups, or more? Thank you for the offer to answer questions!

<comment><USER10> Investment into incubators, co-working spaces, government projects such as tech parks, building office space, streamlining of company registration and visa's, doing official visits (XiJingPing at Cheku, China's finance minister at 3W Cafe), yeah, they're pretty involved in things.

<comment><USER22> I've heard about these places from colleagues. Every local government is starting incubators, but many of them are like ghost malls. Which is funny, because they are converting a ghost mall in Beijing Zhongguancun near my office into an incubator space....

<comment><USER30> I know someone who works at one of the government backed incubators in Shanghai and he told me that a few of the companies they have are pretty promising, but there are a lot of accepted companies who don't have much of a shot. Startup solve a national problem of having too many college graduates and not enough job opportunities, so some of the incubators just soak up some of the extra graduates with the hope that maybe they could make something useful with time. Of course, with continued government support the incubators could improve and become more focused, but for now it seems at least a few are a way to provide jobs to what may otherwise be unemployed college grads.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Can someone name one innovative or disruptive technology that has come out of China in the last 20 years? Honest question.

I am admitting ignorance here. I have this assumption that many Chinese companies just copy/refactor existing ideas and apply them to their protected market.

<comment><USER32> Lower-priced but "lower-quality" is one of the quintessential properties of a disruptive technology. You can probably apply this to all electronics manufacturing, from smart phones to consumer drones. Could smart phones have become so ubiquitous if each cost over $1000 to buy?

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I know this may sound flip, but as far as innovation goes the Chinese* have not invented anything since gunpowder. Of course SV, is much more than just innovation: it's access to financing and technical and sales talent. Along these dimensions, Beijing may represent a competitive threat.

*only those based in China. Chinese people freed from strictures of autocracy, colonialism, communism, and kleptocracy have made great innovations.

</comment><comment> Supi-lee I am pretty sure India would be building its own devices, OSes , search engines, social networks etc if the govt gets more protectionist. There is no reason this can't happen overnight.

It has an endless supply of cheap labor and high end talent.

It (protectionism) has worked well for them in the auto, pharma, telecom sectors where the local companies are market leaders despite serious competition from the west.

<comment><USER34> Labor in China isn't really that cheap and limitless any more. And the sheer number of university graduates to select from slightly distorts the overall quality of education in China.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Dude the air was clear the day you were wearing masks. Creadabilty lost.

<comment><USER22> Yesterday the air quality was yellow (i.e. Clean air), but I still ran into an American Chinese girl wearing a face mask asking for directions. Weird....

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Lack of clean air to breathe and rampant corruption and authoritarianism seem not very conducive to a successful startup culture. There is a huge churn of chinese money trying to find places to go and get a good roi. It is not clear that this will last though.

Also, I find it unlikely that without a free/open software ecosystem like linux or bsd they will get very far. Building a startup culture on a general computing foundation of massively pirated windows os is just not going to work.

<comment><USER10> I've been proselytizing linux over here. Ubuntu Kylin is pretty cool to set up for people, but the wifi cards on a lot of laptops don't take too well to it.

<comment><USER37> Why Kylin and not Xubuntu or Lubuntu?

<comment><USER10> Well, the OS I'm running is Ubuntu, and Kylin is "Ubuntu for China", with fcitx set up for Chinese already, and a separate Software Center that has a delightful page that shows Linux alternatives for Windows software. Haven't quite gotten around to playing with other linux distros to be honest.

<comment><USER37> Interesting. The Chinese devs I work with hate Kylin (probably because it's approved by the Party) and seem to really prefer other Chinese-created variants, particularly Lubuntu and Xubuntu. I've got no experience with Kylin, so it's interesting to hear these points.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Tao of Programming - <AUTHOR> http://www.canonical.org/~kragen/tao-of-programming.html <comment><USER2> Yes, that's a classic :)</comment>


Watch what you store on SkyDrive–you may lose your Microsoft life - <AUTHOR> http://wmpoweruser.com/watch-what-you-store-on-skydriveyou-may-lose-your-microsoft-life/ <comment><USER2> So Microsoft is peeking into private folders, and judging the contents based on political and religious values not inscribed in any law? And completely terminates all Microsoft service to anyone found wanting to obey by these fundamentalist directives?

The warning should not be "watch what you store on SkyDrive", the warning should be "stay the hell away from Microsoft".

<comment><USER3> From the code of conduct.: [http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows- live/code-of-cond...](http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows-live/code-of- conduct)

> provides or creates links to external sites that violate this Code of > Conduct.

Along with

> depicts nudity of any sort including full or partial human nudity or nudity > in non-human forms such as cartoons, fantasy art or manga.

So linking to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturism> would be enough to get banned, no?

<comment><USER4> "nudity in non-human forms"

Does that mean that in photos, chimps must wear clothes?

<comment><USER5> It probably means "flesh tones that our CV algorithms would flag as illicit" -- that is, they are probably prohibiting you from storing images that would create false positives.

<comment><USER4> To be honest, I think these clauses are broadly worded so they can suspend anyone's account and come up with a justification after the fact.

Note the prohibition of _advocating pornography_ and _expressing hatred._

<comment><USER6> Why don't they just put: "We can ban your account without prior notice for any reason we see fit."

Tons of services have that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is like a hotel manager kicking you out because you and your partner are having sex. Why? Because prostitutes have sex too, and we don't want our hotel associated with that.

There are other, more troubling things here too. Materials related to the sale of firearms and ammunition are prohibited. Firearms in various forms are completely legal to own and trade to various degrees in the United States, why are documents relating to that trade of firearms banned?

I also see that anything that incites, advocates or expresses profanity is prohibited. I would advocate that all SkyDrive users place a copy of the terms of service in their account. This should incite most people to express their opinion of Microsoft's actions by saying "Fuck you, Microsoft", and thus violating the terms of service.

<comment><USER8> I agree with your analogy. I don't understand your last two sentences. I don't get how advocating users placing copies of the ToS in their accounts incites people to express their opinions with a "fuck you, MS."

<comment><USER7> I guess I fumbled the satirical point that I was trying to make.

Most folks don't read terms of service documents. But, putting this particular terms of service document on your SkyDrive and reading it would incite many people to express their opinion of the document using profanity. (It certainly had that effect on me ;) )

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The most disturbing thing here is that Microsoft are routinely looking at peoples private data to monitor it. Whether this takes the form of an automated program to flag things up, there's still going to be a human arbitrating the final decision.

That's just creepy.

<comment><USER10> Give it a few years and people will get used to it and come to accept it.

Just look at air travel. It took just a decade to get people to accept having their genitals touched by people in uniform before getting on airplanes.

There will be some very, very minor outrage initially, and then that will subside and people will obediently adapt. Some will even claim that it is your patriotic duty to accept it.

<comment><USER11> I don't think that's a good analogy though. People feel peer pressure to accept the humiliation of the TSA because it is for our "safety." When it comes to long term storage of our privates, I think there will be a different attitude.

<comment><USER10> No, people pretty much have exactly the same sort of attitude: "I have nothing to hide so this doesn't concern me". Just wait and see.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Welcome to the cloud.

If you work or play in space owned by someone else (Google, Microsoft, Amazon, whoever) then you have to realise that they can do almost anything they want. If this starts happening too regularly then consumers might start to rethink the benefits of cloud-based systems for running large parts of their lives.

<comment><USER13> Painting way too broad a brush stroke. Just because an idiotic corporation has no idea how to administer their cloud products doesn't mean they are all bad. I've been using dropbox for years and I've never heard of anyone anywhere having their account shut down for having a nude photo.

In fact, I know there's tons of pirated content on dropbox because when I add a pirated movie, 9 times out of 10 it get's synced immediately. That means that file exists there already and they can identify it via MD5 hash. They could have banned it based on some sort of blacklist, but they didn't.

Probably because they understand that if they did, they would piss their paying customers off. So why spend effort trying to do that?

<comment><USER14> Wasn't Dropbox involved in a pretty big privacy scandal a year or two ago when people found out they weren't encrypting their files properly or something?

<comment><USER15> I believe Dropbox create a hash for all users' files that point to a single file hosted on Dropbox, so Dropbox save the space that would have been occupied by the - according to them - redundant files. You could say that a Dropbox repo is like a list of references to non-redundant files hosted by Dropbox.

In finding any disagreeable content, I believe the implication was that Dropbox could map it the other way around from the infracting file to a list of users with the file's hash.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I don't think Microsoft know what they doing. All cloud storage providers need a policy similar to what Microsoft have. They cannot have pirated content, child porn etc on their servers.

This rule should be strictly enforced on public folders. On private folders Microsoft shouldn't even be looking. While you should not be allowed to store "bad" content, it shouldn't be enforced on private folders unless there is some from of legal request.

I don't understand why they think it should work any different. Skydrive should be a way to back up files. You cannot back up your files if someone is snooping on them or if your account is banned for accidentally including that risky photo of your wife in the back up folder...

But fine. Whatever. Microsoft want to make their service unusable. Why are they then banning the entire live account? Suspending people from XBOX live and prohibiting them from using app purchases? If they are suspending the account the account holder needs to be refunded. Why don't they just prohibit the account from using SkyDrive?

Microsoft have been getting better recently. On this though they seem to have completely lost the plot.

<comment> mike-cardwell I disagree. All cloud storage providers should have similar policies and should enforce them ruthlessly. Maybe then, people will take client side encryption seriously.

<comment><USER17> Does anyone know of any cloud storage with client side encryption that is convenient to use? I'm using Wuala, but would like to hear about alternatives.

<comment><USER18> SpiderOak (most similar to _drive, dropbox), Tarsnap (_ nix-only, have to compile it yourself), aes.io (browser-based, like box.com)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The problem here for me is not so much that MS found an image they didn't like and then over-reacted (which I rather think they did). It's that they have obviously written tooling specifically with the purpose of finding these things, and then shutting down accounts.

That they think it's OK to routinely look at these files, where I think most consumers would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, highlights to me an extremely scary though process.

<comment><USER14> Indeed. Remember when the tech blogs made a big deal about Google Drive's privacy policy because of the wording, and saying how Skydrive has a bit better wording? Well it seems in the end it was Microsoft that was using actual people to look at private files, while Google just wanted to scan them automatically using algorithms for different stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Most of those are, IMO, reasonable requests.

> _contains or could be considered 'junk mail', 'spam', 'chain letters', > 'pyramid schemes', 'affiliate marketing' or unsolicited commercial > advertisement._

The amount of spam I used to get that was "Send this to 5 other people or bad things will happen" was amazing, and it'd be a shame if they were banning people who were storing all their email.

> _depicts nudity of any sort including full or partial human nudity or nudity > in non-human forms such as cartoons, fantasy art or manga._

This is baffling. I can make a guess at what nude means - "a naked human, or a human with breasts or genitals on display." But I'm lost at partial human nudity. Is a man with shoes, socks, trousers, and an unbuttoned shirt clothed, or partially nude? What about if he takes his shirt off? What if he's a slob, or if he's like the guy in the diet coke ad? What if the image is a woman in a long t-shirt (with non-visible underwear).

I understand the need for wriggle-room with these types of rules, but they need to make this a bit clearer to avoid regular photos being banned.

<[http://gathering.tweakers.net/forum/list_messages/1502278/&#...](http://gathering.tweakers.net/forum/list_messages/1502278/>);

I don't understand why MS don't allow you to migrate your stuff out of their service. This guy appears to have lost a lot of stuff. He was a dedicated MS user - he even had a Win7 phone (now useless) - but he isn't anymore.

<comment><USER21> What is even more baffling is the bit just preceding that at the top of that section [1] that says:

 _You will not upload, post, transmit, transfer, distribute or facilitate distribution of any content (including text, images, sound, video, data, information or software) [...]_

 _Text_?! Well, that rules out backing up e-book collections there.

To be fair, I don't think Microsoft are that out of touch with reality that they truly believe nobody will use their Skydrive to back up their porn stash or, uh, erotic literature. I also doubt they will police content to that extent, and they're just doing a CYA with these over-broad terms and conditions.

As an aside: for some reason, this reminds me of a question I had to answer when filling out a UK visa application (paraphrasing) -- "Have you even been involved in any terrorist acts?"

[1] [http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows-live/code-of- cond...](http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows-live/code-of-conduct)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Guess I won't be using SkyDrive then. Not because I store naked pictures (I don't!), but because they shouldn't be looking at what I'm storing on the drive!

This is my _private_ data.

<comment><USER23> Then you should host it on _your_ private cloud.

PS: owncloud.org

<comment><USER24> Thanks for making me discover owncloud! The only sad thing is that it uses server-side encryption, which I don't trust even if I own the server :(

However, through the power and sheer awesomeness of open source, I might try to get my hands dirty at implementing client-side encryption sometime. The rest of the software looks perfect and I have a couple Linux boxes just begging to be used :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why should the cloud storage providers care what you store in your account, especially if it's all private? This sets a dangerous precedent. Imagine if Gmail didn't allow you to send "certain" images to someone else.

I think if they keep doing this, either Microsoft or any other cloud storage provider, it will be a huge drawback in trying to convince people to store their files in there instead of their own their own devices. This is something we'll all worried about before cloud storage services took off, and now that worry is turning into reality.

<comment><USER12> _Imagine if Gmail didn't allow you to send "certain" images to someone else._

From the Gmail policies (at [https://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en/program_policies.h...](https://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en/program_policies.html)) :

      users may not:
      Send, upload, distribute or disseminate or offer to do the same with respect to any unlawful, defamatory, harassing, abusive, fraudulent, infringing, obscene, or otherwise objectionable content

<comment><USER25> They have this policy in place but there is a difference between having a policy and actively enforcing it.

<comment><USER26> Not related to them wanting to do it / enforcing it, they might be required to have that in there for legal reasons.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is why I use clients that do client side encryption. The data is encrypted on your local machine; usually compressed and then sent off to the cloud. The key is stored on your machine and there is no easy way for them to see the data you have stored. I used to use Jungledisk but switched to SpiderOak because the Linux client is much better. There really isn't much of a drawback other than you must never forget your password :) if you do you are pretty much out of luck.

<comment><USER28> I liked spideroak, but the client was exteemely slow on a core2dou mac with backup datasets larger than 50gig.

<comment><USER27> I've no idea about the performance on mac, however if you haven't tried it out in the past couple of months they have really done some great updates to the clients. As far as slow with large datasets I have about 400GB (compressed down to ~300) that I am backing up, with regular additions on a daily basis. Some releases have been pretty sucky, but it keeps getting better, I would highly recommend them to anyone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> From the Terms of Service:

"incites, _advocates,_ or expresses pornography, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity, hatred, bigotry, racism, or gratuitous violence. "

Wow, not only is it impermissible to upload pornography but apparently it is impermissible to talk about it too.... Nor can one _express_ hatred of an ex or even say that there are times when hating another person or even an idea is beneficial!

Way to go Microsoft!

I _HATE_ Neo-Nazis! Good thing I am not posting a document that says _that_ to Skydrive!

</comment><comment><USER29> Hmm, curious. The first guy that contacted Microsoft was told what the problem was, and given an opportunity to fix the problem.

This next guy doesn't seem to have been given an opportunity to fix the problem.

Perhaps just an untrained employee, or lack of a proper procedure in place by Microsoft.

Regardless, the fallout from this is likely to be quite large, as the entire reason for putting your data in the "cloud" is that you trust that you'll be able to access it.

<comment><USER20> > _[...] the entire reason for putting your data in the "cloud" is that you > trust that you'll be able to access it._

I agree that many people think this. But I cannot understand why they think it. I hear people talk about "cloud backups", when the only copy they have of a file is the one in the cloud.

<comment><USER30> Access doesn't mean backup. If I have a document in Google Docs only, I can access that from anywhere with an internet connection. If I'm talking about a cloud backup, I mean e.g. Dropbox where I have more than one copy.

<comment><USER20> But even then, I can't understand why people think that SERVICE X is always on.

Obviously there's a few people who know the up times and down times and make an informed choice.

But many people just assume that it will always work, and who will suffer when that service is not available.

Maybe my early experience of batch processing and unreliable utility supplies and a few experiences of dropped services has taught me, and that other people are living in a world with remarkably good up times and thus don't get the chance to learn that three nines is not six nines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wow, this is insane. Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot here. Guidelines like this are a dealkiller for just about everyone. Even people who have no intention of putting questionable content on their drive will recoil on the mere idea that Microsoft is monitoring their private files.

Big F up, but what's new with MS these days.

</comment><comment><USER31> This made me go check the terms and conditions for DropBox, and they're much better. The closest they come is saying you may not "publish or share materials that are unlawfully pornographic or indecent, or that advocate bigotry, religious, racial or ethnic hatred". That's a whole lot different to Microsoft's banning of any kind of porn, lawful or otherwise, even when it's not published or shared.

<comment><USER32> The latter clause is awfully broad and subjective. If someone put in their Dropbox account pictures of say, artifacts of the Nazi regime, would that be violating the rules? It's not at all clear that that would be advocating bigotry, religious, racial or ethnic hatred on the part of the user themselves, but it clearly was related to historical political movements which did so.

<comment><USER31> The key is the verb "publish". Putting it in your Dropbox account != publishing it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> So, technically and appearantly practically, you cant privately store a picture of yourself being born.

Seriously, when did it suddenly become okay for companies to police our culture?

Imagine cars breaking down because you used it to drive to known bad neigbourhood?

Imagine dinner plates that break down because you out meat on them?

Imagine fruit juice that evaporates if you mix it with alcohol?

Why is Microsoft targetting the amish people? It does not make economic sense.

</comment><comment><USER34> One obvious way to handle this on private folders is client side encryption. Companies need to be protected, and users need privacy. This seems win-win. If an agency need to look in private folder, they must go through user - and that would at least have legal recourse.

<comment><USER35> There is, actually, a loss to the provider. Every person's version of pirated movie X will be unique, which means the provider has to pay for more storage space than they would without encryption. (since without encryption they could compute a hash of the file and point to it on their servers)

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I think there is a problem with these accounts that encapsulate a lot of different services that need to be addressed.

I had my Youtube account suspended and that subsequently banned me from my Gmail, Docs etc. You feel vulnerable.

Maybe some kind of policy that forced the provider to at least block you only for a specific service ?

</comment><comment><USER37> When it comes to Microsoft, I always wonder whether it's just incompetence or a very clever attempt to discredit the whole cloud idea that threatens their cash cows (that are based on the rather outdated concept of local software and data).

BTW, this is the creepiest "GMail Man" variant ever.

<comment><USER38> This is unlikely, since Microsoft has put a lot of money and marketing behind their own cloud offering, Azure. It also is inconsistent with everything that they are trying to do with Office360.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> The really interesting angle to this is that (apparently) Windows 8 and the next version of office are going to _default_ to storing a lot of stuff in Skydrive. So unless you actively try to store stuff locally it is going up to the cloud. It will be very interesting to watch what happens as a tidal wave of (intended to be) private porn hits Skydrive and consumers get their accounts banned en masse.

Like others, I think MS is in a dead end street here. There is stuff that they just can't allow - harboring child porn is illegal regardless of whether you're storing it for someone else, etc. But if they don't default content into Skydrive then hardly anybody will use it and people will keep assuming Google Docs and other cloud services are just "better" for collaboration. The only way out is client side encryption, but that disables many server side functions (eg: search) and gets god-awful complex for sharing between parties.

</comment><comment><USER40> This is why I prefer services to be with different providers. Having storage with dropbox, mail with gmail, phone with Apple etc. etc. means one service dying won't kill your entire online persona. While if you use G-drive, gmail, android phone, Google everything like they want you're basically screwed if you violate the TOS of any service.

<comment><USER41> This is especially bad when you lose money. As stated in the article, he lost apps that he had bought and paid for! This is a very gray area, and the fact that a software company can put arbitrary rules for one of its services that affect your assets in another domain, assets you paid for, is possible illegal.

Think about what happened if you went to Wal-Mart and purchased clothes and other items there. Then, two years later, you cause an incident at Wal-Mart and you are banned from their store. Does that give Wal-Mart the right to come to your house and burn everything you previously bought at their store???

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Reminds me of the people who lose access to Gmail, because they violate some completely arbitrary rule on Google+.

I can't believe companies do so much to deter people from their cloud services. That'd be like Apple shutting down the iTunes and iCloud of a developer, who hacked around in iOS. I hope that has yet to happen.

</comment><comment><USER28> Windows Phone got a feature to auto upload all the photos you take on the phone to skydrive, I would imagine a lot of people would run foul of these rules...

</comment><comment><USER42> I read the Dutch thread on Tweakers.net related to the suspesion of WingsOfFury. This was done because of a favorites folder which contained links to inappropriate material. So, in effect, making a backup of your links can lead to a blockage/suspension?!?!?!

</comment><comment> iso-8859-1 Is nudity allowed on other platforms? Dropbox? Google Drive?

<comment><USER43> Google uses one generic TOS, I haven't found an Acceptable Use Policy, the TOS doesn't seem to mention it.:

<https://www.google.com/intl/en_US/policies/terms/>

EDIT: Found it. [https://support.google.com/drive/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ans...](https://support.google.com/drive/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=148505&topic=2463295&ctx=topic)

 _"Don't publish sexually explicit images or videos, such as those with nudity or graphic sex acts. Writing about adult topics is permitted as long as they aren't accompanied by sexually explicit images or videos, or any material that promotes or depicts unlawful or inappropriate sexual acts with children or animals. Additionally, we don't allow content that drives traffic to commercial pornography."_

\</comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

Dropbox TOS don't seem to specifically mention it, they're Acceptable Use Policy notes that "unlawfully pornographic" and "indecent" material is not allowed:

<https://www.dropbox.com/terms>

<https://www.dropbox.com/acceptable_use>

 _"You agree not to misuse the Dropbox services. For example, you must not, and must not attempt to, use the services to do the following things....publish or share materials that are unlawfully pornographic or indecent, or that advocate bigotry, religious, racial or ethnic hatred;"_

<comment><USER12> Google drive also includes a link to their Program Policies: [https://support.google.com/drive/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ans...](https://support.google.com/drive/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=148505)

This prohibits publishing "Violence", "Hate speech" and "Sexually explicit material", amongst other things. I'd guess it was written with more public publishing in mind, so it's not clear whether it's intended to include purely personal content on Google Drive.

<comment><USER43> I actually edited that in a few minutes ago.

And I was thinking the same thing as I read it, when they say "publish" do they mean make publicly available or store?

I also wonder if the Dropbox AUP just adds "indecent" to the "unlawfully pornographic" statement, or means that they prohibit all indecent exposure.

And that word "publish" shows up again.

<comment><USER44> My guess is that publish must refer to making something public. That is the only sensible explanation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I'm not surprised at all. If I recall correctly, there was a link posted a while back about someone breaking some condition in the Google TOS, and thus being locked out of their Google Account, and therefore all their email, documents, and so on.

And that's why I'm trying to make sure I don't become too dependent on any one "cloud" ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER46> > depicts nudity of any sort including full or partial human nudity or nudity > in non-human forms such as cartoons, fantasy art or manga.

What about pictures of your kids? Anyone who has kids has the ubiquitous first bath, bathtub hijinks pictures of small children.

Where does this cross the line into child pr0n? What if you catch a "private" part by accident in the frame?

These are _not_ for public consumption but may appear on private cloud storage due to backups, etc.

This is a large issue as more and more companies are backing your stuff up in the cloud. You as a consumer may not even realize where your _private_ content is going.

</comment><comment><USER47> Since SkyDrive no longer has a restricted list of filetypes allowed for upload. How hard would it be to only upload encrypted files?

A neat solution would be a client side utility that encrypts local files (or entire folders/tarballs) with gpg, generates checksums, splits them into 2048KB or 1024KB chunks and uploads those to SkyDrive. The downside is that there would have to be some sort of management/database locally (and on every machine you wanted to download the files to) that would keep track of which chunks make up which file and rebuilds everything when you download them.

</comment><comment><USER48> One of the reasons you should use personal cloud offerings like Tonido (<http://www.tonido.com>) instead of public online cloud services.

Disclaimer: I work for Tonido.

</comment><comment><USER49> Hmm... I don't fully understand following sentence from Microsoft Services Agreement ( [http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-live/microsoft- se...](http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-live/microsoft-service- agreement) ):

> We also don't control, verify, or endorse the content that you and others > make available on the service.

Isn't scanning my private content for nudity a verifying? Or what does it mean in this context.

</comment><comment><USER50> I've actually had this happen to me a few months ago; I tried to sign in and my account was locked due to some private pictures I had stored. I decided to just wait out the the "grace period" they gave me. When I checked back a few weeks later, my account was left unchanged. I hadn't even contacted support, so I'm curious as to why my situation was any different. As far as I can tell, all charges were dropped.

</comment><comment><USER51> It's things like that why I believe that cloud computing and Web 2.0 are a bad idea.

Data and processing power should belong to the user and not corporations.

</comment><comment><USER52> This is what happens when you rely on the "cloud" for private data.

Private data is at home, or in backups stored in the bank, not at someone else network.

</comment><comment><USER53> This makes me so angry, and I should know better.

Sorry, why are people falling for the cloud? The whole thing is absurd. We had all our data nice and safe, we could make it accessible across the net, and it was complete in our control. Then some one came up with a new trendy way of ruining all that. Now, for some reason I am yet to understand, we give control of our data, data being the most precious thing in IT since you cant go out and buy a replacement, to bible bashing, moralistic, judgemental, board meetings in big corporations.

HELLO?????????

This is the biggest kings new clothes situation since Satan knows when.

Guys, you know how this works. Stop marching in towards the edge of the cliff. Its is no use bleating on and on about privacy etc, when almost every one is buying in the the cloud regime. When the hell did these companies ever respect your privacy and right to your own morality. You know they don't. Yet ever single time this sort of issues crops up there is almost utter surprise. Its like watching a woman being beaten up for the 100th time by her psycho husband.

Please, the king has no clothes. None. Secure you own data your way.

Thanks for the rant space.

</comment><comment><USER54> From the list of prohibitions: "...is illegal or violates _any_ applicable local and national laws"

So a photo of any woman not wearing a burkha, if placed in my private SkyDrive folder, can result in the loss of my Hotmail and Xbox Live accounts.

Wow. What kind of idiot would do business with these people?!

</comment><comment><USER11> You mean the Cloud is not the panacea for online life that everyone acts like it is? You mean there's a reason you may not want to ditch having your own storage hardware in favor of "all cloud all the time." huh.

Seriously, why would anyone use this service. No profanity?

<comment><USER55> _why would anyone use this service_

Because we can stick truecrypt containers in it? Not that I use it personally, I prefer Tarsnap.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> Trusting Microsoft with cloud storage is akin to using Hotmail for email. It's unthinkable for anyone with technical knowledge, but often the only option that non-techies are aware of. The best we can do is educate others to use something sensible.

<comment><USER57> "It's unthinkable for anyone with technical knowledge"

Email is email... Don't let your hatred for companies run your life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Ideally, client side encryption might be a good solution for this. From what I've seen, there isn't a public API to work with skydive. Even some open- source efforts are mostly outdated by now. Maybe that could be something worth looking?

</comment><comment><USER59> Damn, I've been using SkyDrive to store OneNote notebooks for easy sharing and editing. Never thought they actually check private folders - yet another reason to never store any sensitive or important information in the cloud...

</comment><comment> at-fates-hands I've been using the a Windows 7 phone and Skydrive is part of the deal. I haven't uploaded a lot of photos, but to find out they're going through my stuff makes me feel pretty uneasy.

Glad I'm going back to my Android based phone this weekend.

</comment><comment><USER60> The OP is "wmpowerusers.com" (Windoze Mobile Power Users) yet the site doesn't even scale to my mobile device?

Someone needs to clue in on "viewport" either in meta or CSS.

That said, I don't see this as a newsworthy item. It's more of a crybaby thing.

</comment><comment><USER61> The only cloud based personal data storage company I trust, use and recommend to my friends is SpiderOak: Easy to use client, gobs of storage and it's absolutely impossible for them to see your data.

</comment><comment><USER62> I guess I'm in the minority to side with Microsoft on this one. Look, the guy uploaded nudes, maybe it was even porn. He violated the rules. This isn't censorship, it's not creepy, it's the rules.

<comment><USER53> "Maybe".

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> The problem is here is that they are peeking into private folders. So if their algorithm gets 'positive' my private folder will get scanned by some employee. That is just creepy - really creepy.

</comment><comment><USER64> I really like the practicality of my G-Drive, but these things scare me. What do you recommend for permanent online access and backup of your data? Do you encrypt your private photos etc?

<comment> iso-8859-1 We've been over this so many times... Backup != Dropbox and the like.

 _Ask HN: What's your favorite online-backup tool?_ : <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1946416>

See this thread from a week ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4224518>

In short:

 _If you are a hacker or care about security and have money_ : SpiderOak or Tarsnap

 _Source code_ : Git

 _If you are poor and care about security_ : Dropbox with TrueCrypt (be careful that you don't mount simultaneously)

 _None of the above and lazy_ : Dropbox vanilla (better terms, non-evil non- giant company)

<comment><USER65> "Dropbox with TrueCrypt (be careful that you don't mount simultaneously)"

What scenario do you refer to? Why would it be bad to run a non-paused Dropbox client and mount a TrueCrypt volume inside it at the same time?

<comment><USER66> I'm starting to suspect that the people who keep recommending TrueCrypt for day-to-day usage on Dropbox fall into the camp of "Do as I say, not as I do." Because if they are actually using TC the way they suggest, they might as well use FTP.

First, I created a small 64 MB TrueCrypt partition. I then mounted the partition in TC. I noticed immediately that the tc file has an exclusive lock, so any changes in your TC partition will never be synced until the partition is unmounted! If your use case is to mount your partition immediately upon login, work for the day, and then shutdown, Dropbox will never have an opportunity to sync your partition.

My next test was to mount the TC partition simultaneously (Desktop and Laptop). Then I run into conflicts, as another posted mentioned. Because of the exclusive file lock, if you mount simultaneously on two machines, you will start getting duplicate -conflict files when unmounting either of the partitions, since the other is still locked. It's not immediately clear from examination which TC partition is actually the most recent one. And may Gods have mercy on you if at any time you edit both partitions before they sync.

Even if you're willing to live with these annoyances, there is now the trade- off of which partition size to create. Too large of a partition and syncing can take a long time, even if you make minimal file changes (because of chaining, there is not a 1 bit -> 1 bit change in TC partitions). Too small of a partition, and you'll have to keep resizing it or creating new ones. What a hassle.

The only use case which seems to work well for me, is for minimally modified files, like for annual tax returns. Here, a TrueCrypt container makes sense and works quite well because the partition is basically read-only and unlikely to be simultaneously or even regularly mounted.

So for those people who keep suggesting TrueCrypt, I'm curious, do you actually use it, and if so, how? The suggestions for file-level encryption (encfs) appear to be much more sane.

<comment><USER65> Thank you for the detailed review!

Indeed, it seems like one of those problems where solutions seem obvious (use TrueCrypt!) until you experiment or think about it more deeply.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> I recall google doing something like that after introducing G+.

</comment><comment><USER8> So why aren't you encrypting everything you stick in The Cloud?

</comment><comment><USER57> TL:DR Everything you put on the internet is transparent. If you want something private, encrypt or keep it to yourself.

</comment><comment><USER68> Swiss banks should start offering cloud storage. 'Cause then we'd be somewhat sure that they are not peeking inside...

</comment><comment><USER69> Losing your Microsoft life is more of a selling point for skydrive, no?

</comment><comment><USER70> What about encrypted content? Is that disallowed too?

</comment><comment><USER71> "Partial nudity" - what the fuck is this, the 1950s?

</comment><comment><USER72> no response from Microsoft on that? They should at least email them and ask them if that's what they intended to happen with the service.</comment>


Eavesdropping on geeks: 'Star Trek: Discovery' vs. 'The Orville' - <AUTHOR> http://www.pigdog.org/auto/professionals/shortfeature/3156.html <comment><USER2> I agree that Discovery (and maybe it's fans) takes itself way too seriously. After watching it I posted on reddit expressing a general dissatisfaction and wondering who the target audience is, I was instantly and repeatedly berated. Maybe they know their show is weak or maybe they're just assholes. Either way, Orville seems the better choice.

<comment><USER3> People holding a different opinion than you aren't automatically assholes. Maybe they think their show isn't weak, did you even consider that outrageous option for a moment?

<comment><USER2> I did. Did you consider THAT outrageous option for a moment? Having a different opinion is no excuse to repeatedly berate a person.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow. First time I ever heard of _anyone_ liking the STD Klingons. To me they just look deformed, not to mention that they're dressed up like a Mardi Gras krewe.

<comment><USER5> I still think that the Klingons just got plastic surgery after they accidentally turned themselves into human looking peoples in Enterprise.

<comment><USER6> Not to be "that nerd" but it wasn't an accident. The writers actually performed a fairly elegant retconning to explain the difference in appearance between the Klingons as they appeared in multiple series.

<comment><USER5> It was an unintended side effect of attempting to use gene augmentation developed for humans, causing a mutation and disease to spread. They developed a cure with help from the crew of the enterprise/phlox but that cure didn't immediately fix the mutations, it took generations.

That's why I called it an accident.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have no idea what that site is, or who those people are, but I agree with them. I also have to say that I'm in for anything Braga cares to bring; he's a real talent, a true Trek fan, and a genuinely decent guy. Some of the best TNG eps were written by him.

<comment><USER8> Thats a really limited view to take. Braga when he had limits was a great talent. He did write some really great episodes, but he also gave us some of the worst trek in the history of the franchise.

<comment><USER7> Any examples of "worst trek in history..." ?

<comment><USER2> Not jumping into the "worst trek" topic but he did write Mission Impossible 2

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I should really check out The Orville I guess. I really enjoyed the brief existence of Other Space on the equally brief Yahoo Screen. That show had so much promise.

</comment><comment><USER5> > It leaves the impression that McFarlane is a genuine Star Trek fan and The > Orville is more an homage than a ripoff

If you didn't realize that you must have done exactly zero research. Notice how he's had the entire cast of TNG on family and has been working with Patrick Stewart for years? Notice the huge numbers of star trek and other sci- fi references spread through family guy?

<comment><USER10> He also was behind the new Cosmos series. Regardless of whether you liked the remake, you have to admit he's is a genuine fan of all things sci-fi and space related.</comment></comment>