How MicroPublishing Is Killing The Nuances of Knowledge - <AUTHOR> http://coconutheadsets.com/2009/05/03/how-micropublishing-is-killing-the-nuances-of-knowledge/

<comment><USER2> This is all typical technology-is-killing-society-and-making-you-stupider bombastic drivel. When the mail system was instituted in the US a part of the population claimed it would be the end of modern society. That it would eliminate face to face interaction and increase indecency as a delivery method for porn (it did do the latter). Same with the telephone. But here we are, Twitter isn't going to destroy society, make us stupider or less passionate. It's just another way of receiving information. In 140 characters.

<comment><USER3> I think it has more to do with SXSW Interactive, which is what inspired his post. 80% of SXSW is a bunch of people who want to get rich or famous on the web paying hundreds of dollars for the chance to sit googly-eyed in the same room as a few people who _have_ become rich or famous on the web, or who at least worked at a company that made somebody _else_ rich or famous. It's inherently boring. The fact that it's nominally about technology can't rescue it.

I managed to see a couple of interesting panel meetings -- yes, exactly two -- when I attended in 2008. They were quite good, and since I got a combined Interactive/Film pass I didn't feel like I got ripped off. (I did feel like I was living beyond my means -- hence my non-return this year.) But I spent most of the panel meetings googling the panelists trying to find something interesting to read about their work, while they answered questions from adoring fans (and from each other) by saying, "Well, what you _really_ have to do, which I really learned the hard way at MyFamousWebSite.com, is give the customers what they want." "Yes, that's right Jim, especially when they don't know what they want." "<appreciative chuckle>." This drivel at panel meetings with awfully interesting and high-concept titles. I'm not surprised SXSW Interactive inspired some reflection about the trivialization of human knowledge.

Half the panelists were just promoters or PR hacks representing a company. They may have been the original founding CEOs yadda yadda yadda but they were acting as PR hacks, present solely to project the right image for their company and convert their minor fame into web traffic. _Some_ panelists who were there flogging their companies recognized that they had an obligation to the people who paid to see them, and actually said interesting things and tried to answer interesting questions. That's actually an effective way of promoting a company, if anybody's wondering. I don't care _what_ a guy talks about -- his new product or alpaca cheese -- I'm going to check out his company and their products if and only if he gives me something worth thinking about. Partly that's because I want to reward him for being a good speaker, but partly it's a natural mechanism: anything substantial enough that it can't be completely digested on the spot will pop up later for further mulling over, which is a logical occasion for finding out more about the speaker and his company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> People actually have serious conversations on Twitter?

I just chat with friends and look for links.

<comment><USER5> I don't even use it at all

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Worrying about declining:

:: IQs :: Attention spans :: Standards of teaching :: "Nuances of Knowledge"

is a pre-occupation soley of educated middle classers.

Other people are busy doing what they always did,(inanely communicating) just via any new method.

As an guideline to the mean, here in the UK hairdressers and taxi drivers are regarded as the benchmark "Man on the Street"[1].

How many Hairdressers and Cabbies Tweet??

Then ask yourself if they _all_ tweeted, would that materially effect how "Nuanced their Knowledge" was?

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

[1] <http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=9053>

</comment><comment><USER7> I like the analogy made here between errors/unpredictability caused by numerical rounding, and 'rounding' thoughts down to 140 characters.

</comment><comment><USER8> 10 points for using the term "availability cascade".

However, I wouldn't be too worried about Twitter. I do not see it having the significance to the nature of conversation that the author presumes. It's just another option, of easy to use but short format broadcast messaging, and I am sure that people will adjust their expectations in the fullness of time. It's really early days yet.

</comment><comment><USER9> Twitter is no better or worse than say.. firing off a quick email to someone. Or a short telephone call.

Or any other means of quick, social communication.</comment>


An Open Letter to Students on the Danger of Seeing School as a Trial to Survive - <AUTHOR> http://calnewport.com/blog/2010/08/27/an-open-letter-to-students-on-the-danger-of-seeing-school-as-a-trial-to-survive/ <comment><USER2> As a student at Northwestern, I 100% agree with this. Students around here are always complaining about the vast amount of things they have to do, midterms, papers, student group meetings, greek events, school events, when most of these things can be easily cut back if they make the choice to.

Do less. Do Better. Know more!</comment>


Curing Health Care: Remove Tax Subsidies for Employer Provided Healthcare Plans - <AUTHOR> http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/7298

<comment><AUTHOR> OK I know that many on this forum have a distaste for Milton Friedman, but this is a really interesting article in light of the discussion carried on from here:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2247560>

The reason I like this argument is nobody is talking about this as a solution, and a lot of people disagree with it-- that probably means it's worth looking at.</comment>


Bitcoin Miner for Websites - <AUTHOR> http://www.bitcoinplus.com/miner/embeddable

<comment><USER2> This was around 2.5 years ago and even then it was impractical as people were mining with GPUs which pushed the difficulty up too much. Now we have had ASIC devices for most of this year and the difficulty has gone up an insane amount, so the practicality of using this is even less.

It is important to note that the JS method on that website will use CPU only, so it will be a) noticeable (especially on laptops and mobile devices) b) several orders of magnitude too slow c) not worth the 2 minutes to implement</comment>


Ask News.YC: Recommendations for landing page optimization software - <AUTHOR>

Is anyone here using software for A/B or multivariate testing?   Or software for dynamic landing page optimization? <comment><USER2> We do, but it's all in house. Sometimes it reveals very interesting data, often it reveals nothing at all. Don't expect big gains with no work.

</comment><comment><USER3> Unless you're a strict black hat seo...

don't.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why? I'm talking about measuring the effectiveness of a different web pages on a site to see which leads to a better conversion rate.</comment></comment>


Sony Got Hacked Hard: What We Know and Don't Know So Far - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sony-hack-what-we-know/ <comment><USER3> Many people suggest that startups not over-optimize on issues like security and performance when it's not their core business.

The same could be said of Sony: empathize a little with them. Sony Pictures pays a lot of creative people. Maybe they should have seen the hack coming, but like the PSN outage this story will be maybe a paragraph in a Wikipedia article years from now. Even one great film could be watched by people a century from now, and I respect that their priorities are around figuring out economically viable filmmaking, not I.T.

The film industry regards Sony Pictures as the major studio that still takes risks on edgy comedies and dramas. They are known to respect directors more than the other majors.

Gawker will surface their ridiculous PowerPoints which truthfully exist everywhere. Or journalists will scandalize the executive pay and severances, nevermind that Nick Denton's and Anna Wintour's paychecks and perks are probably far more offensive.

But I don't mean to engage in whataboutism. In fact I mean the opposite: Just because some tech companies care a lot about security doesn't mean everyone should.

<comment><USER4> Sony Pictures has an operating income (revenue minus expenses) of $501 million per year. They can afford to pay creatives, but they can't afford to pay for a few more security engineers?

Look, I get the creative field costs a lot of money. But Sony Pictures was paying $454,224,070 [http://fusion.net/story/30850/](http://fusion.net/story/30850/) in total salaries as of May.

Even hiring 5 more security engineers would have gone a long way. That's $1 million if we assume a $200k salary for good security engineers. A drop in the bucket for Sony Pictures.

I personally could do a lot with 5 security engineers.

<comment><USER5> you are talking about human problems. people clicking links. people typing their passwords into foreign web forms.

software engineers wont magically fix executives handing over credentials to hackers.

if you were designing a network and interface to access your files, maybe you could design it without resorting to passwords, but that wasn't practical in sonys case.

maybe they could have designed their network to notice the data leaving, but again, the hackers could always find a way to win. (physical infiltration of the company and a verizon hotspot?)

<comment><USER6> > software engineers wont magically fix executives handing over credentials to > hackers

and all those important files were just lying around

You can't _project_ a film without a _dedicated digital link_ to Sony's servers in London authorising it. For some movies they send personnel to _your_ cinema to record the audience with IR cameras. For some movies you are _not allowed_ to let the staff watch the film for free.

<comment><USER7> How much of that is really security vs. excercising power and control over a market?

<comment><USER6> If they can find the money and staff to implement securing third party cinemas to prevent copyright infringement by members of the public, perhaps they should spend a few dollars to secure their own premises.

<comment><USER7> People in cinemas with cameras are physically detectable.

Network attacks on infrastructure and/or exfiltration by rogue (or rouge) elements within your own workforce are vastly more difficult to detect. Not impossible, but they involve both violations of trust and allegiance, and plausible cover under other activities.

Though, once you're aware of / suspect such exfiltration, there are generally a limited number of places to look for suspects / points of access.

<comment><USER6> I should have made more of the fact that to screen the movie on your own projector you have to have a dedicated ISDN line to Sony in London which authenticates your machine with an online DRM system.

You also have to give them a share of your ticket sales, provide sales figures and you cannot offer discounted tickets for concessions or special offers.

<comment><USER7> I understand.

Much of that is effectively exercising control over the market venue though. The studio gets to specify which facilities do or don't meet the standards required to show their content. To that extent, the technical restrictions are less about keeping the content from being pirated (there are plenty of other leak channels, typically pre-release review copies, which have their own copy controls, yes), and far more about keeping cinemas beholden to the studio vassal lords.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> An article on _The Hollywood Reporter_ has some more information on this, including perspectives from sources elsewhere within the industry: [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sony-hack-studio- secur...](http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sony-hack-studio-security- points-753509)

 _" It's changing our business," says one producer of its impact on Hollywood. "From now on, money and time will be allocated by studios to deal with this full-time."_

...as it should have been already, given how big and how valuable a target these companies are.

<comment><USER9> > _" It's changing our business," says one producer of its impact on > Hollywood. "From now on, money and time will be allocated by studios to deal > with this full-time."_

Shame that most of Sony's Finance and HR are blaming the IT department - <USER2> bloody typical!

 _" Everyone's looking to the IT department to say, 'How did you let this happen?'" said one employee in Sony Pictures' finance department."_ [http://fusion.net/story/31116/inside-sony-pictures- employees...](http://fusion.net/story/31116/inside-sony-pictures-employees- are-panicking-about-their-hacked-personal-data/)

<comment><USER10> I work in an IT department. Pretty sure IT Security would be the responsibility of somebody here.

<comment><USER11> I worked in an IT department for a communications company that worked with AT&T where, at least once a month, I would find a different way to suggest to a different team lead to check out EMET in case we ever got targeted.

It got ignored.

If they ever get hacked, I won't be surprised.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Even though I am a massive supporter and advocate of whistle-blowing and leaking (in the public interest), the state of a lot of the journalism around this is appalling - esp the Gawker article. (Though the Wired one is pretty responsible in fairness.)

Unless Sony has shown to be doing something malicious (which I don't think it has - other than some horrific Adam Sandler movies recently), then the angle of mining the data just to create click-bait headlines is particularly infuriating.

Yes, it is right to report such a large cyber intrusion in the public interest, especially if people's data has been taken (and Sony already had this problem occur before - so it is worth pointing out that they had a chance to tighten up security) but trawling through the internal data of an innocent private company and exposing it online, just to gossip, is particularly poor journalism. Having worked with a lot of media, you can be sure they rightly wouldn't be too happy if people did that to them - just for kicks.

<comment><USER13> During/after the recent leak of celebrities' private photos, the condemnation was swift and serious. People can see how that directly applies to their own life, they wouldn't want their photos out there like that.

But when it's a company -- it's apparently OK to just look through all their shit. It's already publicly available anyway, so what's the big deal?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Opening an article these days with:

> Who knew that Sony's top brass, a line-up of mostly white male executives, > earn $1 million and more a year?

is just take advantage of a difficult moment and increase the `hate`.

I don't get why this could happen on magazine like Wired...

Reading comments on the article seems that statement is pretty unfair.

I didn't check myself because I think reading those informations is bad as the hack itself, however the author who did that can also feel free to judge others.

<comment><USER15> Oh, no! Pointing out that a corporate power structure is overwhelming white and male is so unfair to those that are white and male.

I used to be this author's editor and that lede is very Wired.

Sad to see this "tone policing" comment is the top-voted comment on this thread.

<comment><USER16> I definitely think that it's useful to point out the over-representation of white and male voices in powerful positions (which seems particularly relevant in big media corporations, since it's such a cultural driver), but in this case it's kind of stuck in there without any follow-up or relevant thesis.

But, yeah, it's definitely silly that the top comment is just complaining about that sentence.

<comment><USER17> Yes, because privileged white guys, right? Would you feel the same if it was a minority instead? Would it even be noteworthy? Could we even have this conversation if it was a cabal of religiously exclusive peoples? That's right, only white guys are privileged, not minorities who have actual legislative privileges. One is evil, the other is supposed to be socially rewarding, but guess what, many see it for what it is; inconsistent dogma for the over- socialized.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "Or that the company spent half a million this year in severance costs to terminate employees?"

That's not much. Is Wired trying to make me think that is a lot? Or are they trying to play it against the salary figures? Considering they spent valuable words in the first sentence to make it clear that the top brass is "mostly" white males I get the impression the comparison was supposed to mean something.

<comment><USER19> Actually the "mostly white males" comment struck me as an interesting side note. Sony is a Japanese company, so for it to be run by "mostly white males" is something that seems noteworthy in itself. Though I doubt that's what they were going for when they wrote that.

<comment><USER20> Not Sony but Sony Pictures Entertainment which is an american subsidiary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Not knowing anything about it did not stop every damn "news" channel from saying "oh North Korea did it" then added at the end "but there is no proof".

How can "news" call themselves news if all they do is speculate. Granted it wouldn't be entertaining if all they said was "Sony got hacked and we don't have any details" but that is why news is called news.

<comment><USER22> WSJ has some reasons to suspect North Korea:

[http://online.wsj.com/articles/more-signs-north-korea-may- be...](http://online.wsj.com/articles/more-signs-north-korea-may-be-behind- hacking-of-sony-pictures-1417467267)

But I think most of the media pretty much just reads the news, press releases, and their social media feeds to write their articles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The North Korean theory seems silly. In fact, it's exactly what I might say publicly if I were Sony and I wanted to try and turn lemons (being hacked) into lemonade (free buzz about an upcoming movie). _The movie Kim Jong-un doesn 't want you to see!_

In the end, I doubt there was any hacking involved at all: a disgruntled employee leaked documents. Perhaps Sony forgot to disable someone's password after giving them the axe.

<comment><USER24> If they did it on purpose it's even sillier. They may think that it would be cool to say they "got hacked by a state" especially if it's related to an upcoming movie about it, but to me it seems like amateur hour at Sony if they got hacked by _North Korea_ , a country not exactly known for its advanced technology and high computer usage.

<comment><USER25> North Korea as a country might be behind the technological curve, but several reports indicate the the North Korean Army cyber warfare division is pretty well funded and advanced. There is a huge divide between the day to day realities of the average NK citizen and the realities of the upper echelons.

<comment><USER26> Who makes up the cyber-warfare division? If I traveled in time back to 1850 with a billion dollars worth of gold bullion, I couldn't hire a single black hat with it. So a few kids of the party elite get to go to nice schools abroad - where are the rest coming from?

Or does DPRK have a shit-hot education system in spite of literally other thing about the country being godawful and totally backwards? If so it's the first I've heard that.

<comment><USER27> Apparently North Korea has fairly substantial IT (and animation) outsourcing businesses: this paywalled A¢M article [http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2012/8/153816-inside-the- hermi...](http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2012/8/153816-inside-the-hermit- kingdom/fulltext) claims 10,000 workers in IT outsourcing. The great majority of the population may be living as peasants, but that's not the case universally.

<comment><USER25> Just found a link to the other article I read on the subject. [http://h30499.www3.hp.com/hpeb/attachments/hpeb/off-by-on- so...](http://h30499.www3.hp.com/hpeb/attachments/hpeb/off-by-on-software- security-blog/388/2/HPSR%20SecurityBriefing_Episode16_NorthKorea.pdf)

It focuses more on cyber warfare, but does cover quite a bit about CS education in North Korea.

<comment><USER27> Very interesting, thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Anecdotally, I knew some guys who worked at (or with?) the global security division at Sony US HQ.

The story went that each of the Sony subsidiaries[1] had their own security division that was largely autonomous for reasons of politics and budget, of course. Each part of the company had different vendors, different policies and procedures, and different philosophies on how security should be implemented.

When they would all send their representatives to have a global security pow wow, however often it happened, it ended up like an episode of game of thrones.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corporation_shareholders_a...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corporation_shareholders_and_subsidiaries)

<comment><USER29> > The story went that each of the Sony subsidiaries[1] had their own security > division that was largely autonomous for reasons of politics and budget, of > course. Each part of the company had different vendors, different policies > and procedures, and different philosophies on how security should be > implemented.

And they could centralize all of that and ... it still wouldn't solve the problem. You'd have a single point of failure that might still leave them with their pants down at the end of the day.

Some days, you just can't win. You can have the smartest people (they probably didn't), the best hardware and software (ditto) and you're still gonna get punched in the junk.

<comment><USER28> Absolutely. I think it is a very difficult problem to solve as companies grow larger and larger and rise to behemoth proportions all while trying to tackle something that is relatively new (the security concerns of today, as opposed to say the 80's,90's,2000's when Sony didn't have to be as competitive in the products that they offered) and typically expensive (for a company Sony's size) where funding for these things seem to be viewed in terms of $ now, instead of potential $ later.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Re/code is claiming that Sony will officially name North Korea as the source of the attack:

[http://recode.net/2014/12/03/sony-to-officially-name- north-k...](http://recode.net/2014/12/03/sony-to-officially-name-north-korea- as-source-of-hack-attack/)

Sony Pictures will officially name North Korea as the source of a hacking attack that has exposed sensitive files and brought down its corporate network last week, two sources close to the investigation tell Re/code. An announcement could come as soon as today.

Details of what Sony and the security firm Mandiant will announce are still being finalized. But the sources confirm that North Korea will be named as the source of the attack.

A Sony spokeswoman declined to comment on the timing or the news, but said "The investigation continues into this very sophisticated cyber attack."

<comment><USER31> "Harming the regional peace and security and violating human rights for money". Interesting. The focus on this film and these supposed ideals make it sound _very_ regional. I'm not saying it's North Korea, but it's someone in the region. Assuming the "purported hacker" actually had something to do with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Are their backups OK? That's the only real issue.

None of the "leaked" data is that interesting. Some executive pay info is in SEC filings. Talent pay is usually known in Hollywood. Leaking the script of _Annie_? That's a remake; we know how it comes out.

The real question is, what did the attackers _change_? Did they add some phony businesses to accounts payable, or initiate financial transactions?

There's a lot to be said for making backups to write-once media.

</comment><comment><USER33> "Pastebin—the unofficial cloud repository of hackers everywhere"

Are they referring to "[http://pastebin.com/"](http://pastebin.com/") ? if so is it really "the unoffical cloud repository of hackers everywhere" ? Is it really used often by hackers?

I thought reddit and 4chan are the more popular places to dump illegally gained information.

<comment><USER23> Very common.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=pastebin.com%20email%20and%2...](https://www.google.com/search?q=pastebin.com%20email%20and%20password)

<comment><USER33> Don't they have some kind of policy to get rid of these things?

<comment><USER34> Why would they?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I am not a sysadmin or network security guy, so I have to ask: how could hackers siphon as much as 100 _terabytes_ of data from Sony's network without being noticed? Shouldn't they have indictors to see their bandwidth was running dry? If so, did the GOP do it slowly to avoid drawing attention?

<comment><USER36> For a network the size of Sony's, it seems like that volume should be relatively easy to smuggle out. Maybe not all at once, right?

<comment><USER37> If my math is right, it would take ~120 days at 10 MB / second.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> So. Sony America suffered an outage on the Playstation Network due to a hack in 2011 causing 171 million in damages (that's the official figure, who knows how much the lost goodwill cost them ongoing). After that if they did not make cybersecurity priority number 1 then they deserve what they've gotten. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

<comment><USER39> Effectively, Sony Computer Entertainment and Sony Pictures Entertainment are about as related as Virgin Airlines and Virgin Mobile. Think of Sony (and any conglomerate in general) not as a parent company _per se_ , but more like a VC firm or a majority-shareholder mutual fund; the executives of the Sony conglomerate don't really have any more insight into the component companies than those companies' other shareholders do. The only way business-process insight is going to be spread between the component companies is if the executives of one happen to read the trade press of the other.

<comment><USER38> Eh, if I am a majority shareholder then I will read the riot act to the company I hold a majority in after they lose $171M on shitty security. Also, [http://www.sony.com/SCA/who-we-are/our- businesses.shtml](http://www.sony.com/SCA/who-we-are/our-businesses.shtml) lists all these so there is some cohesion. AFAIK there's no such Virgin supercompany.

<comment><USER39> Richard Branson is Virgin's sole-proprietor supercompany. :)

But yes, that's true—the investors would be mad at SCE. But would that, in turn, make them think of pulling aside SPE to give them the same talk? SPE isn't even doing anything involving running a public-facing web service; why would the investors presume they'd be at risk? It'd be like YCombinator calling in all their current batch of startups to give them a lesson on finances because one of them screwed up their bookkeeping.

<comment><USER40> > _It 'd be like YCombinator calling in all their current batch of startups to > give them a lesson on finances because one of them screwed up their > bookkeeping._ //

If they "screw up" was criminally negligent and had a cost of the order of $100s of millions I could certainly see YC doing that, couldn't you?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I love the fact that salaries have gone public. That should lead to some very amusing inter company drama.

</comment><comment><USER42> Security means security against the state actor threat. We got a foretaste of it because North Korea's head of state has strange priorities, but there's no reason a hack like this wouldn't be launched in a trade conflict, for example.

We created a security environment that prioritizes surveillance over security, especially in creating a market for zero-day exploits. That's a market that might exist without the US as a buyer, but the size and value of that market is dominated by US spending.

We would not tolerate the development and auctioning of weaponized disease microbes. But we funded a similar market that threatens our technology infrastructure.

</comment><comment><USER43> It's Sony Pictures Entertainment that got hacked, not Sony. They're completely separate companies, yet the media fails to recognize that. Very annoying and confusing, it's almost deliberately.

<comment><USER44> > It's Sony Pictures Entertainment that got hacked, not Sony. They're > completely separate companies, yet the media fails to recognize that.

Sony is a very large conglomerate: while it would be incorrect to say that, say, Sony Computer Entertainment (the subsidiary that runs Sony's video games operations) got hacked, Sony Pictures Entertainment is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sony Entertainment, Inc., which is itself a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sony Corporation.[1] It's as much "Sony" as any of its other subsidiaries.

[1]: [http://www.sonypictures.com/corp/aboutsonypictures.html](http://www.sonypictures.com/corp/aboutsonypictures.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> [http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/4/7333263/the-malware- that-t...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/4/7333263/the-malware-that-took- down-sony-was-written-in-korean)

in the article it says "and the computer that did the compiling was set up to display its text in Korean characters."

i have a problem digesting this, because as per my experience, the compiler doesn't leave a trace the native host's display language or does it?

what do you people have to say about it?

<comment><USER46> There was a resource file included with Korean language strings. That either got there because the developers were Korean or as a false flag since malware doesn't otherwise need multilingual support.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> There are some comments over at reddit suggesting this is a huge deal internally. There are teams that are just not showing up for work because all the systems are down.

</comment><comment><USER48> My friend got doxxed from this. SSN, passport, hiring agreements, everything. This hack basically dumped every single document Sony had out on the web.

</comment><comment><USER49> With security you either pay for it now, or you pay for it later. These companies who make lots of bad mistakes seem to have opted for the latter.

<comment><USER50> Or you never pay for it and no one ever hears about it and everyone is sleeping like babies. Or you pay for it now _and_ later, because you know, security is hard and crackers have the upper hand. The possibilities are endless and nuanced!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> You'd think they would've learned a thing or two after they were made the hackers' pinata the last time around. Sony continues to come up as the poster- boy company for weak security.

<comment><USER51> That was a different Sony company that was hacked. I don't think they share much in common except the Sony name.

<comment><USER52> It was twelve different Sony companies. It was clear that no part of Sony had any interest in information security.

<comment><USER53> The only difference between Sony and any of a dozen different financial services companies is that Sony has better name recognition and so is a bigger target.

<comment><USER52> Are you implying that's not an enormous difference?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> I'm surprised that after the scandal of the 2011 Playstation Network hack that security isn't a big priority.

</comment><comment><USER55> "a line-up of mostly white male executives"

What's the point in such a statement?

<comment><USER56> _What 's the point in such a statement?_

In-group signalling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> with a hack as big as this why hasn't it affected their stock price?

</comment><comment><USER58> Smells like an inside job.

</comment><comment><USER59> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal)

<comment><USER25> Different Sony.

<comment><USER60> Same name, same (lack of) good will.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> The compensation levels should't be confidential in the first place. This policy is only useful to the wrong people.

This is how we get artificially low market rates for developers and ridiculous amounts of money paid to incompetent execs.

edit: the downvotes are an indication that you deserve your bullshit laws/status quo

<comment><USER62> The down votes may not be because people disagree with open salaries, but because this has no value in the discussion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> Is this a hack of a division of Sony? Because the executive names I found don't sound white. [http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/executive/](http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/executive/)

<comment><USER16> It's Sony Pictures Entertainment, am American subsidiary: [http://www.sonypictures.com/corp/management.html](http://www.sonypictures.com/corp/management.html)</comment></comment>


IPhone at $200 - <AUTHOR> http://techland.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/05/23/att-shows-thinking-on-new-iphone-subsidy/

<comment><USER2> Well, you'll be paying the ~$1000 "real" price back in overpriced contracts with obscene minimum runtimes. (unlocked versions are available for ~€700-€1000 in Germany, France, so the real price is probably closer to $600-800, as Europe routinely gets screwed over on import prices anyway)

I'll stick with my cheap-ish phone that is actually mine, and a nice and flexible pay-as-you-go tariff. The way mobile phone contracts are going these days (in Europe) you're almost guaranteed a bad deal with a contract.

</comment><comment><USER3> Come on, it's not that hard:

real_price = buying_price+contract_runtime_in_months*monthly_fee

</comment><comment><USER4> AKA, the world's highest interest loan.

</comment><comment><USER5> $200 would probably make a customer out of me. I'm still considering jumping on the Spring SERO bandwagon, because $30/month would save enough money to buy stuff I want.

I thought about getting a smartphone with sprint for a subsidized price, but the phones are all totally lame. Nobody but apple figured out how to make a useful "smart" phone. The phone companies have gotten plain-jane phones down pretty well, but they never figured out how to scale up the features. Apple sorta went backwards. They scaled down a computer to make it a cell phone. (its not the best analogy)

I think i'll just get a sprint sero simple phone and save up some bucks and get a climbing rope.

</comment><comment><USER6> Yeah VentureBeat reported that a couple of days ago. We're taking bets on it: [http://www.hubdub.com/m7672/What_Price_Will_The_3G_iPhone_Se...](http://www.hubdub.com/m7672/What_Price_Will_The_3G_iPhone_Sell_At)

</comment><comment><USER7> Well I paid $400 and I don't regret it... I did unlock it as Canada has the worst cellphone market in the world. If the second gen is unlockable then 200$ is a bargain.

</comment><comment><USER8> You can get smartphones free now with 2 year deals, the iphone will be free on sites like wirefly/letstalk next year.

</comment><comment><USER9> this is a move that might help a little against the android devices coming out...its a late move though as i think att should have been subsidizing the "carrier" locked phone anyway.

<comment><USER10> Supposedly AT&T is already kicking back money to Apple every month, but I guess now the iPhone will be double-subsidized.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> i think the whole lock thing is weired - cell phone should be available as any other consumer items at walmart, circuit city etc. You just go to these stores, pickup the phone and hook it up with any service provider of your choice, same as what we do with our TV, Internet etc.

<comment><USER11> That would be great! Are you willing to pay an extra $150-300 for your cell phone?

The problem is that it would cost more. In fact, you can already just buy a phone (unlocked) at many online places. The reason it isn't popular is because it costs significantly more - to the extent that even most geeks go with the cheap, locked stuff.

Now, would it make the monthly plans cheaper? Probably, but not by as much as the additional money you'd spend on the phone. Why? Adding a customer, even if they bring their own equipment, costs money. Billing needs to be set up, often it takes time from a rep, new customers have a ton more questions, etc.

So, if you'd be willing to pay an extra $50-100 (and convince 60% of other people that's a better way too), then the industry might change. Until then, we're stuck, but we have cheaper prices.

<comment><USER12> So I guess this argument would extend to other industries as well. You could buy a cheaper computer that was locked in to a particular ISP or a car that was locked into a particular fuel supply. Or perhaps a TV that only connected to a particular cable supplier. All these year of inefficiently allowing consumers to freely match their products and suppliers! What have we been thinking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> 200$ will come with a 3 year contract.

Still not a bad deal for people who are stuck with contracts anyways with blackberry or windows mobile.

<comment><USER4> Yes, this is probably meant to be a better fit for the spending structures of corporate customers.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Your Early Twenties - <AUTHOR>

New grad here. I've got some opportunities lined up but nothing firm yet; Worst case scenario I will continue working on my things which have some passive income.<p>I'm curios to how your early twenties were. In terms of going in to "the real world", getting a job etc.. Were you clueless? If not what were your options? <comment><USER2> Speaking as a new grad: I've got a job lined up, but by no means does that mean I'm not clueless. I feel like I was handed my diploma, and suddenly the door behind me closed and in front of me a dozen doors opened, each leading to a dozen more.

The sum of my knowledge and experience feels more proportionally infinitesimal than ever before. The last time I felt like this was my second week of undergrad, which predated the best four years of my life, so moving forward I'm incredibly scared and incredibly excited.</comment>


Google Removes Patrick Moore as Founder of Greenpeace - <AUTHOR> https://mobile.twitter.com/aaranged/status/1108443770071113728 <comment><USER2> Not entirely correct. Moore got disavowed by Greenpeace for "political disagreements", which triggered Wikipedia authors to rewrite the English Wiki page thus made his entry in the Knowledge Graph disappear because it is fed by the English Wikipedia.

</comment><comment><USER3> Clickbait.

Google removed nothing.</comment>


Grubhub CEO tells pro-Trump employees to resign - <AUTHOR> https://i.sli.mg/vB95ZB.jpg <comment><USER2> Paragraph 3: "I firmly believe that we must bring together different perspectives...including all genders, races.... _ideological preferences_."

Paragraph 4: "...I and everyone else here at Grubhub will fight for your dignity and your right to make a better life here in the United States."

Paragraph 5: "If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because _you have no place here_."

How is this not a severe contradiction?

<comment><USER3> There's a difference between respecting someone's ideological preference, and discouraging hate speech. I like to think of it like this: your liberties to express ideology end where someone else's human rights begin.

I would disagree with firing someone for saying that they liked Trump. I would agree with firing someone for making racist, sexist, or otherwise derogatory comments toward a co-worker. I think that's what GrubHub's CEO is getting at.

<comment><USER4> > There's a difference between respecting someone's ideological preference, > and discouraging hate speech

No there is not. "Hate speech" is what liberals call inconvenient conservative speech. Approving all speech except "hate speech" is just declaring that you will censor speech you find disagreeable.

The only legitimate speech restrictions are viewpoint-neutral no matter what the viewpoint.

<comment><USER5> "You're a dirty monkey and should go back to Africa" is inconvenient conservative speech? You'll have a difficult time defending that statement.

<comment><USER4> That statement is absolutely protected speech.

<comment><USER3> I think you're mistaking the purpose of the 1st amendment. Racist comments are protected speech in that the _United States Government_ cannot arrest/imprison/etc. you for that kind of speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of repercussions for your speech. New York is an at-will state, meaning there is no legal problem with this email. There is no protection for people getting fired for hate speech, just like there is no legal protection for people boycotting or refusing to work for companies that they disagree with.

<comment><USER4> Private enterprises aren't required by law to uphold a high standard of free speech, but being decent Americans does. The government MUST NOT censor, but private companies SHOULD NOT.

<comment><USER3> I think we have a very different standard of what a "decent American" is. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree for now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Analysis by Ken White:

Mini-lawsplainer: maybe @Grubhub isn't safe with that "resign if you support Trump's politics" email after all. /1

/2 Turns out DC is one of a few jurisdictions with a no-firing-based-on- political-affiliation law. Sec. 2-1401.11 beta.code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/cod…

/3 In fact, under 1-1401.11(4)(B) it's specifically illegal to publish a "preference, limitation, specification, or distinction" based on it

/4 So @Grubhub probably just (1) violated the law and (2) gave a fun free retaliation claim to any Trump supporter they fire or discipline.

/5 [I'll spare you the freedom of association analysis or the hypocrisy-of- talking-about-freedom-of-association analysis]

/6 In short, @Grubhub, wallow and rant, but do it on your private account. Boss speech has liability issues.

/7 [Update] For some reason I thought they were in DC. NY and Chicago. Different laws. I'll look.

<comment><USER5> The email isn't "resign if you support Trump's politics" it's "resign if you act like Trump (in his more distasteful moments) during office hours"

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> IANAL, but that sounds like a pretty irresponsible email to make public for the CEO of a public company. Is it not?

Edit: CEO just posted a clarification. [http://media.grubhub.com/media/press- releases/press-release-...](http://media.grubhub.com/media/press- releases/press-release-details/2016/Inclusion-and-Tolerance-in-the- Workplace/default.aspx)

Getting some pretty bad backlash on Twitter.

</comment><comment><USER7> He opened the company up to serious liability for discrimination and creating a hostile work environment. Additionally, shareholders damaged by this monumentally stupid action can sue. Class action and employment attorneys are likely searching LinkedIn and other sites for employees emails to contact as I write this, looking for the ~500 or so employees of their 1,000 that are likely affected by this.

Hillary lost. Get over it, and (this should be obvious) don't tell your employees to resign if they disagree with you.

</comment><comment><USER8> They absolutely should not turn in their resignations. I work for a state writing unemployment insurance application software. If the CEO wants them out, he needs to lay them off/fire them. If the employees hand in their resignation, they are ineligible for benefits. That is what the CEO wants, but that is not what the workers should allow. They are owed unemployment insurance benefits in this case.

</comment><comment><USER9> Title is wrong. He defined several actions that Trump demonstrated as grounds for immediate termination. He informed all his employees that if they do not follow company hr policies they should resign.

<comment><USER10> You could charitably interpret it that way. But he also did write these words:

Further I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can. ... If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here.

If you identify as a nationalist or favor immigration restrictions, then you're not in agreement with his statement and are told to resign.

<comment><USER3> I think if you act in a violently nationalist way (harming or harassing someone who is "not American enough"), or taunt legal immigrants because they "look hispanic", "look indian" etc, that is all completely reasonable grounds for firing.

In my opinion, you can identify as nationalist or favor immigration restrictions as long as you don't harm, harass, threaten, etc. someone. And I think this is what the Grubhub CEO is saying (their later statement reinforces this).

This isn't censorship of ideas, it's reinforcing a culture of empathy and goodwill at a company with those values.

Think about it this way: would you enjoy working for a company that did nothing as co-workers made fun of you for your race, disability, country of origin, or sexual orientation?

<comment><USER11> > reinforcing a culture of empathy and goodwill

Starting off with politics and ending by threatening to fire people is generally not the way one cultivates empathy and goodwill.

I agree with your analysis of the motivation, but the execution was a lesson in what not to do.

<comment><USER3> I've thought about it some more and I agree with you. I don't think this letter is a shining example that should be repeated ad verbatim.

However, I do want to express my opinion that in order for racism & sexism to be defeated, it's going to take some grit and discomfort. To quote: "When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels Like oppression."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Can anyone confirm if this is real? If it is, this is probably going to turn into a PR disaster for them.

<comment><USER3> I think if anything, it'll make people in the more liberal cities - their main market - more attracted to the company. You may disagree, but my feelings after reading this are to support Grubhub, whereas before I was neutral on them. I value companies that are dedicated to inclusion and discourage hate speech.

<comment><USER3> Before anyone accuses me of "being a fascist" for supporting this kind of censorship, take a moment to read the article again. He's not telling people to resign if they are pro-Trump, he's asking people who are going to actively make others' lives worse through hate-speech and derogatory action to resign. Remember that your liberties end where other's liberties begin.

<comment><USER13> Does that really need to be said? I'm sure it's already in the employee handbook that you can't call people racial epithets or sexually harass people.

Try to put yourself in the mindset of a Trump voter working st GrubHub and receiving that email. That wouldn't make you a little bit nervous? Would you really say to yourself "oh, yeah, I see what he's saying here" or would you clam up and live in fear of being outed?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Clickbait title, not exactly what he said.

</comment><comment><USER11> The email sounds like it was written by someone angry and hurt and desperate to "do something" (the hypothetical "he would have been terminated" is revealing).

The actual interpretation of who is being asked to resign is ambiguous.

At the least it should be a lesson not to hastily send company-wide emails while gripped by extreme emotions.

Agreed the headline here is a bit of click baiting.

</comment><comment><USER15> previous submission with some comments and more context in the submitted URL: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12924340](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12924340) ([http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/10/boss-tells-pro-trump- em...](http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/10/boss-tells-pro-trump-employees-to- resign.html))

</comment><comment><USER16> campaigning is different than normal work, all the politics promise something just to gain votes and it's not different from all the other years. like Obama promised change but America just sank into more problems, even with the NSA "the program" he did not do anything about it and even lied to the public concealing it. I would look at the speeches and interview what he gives before and after the campaign it's totally different, and i think if Hilary gained the power America would just be more corrupt if anything even change while trump is president. i doubt it but i would rather see this positive.

</comment><comment><USER3> Source? I'd like to share this but don't want to spread disinformation.

<comment><USER17> sli.mg is the image hosting website that they use on /r/The_Donald

<comment><USER18> It is used there to avoid imgur censorship.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Whoa.</comment>


The Number Code. Crack It If You Can? - <AUTHOR> http://crashzone.tumblr.com/post/41277684058/the-number-code

<comment><USER2> If there are 11 digits that change then there are 10 __11 possible different numbers. Depending on how many they use per day that give a different amount of time before they have to repeat:

1000 per day: 273791 years

1000000 per day: 273 years

So even assuming a lot more than your thousands of cards a day they've got a while before they run out of numbers. Depending on how their system works trying to guess one is futile, if the cards come into use when they're printed and are no longer valid once they've been used you've got a very small window in which to guess one in one hundred billion. So:

1). One hundred billion

2). Tiny to very tiny depending on how many cards are in circulation at any one time.

3). See above

4). Almost certainly not

5). That depends on how they pick their numbers, if it were me I'd use a CSPRNG to generate the numbers and store them, this has the advantage that it's nearly impossible to guess future numbers given previous ones. If they're only using a PRNG or some other weak system then it may be possible if you collect a large enough number of cards to predict future numbers.</comment>


Own Your Online Brand - <AUTHOR> http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/02/own-your-online-brand.html <comment><USER2> Sage advice. If you haven't done it yet you need to _own_ something authoritative about yourself, e.g. yourname.com, or better yet yourname.tel, which is like a business card at the DNS layer (with a window from the web of course).

I also periodically delete my Facebook status updates and tweets, although I'm not yet sure whether Google/others will be archiving those indefinitely.

<comment><USER3> I bought andyking.eu when .eu names were first made available for just that reason, although I only use it for email and not for any web presence - I blog on a different domain.

Of course, having such a common name, very little about me appears on Google. In fact, on Google UK at present the first result for my name is a British strip-o-gram! There are also a former MP, a middling footballer and various British and American academics with my name.

I'm quite happy with the situation, to be honest. The less that can be found about me on Google, the more comfortable I feel. A friend has an uncommon name and every result on the search engine is for her; every fleeting newspaper mention, running club result and years-old web comment is hers. I'm glad I'm not the same.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Part of me finds this mentality _horrifying_ , despite me having do it myself.

Simply put, I don't believe people, in general, should be _obligated_ to participate in Facebook, Twitter, et al, in order to keep from being damaged in the public sphere. If a person isn't doing anything noteworthy, he/she should be allowed to keep to himself and not have to participate in these kinds of social networks in the first place. I really doubt most people out there would appreciate being _made to_ use stuff like this in self-defence.

</comment><comment><USER5> Couldn't agree more! We at NIXTY think this is particularly important for a person's future educational and occupational opportunities. A blog is great and a LinkedIn profile is great too; however, we think what is needed is a more robust ePortfolio - an online presence that has a cv/resume, recommendations feature, and work display. The work display is particularly important because it allows the person to post work (documents, videos, papers etc.) that illustrate their competence. Further, it allows those w/credibility (professor, supervisor) to comment on the work so that others can get a better way of assessing a person's competence.The url for the person's eportfolio is www.nixty.com/name.

People definitely need to be proactive about defining their presence online. This is just one small way that we are trying to help.

<comment><USER6> You might get more mileage if you prefix this comment with "shameless plug".

<comment><USER5> Yikes. Posted quickly w/out thinking about it, while eating. You are right. Would delete it if I could. Thanks for keeping me honest :). Will do better next time.</comment></comment></comment>


Geeks.com hacked, Customer Data Stolen - <AUTHOR> http://consumerist.com/341408/geekscom-website-hacked-customer-data-stolen

<comment><USER2> I use the "disposable" card numbers whenever possible, and get a new number issued about every 15-18 months on my primary credit card.

I know I bought some stuff from them, but I forget how long ago it was. Pretty sure it was before my most recent numbers were issued though.</comment>


Bacon Ipsum, because Unicode is hard - <AUTHOR> http://www.geertvanderploeg.com/unicode-gen/

<comment><USER2> I've been using fullwidth characters. Due to their simplicity to convert to and read. This page of course has the advantage of more variety in characters.

Fullwidth conversion code in ruby:

      "string".tr(' !-~', "\u3000" + (0xFF01...0xFF5f).to_a.pack('U*'))

<comment><USER3> I wondered what was up with the weird kerning.

        Nam
        Nam

(By the way, they seem to break tab-indentation for pre formatted text in the markdown.)

<comment><USER4> Full width characters have a fun habit of breaking most things. Even more so than unicode.

Since they are only used in CJK languages the majority of programmers are unaware of them. The seperate code points between half-width and full-width mean that you need a decent unicode library. Otherwise a user could spoof another user.

One cool feature is it lets you write monospaced even if you do not control the font. Since there are full-width codepoints for most programming symbols.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I use <http://www.fillerati.com/> because It's nice to use real sentences instead of ipsum.

<comment><USER6> Isn't the whole point of lorem ipsum is that it doesn't make sense to the person reviewing the document, that way someone proofing a design will focus on the page elements, white space and text flow instead of getting distracted by the text?

<comment><USER7> It's also valuable to test readability with something you can actually read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Not very usable. If you really need to support Unicode on your website, you need to make sure that proper characters are shown. It does generate filler text, but would you know that character set and HTML code page are setup correctly if you don't know which glyphs have to be shown to the user? To give an example, this tool might generate character č, but if wrong code page is used (say ISO_8859-1 instead of UTF-8), you would see something like ł or ć in the browser. And you wouldn't even notice the difference. In some languages, such subtle change in one character can turn text into swearing or just gibberish.

I'd rather see a website with _fixed_ text that shows some often used Unicode characters, The one you can validate (i.e. shows exactly the same on your website). Adding a JPG or PNG picture of what it should look like would be a plus. By "often used" I mean: Latin with accents, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, ... etc. I'm sure a nice "Bacon Ipsum" with one paragraph from each of these would be quite usable. Although, some are written right-to-left, so maybe two different sets would be better: one for RTL and other for LTR languages.

<comment><USER9> The idea is that you should only use UTF-8, otherwise why bother ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Would be useful to have control over output encoding (ie. generate an octet stream output in UTF8, UTF16BE/LE). Generation of surrogate pairs would also be needed for encodings that support them, since many applications get this wrong (even in Java, the number of java.lang.Characters in a java.lang.String is not necessarily the same as the length of the String...)

You could even add options for "badly behaved" UTF8 (eg. overlong encodings, deliberate sync errors etc.) to stress test the other end.

</comment><comment><USER11> Feature request: RTL. :)

<comment><USER12> plus RTL inside LTR and LTR inside RTL. Have a look at Wikipedia's pages of Arabic dishes for good examples.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Link to the github repo: [https://github.com/gvanderploeg/unicode- gen/tree/master/src/...](https://github.com/gvanderploeg/unicode- gen/tree/master/src/main/webapp)

</comment><comment><USER14> Do random accents help verify that you're handling Unicode correctly? You don't know what it's supposed to look like, so how do you know you're displaying it correctly?

<comment><USER15> Did you try it? For example "Internationalization" becomes "Intèrnátìonàlïzâtiòn". If your code did anything bad to the unicode (eg decided codepoints are one byte, stripped high bit) then it would be very obvious.

For my testing I also go to the wikipedia home page and copy the text in the middle of the page which lists how many articles there are in various languages. This is great because it uses a wide variety of code points, including ones greater than 0xffff.

<comment><USER14> I also see that "Intèrnátìonàlïzâtiòn" breaks in the middle, instead of considering it a word. Is that correct? It may be important for checking your layout. There are also no Asian scripts, nor taller / shorter characters that might overlap if your line spacing is too small.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is anybody else as tired of seeing bootstrap as I am? I digress, though; it's a great project. :)

<comment><USER17> It does allow for variety but typically developers just go for the defaults. I like <http://bootswatch.com/> though.

<comment><USER18> It's really depressing how many websites are still stuck on Bootstrap 1.4.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Snapsolve – Get homework help in a snap - <AUTHOR> http://www.snapsolveapp.com

<comment><USER2> I wish-- Oh there is a web app too! [https://www.getstudyroom.com/tutors](https://www.getstudyroom.com/tutors)

<comment><AUTHOR> Correct! so any student in the country can get help right away from their computers too

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm the CEO of StudyRoom, makers of the Snapsolve app. Our brand new app provides students from any grade level, elementary to graduate level, with high-quality, on-demand help from out Top Student Tutors. If you're stuck on homework just snap a picture of the problem and get a detailed answer in minutes. We will be checking out this post the entire day so if you have any questions or comments feel free to post it below.

<comment> jesus-pierre So is the service free right now? Or is there a fee per homework snap picture?

<comment><AUTHOR> Students can choose from a variety of price points, ranging from free (easy) questions, to paid questions which are priced based on the level of difficulty and average response time to get an answer (from $1.99 to $9.99).

Right now anyone who uses the promo code LAUNCH will get $5 for free.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Love it!</comment>


Ask HN: where for cheap animated video for my landing page? - <AUTHOR>

Do you know any cheap service creating animated videos for landing pages? My idea for startup is actually quite simple so this video could be 20-30 seconds long. Is it possible to create something like this good quality for less than 200$? <comment><USER2> I have a friend that would probably do a short site video for that price range. He does some amazing stuff that's worth much more than that.

You can reach him at firstname.lastname@example.com

Here's his video resume: [http://www.lookintothebeam.com/projects/matt-reyer- resume-20...](http://www.lookintothebeam.com/projects/matt-reyer-resume-2012/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for contact</comment></comment>


How Curry Became a Japanese Naval Tradition - <AUTHOR> https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/japanese-curry-history <comment><USER2> > The word "curry" originated in India, although it did not have a long > history there. Instead, it derived from a Portuguese mispronunciation of a > term meaning "spices," which British colonizers applied to a wide swath of > Indian dishes.

Such misinformation that I can't even...

 _Kari_ is a Tamil word. I am Tamil. It has been in the vocabulary for thousands of years. Just made some elephant yam kari for lunch. It is always dry. Zero gravy. Something with gravy is _kootu_.

(Japanese kare is something completely different. It is by definition a thick gravy. It might trace its origins to india. But it is a separate dish now.)

<comment><USER3> FWIW online etymologies seem to suggest this description isn't totally off, but I agree the bit about it not having a history is transparently wrong.

Etymonline[1]:

> kind of sauce or relish much used in Indian cookery, from the leaves of a > southwest Asian plant related to the lemon, 1680s, from Tamil (Dravidian) > kari "sauce, relish for rice," also "a bite, bit, morsel." As "meat or > vegetable stew flavored with curry powder," 1747 in British English.

This one implies that கறி can refer to the spice in a dish as well as the dish as a whole--seems likely. That is, for instance, how "masala"[2] works in Hindi, which literally means 'spices' but can help form the name of an entire dish, as in "paneer masala".

Wiktionary[3]:

> 1747 (as currey, first published recipe for the dish in English[1][2]), from > Tamil கறி (kaṟi), influenced by existing Middle English cury ("cooking"),[2] > from French cuire ("to cook") (from which also cuisine), from Vulgar Latin > cocere, from Latin coquere, present active infinitive of coquō.

> Earlier cury found in 1390 cookbook Forme of Cury (Forms of Cooking) by > court chefs of Richard II of England.

To be clear: what happened here is that English already had a word "curry" (this is the one we get in the expression "curry favor"), and it encountered and incorporated the Tamil word which coincidentally had an identical pronunciation and a very related meaning.

[1]: [https://www.etymonline.com/word/curry#etymonline_v_491](https://www.etymonline.com/word/curry#etymonline_v_491)

[2]: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%BE%E...](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B2%E0%A4%BE)

[3]: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/curry#Etymology_1](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/curry#Etymology_1)

<comment><USER4> > To be clear: what happened here is that English already had a word "curry" > (this is the one we get in the expression "curry favor"), and it encountered > and incorporated the Tamil word which coincidentally had an identical > pronunciation and a very related meaning.

It would be a good candidate to look into the origins of further, perhaps there is a proto-indio-european link and it's not a coincidence.

<comment><USER5> Tamil is dravidian, not indoeuropean.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nice article. I remember first reading about kinyou curry in the manga series "Zipang" by Kaiji Kawaguchi, in which a modern Japanese Aegis destroyer gets time-warped back to WWII on the first day of the Battle of Midway.

Semi-related: We hear a lot about about Japanese curry when it comes to soupy things. But we never hear about Japanese stew (shichuu). Sometimes when I was getting sick of curry--hard to imagine now--a plate of rich creamy (white) beef stew with some rice in the middle of winter was just the thing. The roux blocks for stew were right next to the curry roux blocks in the store. It had a unique taste that I haven't experienced since moving back to the states. Example picture:

[http://darjapan.blogspot.com/2012/10/hokkaido-cream- stew.htm...](http://darjapan.blogspot.com/2012/10/hokkaido-cream- stew.html?m=1)

<comment><USER7> If you manage to find a Japanese grocer, it's a staple item. In a pinch, order through Amazon:

House Foods Cream Stew, 4.93 Ounce (Pack of 10) by House Foods Link: [http://a.co/d/hXsgx21](http://a.co/d/hXsgx21)

<comment><USER6> Awesome, thank you!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There is a page on the Ministry of Defense website listing curry recipes for various ships/subs/etc. in the JMSDF.

[http://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/formal/family/recipe/archive/curre...](http://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/formal/family/recipe/archive/currey.html)

<comment><USER9> I do wish they'd change the Japanese naval flag -- in much of East Asia the Rising Sun Flag is seen as a symbol of oppression and Japanese imperialism, almost as potent as a Nazi swastika. It doesn't do Japan any good to fly the old imperial flag from every Maritime Self Defense Force vessel, even if it was the naval flag since 1889 (by which time Japan already had imperial designs).

<comment><USER10> If the Japanese had to change their military symbols for that reason, every country in the world would. Even Germany still uses the iron cross as the symbol of their air force.

<comment><USER9> I don't see why every country would have to change their symbol. Yes, all countries have guilt in their pasts, as do all people, but Imperial Japan was a fascist regime that killed 50 million often with horrific brutality. And let's remember, it's just a war flag, you can change it with the stroke of a pen. The flag won't care. The Self Defense Forces won't start to suck, and the neighbors will have one less reason to think of Japan as an enemy, a real boost to national defense. You might not understand the depth of animus in the region against Japan -- schoolchildren are taught to despise it because of the fascist empire, and the Rising Sun Flag is shown as an analog to the Nazi swastika. Completely unlike Germans, Japanese are portrayed as at best ignorant of the dark side of their own nation's history, and flying a flag that on sight causes more than a billion people to swell with rage because they connect it to Japan's fascist past does nothing to dispel that notion. Fret not, the neighbors also choose to forget the dark sides of their pasts. Yet they must all live together, in an environment that feels like it mixes 21st century technology with late 19th century nationalism.

I _love_ Japan. I've been visiting five or six times a year for quite a while. I flew in naval exercises alongside the Maritime Self Defense Forces. I enjoy Japanese curry. You should really try curry soup in Sapporo, it's fantastic. I could happily live in Japan for the rest of my days. I'd still be happy if they changed the damn counter-productive war flag.

<comment><USER11> I feel like the people who would be upset about the flag would also be the same people who wouldn't be satisfied by merely a flag change. They'd say "so what if you just changed your flag? Now change the history curriculum in high school". And they wouldn't stop there either, they'd ask for further changes because it's never enough. " Why haven't you demolished the Yasukuni shrine yet?"

I'm _not_ saying that a country that committed crimes in the past shouldn't have to atone for that by making changes. Germany did this much better than Japan. All I'm saying is that there will be people in the country who will oppose kowtowing to requests like the one you've made because they think it's impossible to satisfy people who make such requests.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I eat pre-mixed Thai curry paste from this brand called "Mae Ploy" with coconut oil, powdered coconut milk, meat (either chicken or beef) and vegetables. There's about five different flavors and for $8 you get a 2 pound bucket of it I have never actually been able to finish one in less than a year.

Turns out I can eat an amazing very low carb meal for about $2 a day and 2-3 minutes of meal prep. It's currently my "meal for life".

If there is a Japanese pre-mixed curry for sale, let me know!

<comment><USER13> That sounds delicious, I love how much flavour is packed in Thai curry paste. But how can you make a fully cooked curry in 2-3 minutes?

<comment><USER14> Thai curry is cooked quickly, usually in a wok. Japanese curry, in contrast, is usually simmered for a long time. The latter is to thicken and soften the meat and vegetables. Thai curry's consistency is managed by using more or less coconut milk vs the actual paste. And the meat and vegetable pieces are cut much smaller so they cook almost instantly.

<comment><USER15> Depends on the recipe a traditional Rogan Josh should be marinated for 24-48 Hours.

I also tend to do tika in a wok if I am doing a curry then simmer the cocked chicken in the wok to finish it off.

<comment><USER14> We were discussing Thai curry. There are some dishes cooked in Thailand that are marinated or slow cooked, but curries aren't. Southern curries are cooked a _little_ longer. But it's common to get e.g., massaman curry in Thailand with undercooked potatoes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Ah now I am dropped back 20 years in my past when I first had a curry udon, delicious and piping hot with gigantic pieces of melting tofu and soft boiled potato. I went back often to this cosy locale buried in the chinatown of a busy southern-hemisphere city. One day, it had disappeared and I still feel its loss. Though I try to reproduce this at home, and I try japanese curry whenever I come across one, I'll never again know those first flavours that brought me such happiness. It must have been a homemade curry because every store brand I've tried doesn't match my expectations. I'll keep trying..

</comment><comment><USER17> The Royal Dutch Navy has a similar tradition: every Wednesday they serve 'blauwe hap' (blue bite, originating from the blue uniforms they used to wear): a dutch adaptation of the Indonesian dish nasi goreng.

</comment><comment><USER18> I think curry is a adopted food in most cold countries and a native dish in hot, humid countries.

A thick stew with tons of spices and salt is basically a food preservation mechanism - especially for vegetables and meat which would spoil quickly.

Similarly, the origin of baked bread - cold countries had a stove for heating the home. someone figured out how to use it as an oven. Most hot countries use fried bread or roasted unleaved bread (roti). Because it is insane to stand over a stove for too long in such temperatures.

<comment><USER19> Preparing food in an oven or the very similar cooking pit has been popular in civilizations around the world. The difference to cold climates is that you keep the oven outside the building.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Just want to chime in to say Japanese curry is awesome! Nothing against Indian or Thai curry, I love those different varieties too.

But just that Japanese curry is its own thing, it is very different and you might like it even if you shy away from other kinds.

Anybody here a fan of Japanese curry?

</comment><comment><USER21> Japanese curry is something different and special. There's something really savory and umami about it. CoCo Ichi is the jam, basically the Japanese waffle house.

<comment><USER22> I love CoCo Ichi, I visit there once a week, basically.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> In case someone is wondering why this only discusses curry being a naval tradition, although both the Army and Navy had the same beriberi problem—the Army solved it the same way as the Navy. Curry is as much a staple meal in the Army as Navy, just not celebrated as a culture as much.

</comment><comment><USER24> what i took from article for my next cooking: _" powder, butter, meat (typically beef), root vegetables, and a sauce thickened with flour."_

sounds simple enough to try

<comment><USER25> Super easy.

I would have said chicken rather than beef which is hugely popular in Brisbane at lunch time.

I've done this one a few times: double up on the sauce ingredients so you have plenty of gravy. Also simmer for as long as you can so the carrots and onion pretty well dissolve and you get a thicker sauce. You can also add Mirin and cut back on the honey.

[http://allrecipes.co.uk/recipe/29578/chicken-katsu- curry.asp...](http://allrecipes.co.uk/recipe/29578/chicken-katsu-curry.aspx)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> not just curry but soup is also indian! of course completely denied by the west so far

soup is from sanskrit supa attested in arthashastra of kautilya dated to 1st millennium BC by westerners and 2nd millennium BC by indians

see link for specific quote from the text: [http://www.alexmthomas.com/2016/05/22/a-review-of- trautmanns...](http://www.alexmthomas.com/2016/05/22/a-review-of-trautmanns- arthashastra/)

<comment><USER27> You're aware that both European languages and Sanskrit have a common ancestor, Proto-Indo-European? That's how you find identical wordstems like "Pa" for father in both (if I remember the example correctly). Something as basic as soup would be easy to imagine going back to PIE no?

<comment><USER26> of course but PIE is an imagined language with an imaginary date of 2500 BC

lack of any attestation kills all PIE claims

whereas sanskrit is a solidly real language with a lot of evidence that it dates back to 4th millennium BC or even much further back for the rg veda

evidence that is vociferously ignored or censored in the west for various reasons

so the tactic of making sanskrit a daughter language of PIE is not accepted

<comment><USER27> So if you don't accept PIE, what's the model you accept? Did Indian and European peoples migrate out of Africa separately according to your model? Using languages to analyze this is indeed a crude tool, but we have something better now: DNA evidence. And so far I at least never heard of DNA being used to disproof the Indo-European relationship, as opposed to some other hypothetical proto-people like Finno-Ugric-Mongolian-Korean-Japanese, whathever the name for that was.

You seem to be a bit emotionally attached to this? I for one like imagining that such a vast and diverse bunch of peoples may go back to just a couple of families crossing deserts, jungles and plains together.

<comment><USER26> there is no dna that encodes for language

how europeans got their language is not our problem

neither the yamnaya r1b z2103 nor sintashta r1a z2125 amounted to much in world history and the sintashtans were just scythians or what we called shakas

these geneticists are just looking for keys under the streetlight ignoring actual evidence

rest of the dna debate is massively hyped propaganda and search for relevance and funding</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Tell HN: Our Project, 365.io, is now $5 instead of $11 - <AUTHOR>

A week ago blehn and I launched 365.io, a website that allows you to undertake a Project 365 in a focused, organized, and elegant way.
Quite a few users signed up, but one piece of feedback we kept getting regardless was that people were hesitant to sign up because of the price, $11 yearly.
As a marketing move and experiment, we decided to lower the price to $5 (which is just slightly below cost per user) for the next few days, and increase the price by $1 for a week after January 1st.
Our reasoning is that feedback has been fantastic, but the app is not spreading well enough because of the price, so we're looking at this like a marketing move instead of a price cut. Our goal is to gather as many users as possible during this time of the year (whether we make a profit on them or not) so the app can spread more easily organically after this period is over.
Let us know what you think of our move! <comment><USER2> I'm not sure this is a good pricing move. Most people who don't mind paying for this probably don't mind paying $11 vs $5. Those who say they have a problem paying $11 probably want it for free. They will say it's just a photo app, there are a billion others out there. Why use yours?

If you are just trying to have a massive user base, make it free. Or do something whacko like make the price really high. The middle road will probably lead to nowhere.

I'd say raise the price to $365, donate half the proceeds to something like <http://www.charitywater.org> and sell, sell, sell.

<comment><USER3> Those are good points.

I don't think the goal is to have a massive user base or make a lot of money right away. It's more about signing up enough users so that the app can start marketing itself (by word of mouth). We were doing ok at $11, but we think there's a psychological difference between $11 and $5, with $5 being within the "sure, why not" territory.

<comment><USER2> If you want to spread by word-of-mouth, you do need to give your users something worth telling about to their friends. Any constraint is ok. Look at Instagram (filters) or Path (limited number of friends).

From my perspective, you are a DailyBooth which costs money.

Why not tap into all the photo apps already out there? Hook into their APIs and automatically generate albums for people. This is a great time to sell "My life in 2010" albums.

Once you get people to pay you money for something, you can ask them again and they will gladly pay for other stuff too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> What if you let users sign up and use the site for 1 month free? They would be more invested in the site after a month and be more likely to part with some money. I would guess that you would make more money with one month free + 5 dollars for the rest of the year vs 5 dollars up front.

I really like the dropbox model of subscriptions. I would never had paid money when I signed up for dropbox, but now I'm right at my free limit. They have me in a win/win for them - I either pay to increase my storage or refer friends. For 365.io I think users would really get the concept after they see their "free" 30 pictures.

Great job on the design.

<comment><USER3> Thanks! Yeah a trial period definitely makes sense.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> As an added note, we refunded the difference to all existing users.

</comment><comment><USER2> <http://365.io/>

</comment><comment><USER5> Looks very nice. Do the 365 days start from when you sign up and pay or is it from Jan 1st 2011?

<comment><USER3> You can start your 365 any time after you sign up. But, once you start, you can't stop!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> i would probably suggest $4.99 vs. $5.00 -- there's a reason people do the silly 99 cent thing, or so i've read.

</comment><comment><USER7> I would suggest making it $1 a month, and billing monthly.

</comment><comment><USER8> How about supporting Project 52 too?</comment>


Wall Street Has Hit Peak Human and an Algorithm Wants Your Job - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-08/wall-street-has-hit-peak-human-and-an-algorithm-wants-your-job <comment><USER2> This mantra is being repeated over and over: algorithms and automation are taking away the jobs.

I'm still skeptical.

Ultimately, work is about solving problems which is a complex and multi-stage process: someone must identify the problem first, someone must formalize the problem into a domain in which algorithms can be applied, someone must code or train an automated solver, someone must deploy and maintain the code...

I expect that a lot of future work will be what we would call today "managerial" type of work. People will identify problems and manage available resources to achieve the desired outcomes. In the past, a significant amount of those resources were other people. In future, more and more of the resources under management will consist of computing power, datasets, robots and only very few other people.

And so I doubt we will run out of work to do. This would mean that somehow we ran out of problems to solve. On the contrary, we appear to be flooded with them: cancer, infectious diseases, global warming, clean energy, access to space...

Maybe in some very far away future we will have a god-like super-AI that will seek and solve problems completely autonomously with no need for our involvement. This is very far off though.

<comment><USER3> > cancer, infectious diseases, global warming, clean energy, access to > space...

The problems left to solve can be tackled by an increasingly smaller percentage of the population. The guys that currently work as taxi drivers or paper pushers can't be reeducated to do cutting edge research.

<comment><USER4> We will never run out of problems to solve. When we have cured cancer and made fully autonomous sex dolls there are still stars to explores and deep problems about nature to solve.

The problem is that a huge part of the population won't have neither the skills or the inclination to work on hard problems.

<comment><USER5> Tell that to 10 postdocs fighting for 1 tenured position.

<comment><USER4> That is not a lack of problems, that is a lack of funding.

<comment><USER5> My point was that it's not a lack of skills and inclination.

<comment><USER6> For every postdoc out of those 10, there's a 100 graduates fighting for a position and 1000 undergrads fighting for an internship.

At any given time slice, skills in a given field are a pyramid. If we assume that the unsolved problems require the highest level of skill to be approached and solved, then there will _always_ be a shortage of problem-solvers (as the problems left become increasingly more difficult and complex)

So yes, it is a lack of skills.

<comment><USER5> There's tons of very simple problems in the world, and tons of people who would be willing to solve them, if only they could get paid for that. That's the limiting factor, not skills.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> We've hit Peak Hunter/Gatherer and a Farmer Wants Your Job. Now What?

This has been going on ever since humans started thinking up better or different ways of doing things. Maybe we don't need as many money managers and brokers doing work that is done cheaper and better with technology. We will still need some, but not as many. There will be new areas where smart, driven people can make a great living.

<comment><USER8> And for the rest of us, will there be suicide booths, or should we just starve to death?

<comment><USER9> Can't we still be hunters/gatherers?

<comment><USER10> > Can't we still be hunters/gatherers?

Sure! Now then, whose land will you be hunting/gathering on? You'll most likely have to pay for access to someone's land, and they probably won't barter access for chickens/goats.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I hope we have hit peak click-bait titles too.

<comment><USER12> I bet we can automate these and eliminate click-bait-headline writers.

<comment><USER13> Bots clicking on ML optimised headlines collecting money from ad networks optimised by machine learning, which serve ads a/b tested to perfection by algorithms, economy 2.0 right there. As long as they're for products made by robot, paid for by investment capital allocated by algorithms...

It's basically the ice cream cone that licks itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> But if few humans are earning enough to generate demand for goods and services, how long will this algorithm have my job?

<comment><USER14> Demand for human labor is already steadily going down. It was just masked by consumer credit boom, and now by the rise of temp jobs and contractor gigs in economies that will soon be disrupted (eg Uber drivers by self driving cars).

To keep them from starvation, you would need to redistribute money to the ones who don't earn it themselves. Either via Unconditional Basic Income or Negative Tax. Because means tested welfare has the result of punishing people for earning money, so they aren't as willing to reinvent themselves and take productive jobs. Same with minimum wage laws. Eventually our society will be so rich that we'll be able to afford it, but how do we transition there gradually?

Computers will attract a larger share of the revenue every few years. They'll become "money sinks". So you tax the profits from laing off people, not enough to disincentivize R&D but enough so we don't have a severe demand shock for human labor and contraction of the money supply as we did in the Great Depression.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> In this domain, yeah, "bankers" are in trouble.

In general, though, it strikes me that we're only scratching the surface of what computer augmented humans can do, what we might call depth, while the major thing today's "algorithms" bring to the table is breath, such as what Google is (in)famous for.

<comment><USER16> Right, if everyone has access to basically the same technology, then the competition is between people for who can best leverage the technology (and who can develop the tools to help them do so).

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm so bored of "OH NOES Robots and AI are stealing our jobs", when it should be "Robots and AI are finally liberating us from our jobs".

<comment><USER8> This would be true only if having a job wasn't a social norm enforced by threat of starvation, homelessness, bad quality of life, and loss of healthcare (in the US). Being unemployed makes you lose social status.

<comment><USER9> Whoa, there! You must be deliberately conflating different things. Social norms isn't important here. The reason we work, if you didn't know that, is that it is a way to provide for oneself, i.e. earning money to buy food, a house, clothes, treatments for illness etc.

It's up to you to get those things, or whatever things you crave. It's not like anything you originally owned has been taken away from you if you don't manage to do that.

<comment><USER8> > Social norms isn't important here.

That is a huge generalization, which seems intuitively wrong: why have norms towards conforming if they aren't effective?

I'm talking about the fact that the unemployed will face drastically lower qualities of life, or even life threatening situations. That this is acceptable comes from government policies, which in turn come from social norms. It's seen as okay to harm the unemployed, deny them healthcare, or let them starve. They're lazy, and they should be punished.

I won't speak for others, like you're doing, but conforming socially is the _primary_ reason I work. I've been unemployed before, and I lost social status from it. It was embarrassing to admit to it. It was like losing a central part of my identity.

Social norms are important, but often you won't notice till you deviate from them.

<comment><USER9> What I'm saying is that lack of food, lack of health care etc aren't means to get you to conform to a social norm. They are simply a consequence of that you're not providing for yourself.

<comment><USER18> The social norm is not to trade with anyone not following those norms. Try buying farm equipment without a bank account or credit rating. Try trading goods without a business etcetcetc

How exactly do you "provide for yourself". You can't just go out and stake a claim to land anymore. The mechanisms for "providing for yourself" are purposefully limited to those sectioned and allowed by social norms. If you want to split hairs other "providing for yourself" please tell me of ways to do this outside the system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> If a robot can replace your job then just buy a robot (or indirectly through investments).

<comment><USER20> A perfect solution for those who will have jobs and money after most do not.

<comment><USER19> Well in a world with no human jobs, Universal Basic Income boils down to the fact the wealth of those who own robots will be redistributed to those who don't have them. So why not make it so that everyone has some share of robots?

<comment><USER21> Communist!

<comment><USER4> Yes, maybe Marx was right all along, just 150 years too early.

<comment><USER10> His critique of capitalism seems pretty spot on, but I'm not so sure about his solutions to the problem.

Here's a (mercifully short) article on the subject by Chris Hedges: [http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/karl_marx_was_right_2015...](http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/karl_marx_was_right_20150531)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm surprised no one around here talks about AI replacing software programming jobs.

<comment><USER23> Here is my (repeated) experience with AI.

\- Wow that looks cool. \- Heh. Look! It sorta works. \- Oh. It only sort of works. \- Um, we can ship this but... \- Next!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> If money becomes some kind of automatically traded around thing with artificial value changes based on interacting algorithms, will it still be a useful for humans to trade physical goods and services?

<comment><USER8> "If"?!

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Build a firewall and make the server room pay for it.

<comment><USER26> What's a server room?

<comment><USER27> Where the cloud is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> More wage depressing propaganda</comment>