The 2013 Thiel Fellows - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcoexist.com/1682017/this-years-thiel-fellows-include-a-fashion-designer-a-poet-and-a-harvard-dropout#1 <comment><USER2> This is a comment from an assessment of the previous generation of Thiel fellows found here: [http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel- fellows...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel-fellowship- where-are-they-now/)

> But what do these companies do? Can we get some specifics? Other than > "Upstart", no mention is given of any of the companies. If you go to the > Thiel Fellowship website, there is no list of startups founded by these > fellows. They do have a list of present and past fellows, but the profile > pages mostly link to either the fellows' personal websites (not company > websites), or dead links. Without any concrete evidence of these companies > even existing, or doing anything useful (instead of just talking about what > they're "going to do", or name-dropping all the investors they've > attracted), this all sounds like a bunch of hot air. Not to be cynical, and > I wish all these people success, but so far they haven't demonstrated that > they've actually _done_ anything.

The entire Thiel fellow program is an exercise in finding out which baby can stand up the fastest and projecting that being the first to stand up somehow makes one a genius.

It's little different from child beauty pageants and dog shows.

<comment><USER3> confluence, you've been awfully negative about the fellowship and Peter Thiel thus far. However, you should be careful to not conflate the lack of readily available data on the fellows with lack of progress on their end. The fact that there _isn't_ much press is a (very) rough indicator that the fellows are spending time working with their heads-down rather than attention-whoring.

Anyways, I'll do some homework for you and dig up some concrete cases of what the fellows _have_ done: \- Andrew Hsu raised $1.5M as a solo founder for Airy Labs from Google Ventures and Foundation Capital ([http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2011/08/04/names-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2011/08/04/names- you-need-to-know-andrew-hsu-19-raises-1-5m-for-educational-gaming-startup/)) \- Ben Yu has built a transdermal caffeine company (<http://sprayableenergy.com/>), which he holds provisional patents for (<http://benyu.org/thiel-fellowship-closing-ceremony-speech>) \- Clay Allsopp is building Propeller (<http://usepropeller.com/>), a drag-and-drop native iOS app builder. He has also authored a RubyMotion book (<http://pragprog.com/book/carubym/rubymotion>). \- Connor Zwick is building YC-backed Coco Controller ([http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/14/the-yc-backed- coco-controll...](http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/14/the-yc-backed-coco- controller-will-turn-your-iphone-into-a-gaming-powerhouse/)) to augment iOS and Android gaming. He also has a Flashcards app with 1M+ downloads (<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/flashcards+/id408490162?mt=8>). \- Darren Zhu is working on a synthetic biology company and has gotten a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ([http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/06/thiel- fellows-are-making-th...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/06/thiel-fellows-are- making-the-grade/)). \- Dale J Stephens has published a book, Hacking Your Education ([http://www.amazon.com/Hacking-Your-Education-Lectures- Thousa...](http://www.amazon.com/Hacking-Your-Education-Lectures- Thousands/dp/0399159967)) through Perigee Books, and has launched the UnCollege movement (<http://www.uncollege.org/>) \- Daniel Friedman is building personalized online education startup Thinkful, which has raised $1M ([http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2013/02/26/peter- thie...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2013/02/26/peter-thiel-backs- thinkful-for-personalized-online-education/)). \- Eden Full is building the SunSaluter (<http://www.sunsaluter.com/>) through her social venture Roseicollis Technologies, which has won the Westly Prize, the Mashable-UN Foundation Startups for Social Good Challenge, second prize at the Postcode Lottery Green Challenge, and the grand prize at the Staples-Ashoka Youth Social Entrepreneurship Challenge (<http://www.linkedin.com/in/edenfull>). \- James Proud sold his company GigLocator for undisclosed 6-figure sum ([http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2012/06/20/skip- school-s...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2012/06/20/skip-school-sell- company-meet-the-thiel-fellow-who-just-turned-a-profit/)) \- Laura Deming has her own fund (<http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mkg45jfej/laura-deming-18-2/>) and has been working working closely with biotech legend Corey Goodman to fund anti-aging therapies. She also spoke at TEDMED 2013 (<http://www.tedmed.com/speakers/show?id=46921>) \- Nick Cammarata "started a company that was recently acquired" ([http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel- fellows...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel-fellowship- where-are-they-now/)). \- Paul Gu is working with Upstart, which raised $5.9M as a kickstarter for people ([http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/22/upstart- grabs-5-9-million-t...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/22/upstart- grabs-5-9-million-to-let-investors-back-people-yep-a-kickstarter-for-people/)) \- Ritik Malhotra is working on YC-backed Streem, a Dropbox for Video (<https://angel.co/streem>) \- Sujay Tyle is working at Developer Auction ([http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/21/developerauction-sujay- tyle...](http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/21/developerauction-sujay-tyle/)), which has raised $2.7M ([http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2013/03/14/developera...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2013/03/14/developerauction- raises-2-7m-seed-for-tech-hiring-service/)) \- Taylor Wilson is building small nuclear fission reactors (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HL1BEC024g>) \- Tom Currier built out a robotic solar panel tracking company (<http://www.qbotix.com/>) that has raised $7.5M total (<http://www.qbotix.com/pressseptember4/>) and got a couple patents for it (<http://www.google.com/patents/WO2011150373A1>, <http://www.google.com/patents/WO2012009470A1>) \- Yoonseo Kang has been working on Open Source Ecology and Open Tech Forever (<http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/User:Yoonseo_Kang>). You can check out some of the stuff he's built here: <http://vimeo.com/user9565582>

The fellows who haven't been explicitly mentioned here aren't necessarily dormant; they simply have not bothered to garner any press.

Please tread a little more carefully next time you label something as being "little different from child beauty pageants and dog shows" -- or at the very least, do your homework so a "college dropout" doesn't have to do it for you.

<comment><USER4> While I feel like confluence is being overly snarky and cynical about the Thiel program, upon hitting the fact that you listed Andrew Hsu and Airy Labs among the list of accomplished Thiel Fellows it becomes immediately apparent that you really haven't actually done your homework.

At the risk of sounding like I'm attacking Andrew, _he was just about the worst possible example for you to pick._ His startup is and was notorious for imploding after being run into the ground with highly public mismanagement that involved interference from his family members. If I were someone who wanted to make a spurious argument attacking the Thiel Fellowship, he would be exhibit #1.

The rest of your post is merely a long list of people all in the process of "starting" something - but not actually having accomplished anything of particular note. It is easy to "start" a company, or a fund, or an organization. It is much harder to actually achieve anything with that. And despite what TechCrunch/other mdia may wish for you to believe, raising funding, giving talks, and winning random competitions are hardly accomplishments.

Now, I don't think the Thiel Fellowship is a bad thing. If I was younger than 20 I would very much be interested in applying for the program. The fact that most Thiel Fellows have not accomplished anything of great external significance has so much less to do with the program and the fellows themselves, and so much more to do with how _damn hard_ it is to start a successful company / solve a big hairy problem. It's not something you do in two years. It's a process and I think the Thiel Fellowship was only ever meant as an experience in independent learning/self-starting for the fellows.

I have no doubt that every Thiel Fellow has learned a lot in his/her experience, but I think it is unwise to tout many of the people in your list as having made concrete achievements.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm surprised with he haven't got the usual HN comments which appear every year when this story is posted. That's a good thing, but here's my "inb4" reply for when those comments finally pop up.

Type 1. Last year there was a comment like "I don't want to crush dreams. But these kids are being set up to fail. They cannot, and will not, live up to these expectations." Related to this are the complaints that these kids only achieved the things they've achieved prior to the programme because their parents were well-connected and helped them out, etc.

Type 2. Accusing hypocrisy on behalf of Thiel, who has two advanced degrees, and who often advocates for a return to advanced research which couldn't happen without higher education.

I think type 1 comments come from envy, even if they sound like something else. That's understandable, since many HN readers probably have similar smarts to these kids but didn't get the same opportunities in their teens. I know I felt jealous when I first heard of the Thiel program.

But - if you look at history, geniuses seem clustered around particular times and locations - ancient Athens, Renaissance Venice, Victorian London, and a few other cultural hubs. This implies that there were thousands of _potential_ geniuses who died in rice paddies (or were killed in war, or who happened to be members of oppressed minorities, or who lived in an era when all the smartest people worked in investment banking, or whatever). It's not just that these individuals were robbed of their potential, it's also the world that was robbed of their contributions. So any attempt to mitigate that trend can only be a good thing, even if it means that some future Einsteins are still dying in rice paddies.

Part 2 is a more interesting critique. My response: I can't speak for Peter Thiel, but I don't think he believes that university shouldn't be an option. Rather, university shouldn't be the _only_ option.

<comment><USER6> > _So any attempt to mitigate that trend can only be a good thing_

Yeah, that is something that remains to be seen.

This is an intervention in the lives of these students. Whether it's a good or a bad thing, for them or for society really is an open question.

Amongst the entrepreneurial community there is a lot of discussion of trying something interesting, and failing fast to learn from it. The real question is, does giving a 17 year old 100k$ help with that?

Do they need 100k$ to do something interesting? Are they at a point in their life where 100k$ the responsible amount of money to give them to experiment with? Where do they go from there? (these are not rhetorical questions, and I am not entirely convinced the answer is no)

There are also broader societal questions. There has been an impetus in the US at least that everyone should get a university degree, come hell and/or high water. That's a model that in its current incarnation is really screwing over a number of people. But I don't see that Theil's program is a solution either. He's picking people he thinks will succeed, just as much as universities are pre-selecting folks who get good marks in classes (as opposed to picking people who will be improved/edified by going through university).

<comment><USER7> As one of this years new fellows (Who happens to be 17), I would say $100 is not something that alone is going to help me do something interesting, but is going to help a lot. A lot of people that do not know the fellows and other finalists don't realize that we have gained a lot of knowledge and experience in our fields prior to applying for the fellowship. I've had three years experience in hardware prototyping and development at MIT, and have been hacking and tinkering for a much longer time. The $100k is there to allow you to follow your dreams... both as a safety net and a way to cover personal expenses. A lot of us hope to or are in the process of receiving Angel, VC, or some other form of funding to better cover our projects.

As for whether it is a responsible thing to do, a large part of what the fellowship is is a "life accelerator", as the money is virtually "no strings attached" (Well, there are quarterly "check in" review meetings, with review forms.) There isn't a temptation to spend all the money at once as it is given in monthly payments (Though you can ask for a larger sum as long as you give a good reason.) While I suppose you aren't able to trust me due to my bias, I would say that myself and a majority of the other fellows would be "responsible" with the money we receive just on the fact that we want to succeed. I take great pride in my work, and want to fulfill the cliche of "changing the world", and I will continue trying. I think my sense of responsibility developed just like anyone else (even if the average person typically only becomes what society considers 'responsible' during/after college)... if you want to achieve something, whether it be to launch a product and start a company, get a job, buy a house, or have a family, you find a way to do it and try as hard as you can to do it. I hope that the other fellows and I are able to show that young people are able to do these things, and these "life lessons" can be learned at a much earlier age than most people think, and that we can truly change the world...with or without a piece of paper telling us what we know.

<comment><USER8> _with or without a piece of paper..._

Amen. I knew through my educational life, from early on, that I was capable of more than the industrial-era training and box that the current system in the U.S. puts us through. Glad to see the open shots of the rebellion finally coming to be and wishing you the best.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Every year the Thiel Foundation filters in 20+ amazing individuals. This year is no exception. Congratulations to the fellows that made it, I'm excited to see what they build.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, it's a non-trivial filtering process (I volunteer, and a few other people I know). One of the best parts is that those selected for the last round but not ultimately accepted get most of the benefits from the fellowship (other than the money), too.

<comment><USER11> out of curiousity, what benefits are you referencing?

<comment><USER10> Referrals, events, participation in the ongoing mentorship, etc. Everything except the 100k.

<comment><USER11> how many applicants make it to the last round?

<comment><USER7> ~40

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Does anyone have any information on how the previous fellows are progressing?

<comment><USER13> Yes, check this article. Have a nice day! [http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel- fellows...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/04/24/examining-the-thiel-fellowship- where-are-they-now/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Congratulations to all, but especially to Diwank!

</comment><comment><USER15> Glad to see this continuing and always an interesting set of young adults.

That said, the web page design there is abysmal - the expanding photo captions are unreadable, the animation thing is simply obstructive, and the problem persists no matter how big you make the window.

</comment><comment><USER16> It would have been really great , if he had backed ideas with much riguor as YC does. I think the whole fiasco is about the message not it's immediate impact. I do believe he's sending us a very important message though.

</comment><comment><USER17> Congratulations to all! May the force be with you! ;)

</comment><comment><USER18> I'm excited to see what these people come up with.

</comment><comment><USER19> These young people amaze me.</comment>


Scientists Have Finally Discover the Function of the Human Appendix - <AUTHOR> http://humansarefree.com/2014/02/scientists-have-finally-discover.html <comment><USER2> Original article from 2007: [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022519307...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002251930700416X)

and more recent one: [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009....](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01809.x/abstract)

via reddit: [http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1xkm1x/scientists_f...](http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1xkm1x/scientists_finally_discover_the_function_of_the/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Having an inflamed appendix does not automatically mean you need a surgery, unless you live in US. In many parts of the world they give you a course of antibiotic shot first, and its effective in majority of cases. US is way too surgery happy because of fucked up incentives system. A friend of mine had her appendix pulled after going to hospital for pneumonia stomach flu. After the surgery they hushed it up, but it turned out that her appendix was fine and they misdiagnosed.

<comment><USER2> Anecdotes are anecdotes. The cost/risk of removing the appendix is super low.

My dad had his removed and they ended up finding a cancerous mass. That doesn't mean it's best to remove it (my point is that your anecdote doesn't provide any value in the argument for/against removal).

If anything, rather than being surgery happy, the US is probably antibiotic averse. Rather than throwing antibiotics at the problem, remove what is for the most part (present article's suggestion excluded) useless, especially if it's showing signs of causing problems (inflammation, infection, what ever).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Scientist: "We have a theory", crappy web site journalist: "now finally confirmed and validated once and for all!"</comment>


New 'Unpatchable' Exploit Found in Apple's Secure Enclave Chip - <AUTHOR> https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/01/new-unpatchable-exploit-allegedly-found-on-apples-secure-enclave-chip-heres-what-it-could-mean/ <comment><USER2> The vulnerability was explained in more detail in an article [0] submitted earlier this week [1]

> Team Pangu demonstrated that they could exploit a bug in the memory > controller that manipulates the TZ0 register memory. TZ0 refers to a > register that controls the range of SEP memory usage.

> @Windknown first introduces the architecture of Apple's SEP hardware and > system. The main processor and the co-processor are isolated and need to > communicate through a shared memory mechanism. Subsequently, it explained in > detail the process of SEPROM initialization, including the realization of > the memory isolation mechanism. The memory isolation mechanism is > implemented by the TZO mechanism.

> The TZ0 register describes the range of SEP memory usage, and AMCC is used > to prohibit the main processor from accessing the memory space of TZO. The > epic vulnerability announced this time is in SEPROM. By combining the > BOOTROM exploit of checkm8, the IO mapping register can be modified to > bypass the memory isolation protection. Then cooperate with the race of the > main processor to achieve the purpose of modifying any SEPOS and SEP APP. > For example, through the restriction of password input in patch sks, to try > to lock the screen password without restriction.

> According to Axi0mX, the SEP chip bug can only be triggered if the hacker > has physical access to the device and with a BOOTROM exploit like checkm8 or > checkra1n.

> He also added that this vulnerability cannot be used to jailbreak via a web > browser (JailbreakMe) or with an application (unc0ver) because the value in > the TZ0 registry cannot be changed after boot. So, unless someone gets > his/her hands on your iPhone and puts it in DFU mode, you are safe.

[0] [https://androidrookies.com/team-pangu-demonstrates- unpatchab...](https://androidrookies.com/team-pangu-demonstrates-unpatchable- secure-enclave-processor-sep-chip-vulnerability-in-ios/)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23976506](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23976506)

</comment><comment><USER3> No details in the article of what the exploit accomplishes or what is required in order to achieve the exploit, except that it is a hardware issue in the A11 Bionic chip, which exists in iPhone 8, 8S, and X. Not present in the A12 and A13 Secure Enclave.

</comment><comment><USER4> Is this the same or different than the "New 'unpatchable' iOS exploit could lead to permanent jailbreak for iPhone 4s to iPhone X" from September 2019:

* [https://9to5mac.com/2019/09/27/ios-unpatchable-ios-exploit-j...](https://9to5mac.com/2019/09/27/ios-unpatchable-ios-exploit-jailbreak-iphone-x/)

* [https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/09/devel...](https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/09/developer-of-checkm8-explains-why-idevice-jailbreak-exploit-is-a-game-changer/)

* [https://github.com/axi0mX/ipwndfu](https://github.com/axi0mX/ipwndfu)

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21091219](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21091219)

<comment><USER5> Different, the Secure Enclave was basically the one thing unaffected by checkm8.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is it actually confirmed that A11 is vulnerable? The only information I read is that checkm8 is available up until A11 and checkm8 is a prerequisite to trigger this new exploit. However, every demo/tease/screenshot I've seen is with an A10. If A11 is vulnerable, wouldn't the hackers show off the attack running on it?

<comment><USER7> I don't think so. I've heard rumors that whatever they're doing does not work, but whether it's because the bug is actually fixed or because they just didn't bother adapting it is unclear. And there's also some other thing going around that supposedly iOS 14 has some sort of additional stuff to make checkm8 less effective, which would involve a SEP exploit…

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> ...up to the A11, so the most recent devices are not affected.

</comment><comment><USER9> Secure enclaves and their ilk should really not be soldered on devices, or on silicon.

What happens if/when someone manages to create a persistent enclave exploit?

It might be entirely impossible to know if you're affected, and the only plausible (but not very reasonable) end user mitigation might be to replace an entire logic board. Likely for a quite hefty sum of money.

I'm not saying it's all together a bad idea with a more secure processing unit, but there are quite literally no good (user centric) reason to make it hard to replace, certainly not in anything bigger than a phone form factor.

Specifically about Apple: With its persistent claims of user centricity should not need to be told this, that it should be removable/movable, unless of course this has nothing to do with the user at all. Exactly what is up for debate, but there's a certain asymmetry in the message, the effort required, the end user benefits, and the trajectory of this work that I have a hard time reconciling with anything primarily benefitting the user. Especially considering the otherwise quite lackluster attention to quality and security seen in the last few years. Lots of security features that are ostensibly for the benefit of the user, but where one can tell a parallel story that is about complete platform control, in the light of which the design decisions seems to make more sense.

<comment><USER10> The same could be said for storage and ram chips.

But apple really wants you to buy a new device as often as your paycheck allows you, so this kind of things (removable secure enclave) isn't going to happen, most likely.

<comment><USER11> Apple actually goes out of it's way to maintain compatibility with older devices much longer than most manufacturers. Even the ones that no longer get the most recent OS get security patches for some time after. Yes, it would be nice to have replaceable RAM and SSD in phones, but that would not benefit most users who would never replace anything. Making those things replaceable means they are bulkier and more complex to manufacture reliably. Apple seems to have made a trade-off there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > The only thing we know so far is that this vulnerability in Secure Enclave > affects all Apple chips between the A7 and A11 Bionic, similar to the > checkm8 exploit that allows jailbreak for almost all iOS devices up to > iPhone X.

Actually, the exploit _requires_ a bootrom exploit like checkm8 to work. This is why it doesn't work on newer devices.

</comment><comment><USER12> ... the SEP is not a "chip", it's just another processor core / set of peripherals inside the SoC.

</comment><comment><USER13> Does this mean trust issues with mobile payments

</comment><comment><USER14> This demonstrates yet again how encryption technology should be in software, not hardware, in open-source, not closed-source, and in the decentralised full control of every user, not centralised self-serving entities.

<comment><USER12> No, it really doesn't.

<comment><USER14> How so?

<comment><USER15> I think the burden is on you to show how all of these things are demonstrated. You're the one making a claim here.

<comment><USER14> If someone disagrees, it is reasonable to expect them to explain why instead of merely dismissing it.

Also, I think my generalised statements - and generalised statements have value and meaning - are quite self-evident and already well understood concepts among HN readers.

However, here they are explained one minor level further:

\- Software can be patched. Hardware can only be thrown out.

\- Open-source can be far more easily audited. Closed-source software has to be reverse-engineered by the user at best.

\- Full control of encryption means the user has the ability and responsibility to control all aspects of access to the keys.

I now invite you or others to explain your disagreement.

<comment><USER15> > the user has the ability and responsibility to control all aspects of access > to the keys.

It should be obvious to you that this is crazy talk.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is the "other side" of the Net Neutrality argument? - <AUTHOR> Everything I've read or seen on the internet has told me companies are trying to end Net Neutrality and that this is a really bad thing and I should do something about it. All of the publications I've seen have been pushed by Reddit or Youtube or some site that would be negatively affected by the decision. Surely, the content-creators on these platforms are biased against ending Net Neutrality.
Instead of blindly following and accepting the rhetoric of these content-creators, I want to explore all sides of the argument.
If ending Net Neutrality meant the end of everything that is "good" about the internet, there wouldn't be proponents pushing for it.
I refuse to believe that mega-corporations like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon are 100% evil, and that they want to end Net Neutrality just to screw over their customers and get more money. After all, the employees of the ISPs are humans and must also be benefiting from Net Neutrality, no?
So, what is the other side of the argument? Why would anyone want to end net neutrality? <comment><USER2> \- It's more expensive for an ISP to stream data from Netflix than it is to stream data from their own servers.

\- Net neutrality would prevent a philanthropist from providing free wireless access to Wikipedia (but nothing else).

\- Packets for real-time streaming should take priority over others.

\- ISPs will bypass net neutrality restrictions by switching to proprietary non-standard channels.

\- What's the difference between Amazon providing free shipping and Netflix offering free streaming?

\- Net neutrality is a distraction for the real problem that is lack of competition and artificial monopolies.

<comment><USER3> > It's more expensive for an ISP to stream data from Netflix than it is to > stream data from their own server

Where to begin...

1) Almost by definition, if you connect to Netflix via your ISP, you are streaming content "from" at least one "server" belonging to Netflix, and at least one "server" belonging to your ISP

2) Netflix is an especially bad example for your point, because they provide free caching appliances to any data center with enough traffic. So most of the time you are streaming Netflix, assuming you're accessing the most recently popular content, you are _literally_ streaming it from a "server" on your ISP's network.

3) Your ISP does not pay Netflix for every byte it downloads from them. That is, traffic from ISP <-> Netflix does not cost your ISP anything more than traffic from ISP <-> news.ycombinator.com.

On point 3, it's important to note that an _ISP does not pay per unit transferred over its network._ The only costs to the ISP are the fixed capital costs of network infrastructure and maintenance. Beyond that they may have transit agreements with other ISPs (usually mutual but in some cases maybe paid). But none of these agreements charge the ISP per gb.

The ISP builds pipes with capacity and then charges you based on how much you put through the pipe (whether directly through $/gb pricing, or indirectly through capped plans). They make their margins with overselling and traffic shaping. True, streaming Netflix does not cost your ISP extra, but it does take up capacity in those pipes. The reason ISPs are concerned is because dominant content providers effectively limit the ability of an ISP to oversell its capacity, reducing margins. It has nothing to do with increased cost of serving bytes from Netflix vs bytes from somewhere else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The main argument against the current net neutrality laws is that they are unnecessary legislation and that government should only intervene with rules when some harm has been shown.

The internet worked just fine with respect to ISPs not favoring content before the net neutrality laws were passed in 2015. Yes, there were some instances of push and shove between content providers and ISPS but overall not a big problem. After all the internet has exploded in reach and scale prior to 2015 without that law.

</comment><comment><USER5> You could argue that ending net neutrality enables more precise pricing models that would reflect the underlying cost of provision, so that people who aren't consuming substantial bandwidth with services like Netflix, Spotify, BitTorrent, et al won't be penalized by an implicitly higher plan price (because plan prices are likely currently modeled on consumption behavior near the median/mean).

For the record, I highly doubt the ISPs would pass any savings along to customers but you did ask for the other side :)

</comment><comment><USER6> The other side is that net neutrality is just a bandage around the more fundamental problem: that there is not much competition between ISPs in the USA.

The seemingly endless debate around "net neutrality" arguably benefits ISPs, who have little to gain by being "non-neutral" but MUCH to gain by maintaining their local fiefdoms.

</comment><comment><USER7> > After all, the employees of the ISPs are humans and must also be benefiting > from Net Neutrality, no?

Corporate policy is not written based on fully-informed democratic vote of employees. Its set by management who is paid to act as an agent of the shared (usually, purely financial for a large public firm) interests of the shareholders.

</comment><comment><USER8> AIUI the basic argument against net neutrality is "government regulation is bad, capitalism is good, let the ISPs do what they want and have the free market sort it out". And of course this is worth a lot of money to the ISPs. But the big problem here is there is no free market for ISPs.

<comment><USER9> > _But the big problem here is there is no free market for ISPs._

What is the average number of ISPs available to a home? I have no data, but I'm guessing it's not very many. Not enough that there is effectively a free market.

<comment><USER8> Exactly. I believe that, for most places in the US, it's 1 or 2, though I don't actually have any concrete data.

<comment><USER10> For reference we have about 15 ISPs in Denmark (however not all of them cover all parts if the country). For my 100/20mbit line I'm paying ~$47 USD.. with no caps, limits or whatever.

If there is an argument against Net neutrality thats based on a free market, doesnt that actually require you guys to have a free market in the first place?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I like your approach, so let's take a look at this from the perspective of a traffic lane, which is how it is often described.

What if your local roads had two lanes, a fast lane and a slow lane. Anybody who pays to drive in the fast lane gets to go faster, anybody who doesn't pay is forced into the slow lane.

All the busses and other gov't vehicles get to drive in the fast lane. Uber makes a deal with the gov't which lets them drive in the fast lane.

The slow lane is set to an arbitrary 30km/h. You want to get to work, but it's 80km away. You could be there in an hour in the fast lane, but it's more than 2 in the slow lane. What do you do?

The gov't will tell you that the fast lane is great for prioritising traffic. Which may be true, but they've decided on the priority based on who has paid the most. Does that actually help you? They say, with the new system, we have all sorts of data on who travels on which roads and we can sell that data to pay for the system.

Ok, how do you benefit from that payment of a system which is actively preventing you from getting to work?

I don't know. Maybe I'm too close to the issue to see what the "other side" may be, other than $$$.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is the most common argument FOR Net Neutrality, but I don't think there is any evidence to believe that this is exactly what ISPs will do if Net Neutrality ends.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have a serious problem with the naming convention of "net neutrality." It's extremely confusing because it sounds like "net neutrality" is some abstract object up for debate. But in actuality, what's up for debate is " _anti_ net neutrality".

The status-quo _is_ net neutrality. If Congress/FCC were to do nothing, we would still have net neutrality.

In that sense, it's confusing for non-technical, mainstream consumers to hear about the debate on "net neutrality" as if it's a question of whether or not we should implement net neutrality. It's _already_ implemented simply by the absence of regulation.

This confusion, and all the convoluted technical discussion that goes along with it, leaves most people with little ability to discern who's arguing for what.

Lobbyists and government regulators prey on this confusion. Their behavior is symptomatic of a much larger problem in US politics. Unfortunately the internet is now a hot target for the externalities of this political system.

The best move, as others have said, would be to _do nothing_. There is no need for regulation; the market is working.

</comment><comment><USER2> Internet providers are like shipping companies. They charge you a price to deliver some volume of data/goods at a given speed.

\- Should shipping companies be allowed decide what you can and can't ship?

\- Should shipping companies be allowed to charge more to ship specific things?

\- Should shipping companies be allowed to charge less to ship specific things?

\- Should shipping companies allow stores to pay for shipping (free shipping)?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> From my point of view, a curated internet would be much less noisy. I'd only be allowed to access to the content that I want to have access to.

Reducing the amount of useless and distracting information that I can see would increase my overall productivity. I realize I could just blacklist sites like reddit and youtube on my laptop, but when I have control over it, I'll just turn it off and browse anyway. If access came at a premium, I'd be much more selective of the information and content I consume through these distracting sites.

I don't think ending Net Neutrality is the best way of filtering the noise, but I think it is one (naive) attempt at doing so.

<comment><USER7> > From my point of view, a curated internet would be much less noisy. I'd only > be allowed to access to the content that I want to have access to.

No, you'd only have access to the content that _curator_ wanted you to have access to.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ok, but the curators would need to provide a suitably large range of content in order to stay competitive.

<comment><USER12> They don't need to stay competitive because most areas of the country only have one option.

<comment><USER13> Nothing is less competitive than a government monopoly.

<comment><USER7> If something is going to be uncompetitive in any case, you strip the power to leverage that for additional control from the uncompetitive thing. Government road networks face no competition, but that's virtually never an issue because no one is leveraging that monopoly to restrict competition elsewhere, not to charge rents beyond what it takes to maintain he road network (or even sufficient to that end.)

Last mile connectivity is a natural monopoly, whether or not it is a _government_ monopoly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why do you think that the behaviour of corporations is a matter of belief? You "refuse to believe" that they want to "get more money", but profit is the raison d'etre of corporations. It's why they exist. Increasing profit is therefore the prime goal. Your refusing to believe it, in the face of the evidence of history, business logic, and political science, is analogous to the blind faith of flat-earthers.

<comment><USER15> And to think that the employees have any say in the policies is also hopelessly naive.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I've found snippets of Rand Paul's opinions on net neutrality, which basically sum up to "any government control in a market is bad".[1]

[1] Campaign for liberty's "The Technology Revolution" [http://www.campaignforliberty.org/national- blog/c4l-introduc...](http://www.campaignforliberty.org/national- blog/c4l-introduces-the-technology-revolution)

</comment><comment><USER16> You can read Ajit Pai's statement here:

[http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017...](http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1121/DOC-347868A1.pdf)

> Today, I have shared with my colleagues a draft order that would abandon > this failed approach and return to the longstanding consensus that served > consumers well for decades. Under my proposal, the federal government will > stop micromanaging the Internet. Instead, the FCC would simply require > Internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that > consumers can buy the service plan that's best for them and entrepreneurs > and other small businesses can have the technical information they need to > innovate.

If you get around the spin in that statement the argument is a fairly conventional one:

Government regulation inhibits technological innovation by requiring internet service providers to provide their services in the same way they always have. If regulations were removed new ideas could be tested in the market and no one can predict what new technological innovations may occur.

How is removing a regulation limiting freedom?

The real heart of this issue is not what Comcast or Verizon will do. If they did things that customers didn't like, and customers were free to leave (as they are now), then they would leave.

Rather the real heart of the issue is that customers may actually welcome the changes. Maybe most people would be happy with only having access to a few sites, or a slow lane for less cost. And the kind of folks who read hacker news would end up being collateral damage, and the original, global, universal vision of the internet will have been lost.

In my opinion the worst-case, dystopian scenario here is unlikely to happen. There are just too many people out there who really do value an open internet, and although there may be a period of adjustment, someone will enter the market to provide what customers want, though it may be significantly more expensive than before.

But I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe in the free market or not. The pendulum swings in american thought, and I'd say we're currently in the panic, distrust and pessimism side, but we'll head back the other direction in a few years.

</comment><comment><USER17> They want to bring back the halcyon days of AT&T.

Big players get to control eyeballs and information dissemination. They'll charge for the value generated by online services and reduce the chaos coming out of the Valley.

Read the Bellhead vs Nethead article from 90s wired.

</comment><comment><USER18> Great question! First if you want to be more informed on the general topic of information distribution channels in history, such as the telegraph, the telephone, the radio, satellite communication and the internet, I highly recommend Tim Wu's book "the master switch".

As for the argument supported by the content distributors such as Comcast & Co (ISP) well it's fairly straightforward. They have been investing for years now in fiber optic cables around the USA and the world to ensure fast and reliable internet connection. It's probably important to note that these investment have often been made in private-public ventures where the US has invested lots of money. Now because in the current system (net neutrality) ISP have to open their fiber optics to anyone paying and cannot prioritize content transmission coming from their subscribers, they cannot ensure that all content will be delivered in time unless they always make sure there is extra transmission capacity in case their's a peak of transmission demand.

Until now, this has never been a problem because in the 90's, they invested so much in the infrastructure thinking it would be a goldmine that when the .com bubble burst in the early 2000 due to crazy investment in fiber optic, ISP's had to fill their lines to be able to pay for their investment. Now that they managed to fill them, they want to make more money without investing too much in infrastructure again because it's risky, time consuming, mega expensive (about a million a kilometer) and not as profitable as it could be without net neutrality. Another problem they are facing is that they are also becoming huge content providers, meaning you subscribe to an ISP and he will offer you TV programs, music, movies you can stream etc. When you pay for that service, they want to make sure you can stream without any buffering (because you paid for it right!) and they can't ensure that with net neutrality unless they always have a margin on the amount of information they infrastructure can handle.

Now this is where the real dilemma comes in: if you want to be able to pay for an ISP's content such as movies and don't want to have any buffering (which btw is almost inexistant today) then ending net neutrality would be a good option. On the other hand, if you want to subscribe to another content provider such as Netflix (if it doesn't belong to your ISP provider because they work with a competing company) then your IPS provider will not prioritize this content on their network and you will have a hard time watching the movie you also payed for! In short, this will tie you to your ISP, and if you don't have a choice of ISP's at home, then your access freedom to the market of content is reduced to what your ISP provider has to offer.

There is also a bigger fight at stake here. ISP's make their money by offering broadband and content to subscribers. The Valley make money mostly with advertisement. Advertisement is content that the ISP's have to "carry" which increases the broadband demand and reduces to IPS's ability to offer paying content to their subscribers, their market. In short, the Valley makes money off wide broadband offered by ISPs and do not pay for that as much as they should!

However, and this is my opinion, opinion you can find in the book i suggested at the beginning of this long post, it's not the right solution in this debate to let ISP's take control on the content distribution market by ending net neutrality. The harm caused by this change from the current situation would be much to great for users and the content provider market then the benefit these ISP would make. They arguments are valid but the solution proposed is flawed, especially considering that in the USA, you only have 4? ISP providers left for a 350 million american market. I believe our liberties are already reducing in terms of the information we are exposed too, it's not easy to find what you need out there (as you may have seen when searching information for this post) and we should not give the chance to huge companies or governments to interfere anymore because they may (and will) use it to their advantage when the time comes... and that the precise moment where We will need it the most!

</comment><comment><USER19> Because it will ultimately lead to censorship, which will be very profitable.</comment>


Ask HN: When to use NoSQL? - <AUTHOR>

There's too much Buzz around NoSQL these days? But I'm still confused when to use NoSQL? Is NoSQL replacement of RDBMS? Or should it be used only in specific scenarios?<p>I've only tried CouchDB and had to write my own Map and Reduce function. Wondering how can it be faster than RDBMS query engine. <comment><USER2> When your data isn't relational and you're trying to store objects, then NoSQL is a pretty good choice.

ORM's have always kinda shoehorned objects into the RDBMS data model and the abstraction isn't always pretty.

With NoSQL, if you're just trying to store some cache or session objects and you need super high read/write time, NoSQL shines. If you have massive datasets, like "timeline statuses" and you need to search for the needle in the haystack, NoSQL (map reduce) shines.

If you're trying to analyze what region of the united states your product sells best to the 12-18 year old range, then RDBMS is usually the ticket.

<comment><AUTHOR> My concern is related to that. We write our own Map Reduce functions and loop thru all the records (say in millions) in the Database to select the ones we need. Isn't this (looping thru all the records) costly in terms of time?

I mean in RDBMS, query engine will handle this and optimize the query. In RDBMS we can even specify the indexes to make search fast but in case of NoSQL there's no schema so how does NoSQL index the data.

I hardly have any experience with NoSQL so just curious. Would be nice if you can point me to some link for more detailed intro.

Thanks :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm about to build a feature for my startup that puts a widget on our customers' websites. The fields on their site need to be customizable by them. Sure, I could have a regular SQL table with `fieldname` and `value`, but that table will get crowded quickly.

So I think I'll use the schema-less aspect of NoSQL to try this out. NB: I haven't played w/ any implementations yet, so if someone out there wants to persuade me to go a different route, please do so!</comment>


Daakia – POP Server mail backup tool - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/gohar94/Daakia <comment><AUTHOR> Open-source e-mail backup utility from POP Servers. Bare minimum features. I couldn't find a free/painless utility to download e-mails from an Outlook Web App (OWA) [http://office365.com/owa/](http://office365.com/owa/) account so I wrote this crude script to do the job.</comment>


Soup-Salad-Sandwich Space - <AUTHOR> http://sandwichspace.xyz/ <comment><USER2> I've said it once and I'll say it again. I know it when I see it. We don't need to classify. Classification will only lead to economic ruin and anarchy! Aliens will be poring through our databanks in an effort of digital archaeology and discover these endeavours.

"They're one of few species to finally reconcile food topology and taxonomy but like the rest, they succumbed to the madness it brought upon their society."

<comment><USER3> But why?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wrong visualization method. They should have used a Ternary plot. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_plot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_plot)

<comment><USER5> A ternary plot only works if the three variables add up to the same constant.

There's no way to fit salad (0,1,0), soup (1,0,0), and steak (0, 0.5, 0) on the same ternary plot because the first two points add up to 1 and the last one add up to 0.5.

<comment><USER6> Well obiously they aren't showing "stake" and "soup" those are binary classifications. They are showing stake-like, soup-like and salate-like, which you can normalize to one. If you actually want to keep the last axis which is essentially a comment on how much the item fits within the space you can use dot color or size though I'd argue that it's actually pretty much irrelevant for this comparison.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> So _this_ is the highest use of the .xyz domain?

I think it is.

</comment><comment><USER8> Since the three axes do not sum to one, there is something clearly missing within their model.

Hmmm. I think a triangular graph would be a better way of representing the data -- this would also expose the hole at the centre of their model; that there are no foods which are equal mixtures of soup, salad and sandwich.

I feel this is an important avenue for further research, and I seek funding to discover the triple-S food...

<comment><USER9> There's some vegetable broths that are solid enough to make the attempt, especially if you toast a bap and hollow the middle out a little.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Apparently fruit salad is as much a salad as a piece of steak.

Sushi is as sandwichy as a hot dog, but a bit more salady.

Pretty sure this is the path to madness.

</comment><comment><USER11> So I'm guessing:

Soup = liquid ingredients

Salad = solid ingredients randomly mixed together

Sandwich = solid ingredients put into a structure

<comment><USER12> Error, taco salad in a corn tortilla bowl is !not sandwich.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Now here is another dichotomy.

How about exploring and graphing the variances between dishes and cultures that that chops the food for the consumer and the ones that are serve the food in whole pieces.

</comment><comment><USER14> What about pulled pork, Georgia style (with coleslaw)? Add hot sauce - do we have the holy grail, the food item suspended gloriously at the heart of soup- salad-sandwich space?

</comment><comment><USER15> I love it. What is it?

<comment><USER16> Some background for the classification:

[https://fauxphilnews.wordpress.com/2016/01/08/towards-a- theo...](https://fauxphilnews.wordpress.com/2016/01/08/towards-a-theory-of- food-categorization/)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Hooks – Stay Up to Date on Anything Through Push Notifications - <AUTHOR> http://www.gethooksapp.com <comment><USER2> I have a feature request: I loved the idea at first glance but then I was appalled to discover that there's nowhere to register a callback URL for any of these events.

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

To me it just seems obvious that there should be an either/or option for SMS or HTTP especially since a metric shitton of people are already using slack and hipchat.

The transmission costs for HTTP are way more cheap than SMS so it seems like it would be in you guy's interest to support webhooks in order to reduce outbound SMS costs.

TLDR; HTTP is the new SMS

<comment><USER3> This doesn't strike me as a developer tool (though it could obviously be used by developers). It's for consumers. I don't know of many consumers who want to receive notifications via webhook.

If they did do webhooks then you could write one that sent out SMSs though - leave them to do the hard part while cutting them out of the loop!

Also I think it's push notifications, not SMS.

<comment><USER2> This kind of thinking reminds me of Twitter in the early days where one founder was trying to pigeonhole it into being for a particular use case. Twitter began it's life as an SMS play also if my memory serves me correctly.

Really it's up to the startup.. do they want to try to eventually become the Internet's primary notification propagation channel or are the only interested in catering to a particular mobile phone use case ?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nice work - looks like a cross between IFTTT and Pushbullet. What are your differentiating factors?

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question, I love both of this tools, while IFTTT is more about automation, on Hooks we are focusing on notifications only. Our value is the content, it's very easy to create alerts about many things with just one click.

Actually we are working on adding Hooks as an IFTTT channel later this month as a trigger so anyone can build their own receipts.

<comment><USER5> How does this differ from Pushbullet's channels?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is this better than Facebook's notify? (Which I actually love - relevant stuff waiting for me on my lock screen without any audio notifications)

<comment><AUTHOR> It's different. On Facebook Notify you subscribe to a channel and then they decide what you get, very similar to rss feed. On Hooks you customize what you want to get exactly and where you want to get it from, like post with 200 points on HN so you get only the content you asked for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> They should call the app "Get Distracted". Its an interesting idea, and potentially very useful, but most likely its going to become the annoying reason your phone keeps going off every 5 minutes. Will give it a try to see.

<comment><USER8> When I first used it, I got overexcited and configured way too many alerts. But I've been trimming it down heavily, and now a fair percentage of the pushes I get are relevant to me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool, how long have you been using Hooks for? Actually this happens a lot, our fault for sure, we need to remove some alerts like "TC all content" :)

<comment><USER8> For a few months. Also, it's one of the few apps I reinstalled when I switched phones. That says something :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Why does this need to be an app? What does it do that a website can't?

<comment><USER8> Well it's about push notifications to your phone, so it has to be an app.

<comment><USER9> That is not true. [0] [1]

[2] is my crappy push notification service mostly built for my own usage because PushBullet started getting more bloated and annoying.

[0]: [https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/03/push- notif...](https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/03/push- notifications-on-the-open-web?hl=en)

[1]: [https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/Push_API](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/Push_API)

[2]: [https://github.com/thefinn93/EasyPush](https://github.com/thefinn93/EasyPush)

<comment><USER10> None of these work natively on iOS.

<comment><USER9> This doesn't work on iOS? I thought it did. [0] claims it can do this on Chrome for iOS, or maybe by native you mean on Safari, which doesn't seem to support it...

[0]: [https://storage-cdn.realtime.co/chrome-push/index.html](https://storage- cdn.realtime.co/chrome-push/index.html)

<comment><USER10> Yeah by natively I meant without installing 3rd party apps, which is what the GP complained about.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Infographic charting every introduction leading to AppMakr's $1MM funding round - <AUTHOR> http://www.danielodio.com/2011/04/16/daniels-rule-of-10-angel-intros-1mm-raise-infographic/

<comment><USER2> This is awesome! I'd love to learn more about each of the datapoints involved. Here are just a few ideas of other dimensions that it'd be interesting to see:

* Type of investor/institution/etc

* How many investments each point makes per year, and the average size.

* How many communications were required for each investor. How many meetings? How many emails?

* Whether or not each subsequent investor knew about some or all of the previous ones.

There are a ton others questions. I'd love to see this for more rounds too!</comment>


Perl from scratch - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/hzhou/MyPerl <comment><USER2> It's for Perl 5 only.

I am wondering about the adoption of Perl 6.

Can somebody speak about his/her experience on switching from Perl 5 to Perl 6? For what use cases would learning Perl 6 make sense if you never worked with Perl 5.

Seems that "Perl 6 from scratch might be [1], or [2] if you need "a lightweight Perl 6-like environment for virtual machines".

As I already googled it, [3] is the (last ?) HN "Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet?" article since 118 days. Did something change since?

[1]: [https://perl6.org/getting-started/](https://perl6.org/getting-started/)

[2]: [https://github.com/perl6/nqp](https://github.com/perl6/nqp)

[3]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12888784](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12888784)

EDIT: formatting

<comment><USER3> Since he can parse perl5, python, php already and output any of those or binaries or javascript, adding perl6 to MyDef sounds not too hard. Ask him.

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems you have mistaken MyDef to this. MyDef is a meta-layer. It simply lets you customize your syntax and add meta-constructs, but you are still writing Perl, C, or whatever language you are actually writing. This project is a complete -- eventually anyway -- Perl compiler/interpreter (Perl5 replacement) in C. The goal of this project is to free Perl to the status of programming language (rather than tied to a compiler). Also, I want to demonstrate my idea of readable coding.

I am sure you can use MyDef to write perl6 or any text based language already. MyDef does not output binary, or translate from one language to another.

(Thanks for your attention, appreciate it :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The motivating example describes the problem and his solution a bit better: [http://hz2.org/blog/](http://hz2.org/blog/) (50x faster)</comment>


Tip from a VC: Raise More by Asking for Less - <AUTHOR> http://starkravingvc.com/2012/10/16/raise-more-by-setting-a-lower-target/

<comment><AUTHOR> "If you are targeting angels and super-angels, the strategy of lowering your target may enable you to raise more money, more quickly."

Wise advice. The first time I ever tried to raise money I had absolutely no idea what I was doing. One of the key things I learned was that they all take comfort in not being the lead. It takes a lot guts to stick your neck out and be the first investor.

</comment><comment><USER2> As a counterpoint, Brad Feld in Venture Deals advises to be ready to defend your number, and thus have a specific one.

Giving the investor a range (or not being able to describe why you came up with this specific number) gives them the impression that they won't be buying into growth, they will be financing an existing burn rate for indeterminate amount of time.

</comment><comment><USER3> We actually raised our target on advice from Naval from AngelList, because our original target didn't incentivize VCs to get in if they wanted to. For our business, raising the target was actually more helpful with raising more money, because we got oversubscribed faster, but with a number of VCs in the round.</comment>


Why gamers should be worried about Microsoft advertising in Windows - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@kmineh0151/why-gamers-should-be-worried-about-microsoft-advertising-in-windows-725ae54b7309 <comment><AUTHOR> Hi guys. I'm the author of this article. I would appreciate any constructive feedback; I'm not much of a writer but I do feel passionately about this.

Thank you.

<comment><USER2> To start with, this is very much a slippery slope fallacy from my perspective. I'm not saying this to outright dismiss your claims, but that if you want to avoid being seen as a "Chicken Little" on this subject you either need more direct evidence and/or maybe tone down the way you approach it/present it (less hyperbole, a less inflammatory domain name).

Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence and there are clear holes in your logic. Why are gamers particularly subject to "lock down" and "walled garden" as opposed to any other Windows user? Beyond political spats with Valve (which mostly seem to go one way with Valve angry at Microsoft, but Microsoft remaining happy that Steam is a mostly good Windows citizen/sub- ecosystem), what makes you think that Microsoft would break backward compatibility just for gamers when it potentially endangers Microsoft's long standing relationships with enterprise customers that are built on decades of backward compatibility?

Furthermore, can you better explain why a "walled garden" is bad for gamers? A lot of gamers (in fact, the long standing majority) are perfectly happy with their PlayStations, Nintendos, and Xboxes. A walled garden may be exactly what gamers want. Maybe it's not a massive conspiracy to endanger "PC master race gamers" but a company trying to make "I want a good console" gamers happier on Windows?

A rising tide floats all boats and it is better for everyone if there are strong gaming ecosystems on other platforms such as Linux and macOS, so instead of focusing on what you perceive to be Microsoft's problems and behaviors, can you try to focus more on Linux's benefits and be passionate about "Why gamers should love Linux" more than "Why gamers should be worried about Microsoft"?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your detailed and helpful response.

I wholeheartedly agree with your first point. I was honestly worried that I was approaching "slippery slope" territory. Really what I intended to show by the "historical" aspects was that Microsoft was capable of shutting down a competitive market with their own product because of their enormous market share, and that it almost seems like they're about to attempt something similar for their app store.

I'm not super proud of the article that I wrote; I think it's full of logical fallacies. I'll be doing it over again on the flight I'm on tomorrow, and I really want to be more structured and logical in my argument.

> Why are gamers particularly subject to "lock down" and "walled garden" as > opposed to any other Windows user?

My goal isn't really demonstrate that Windows locks users into its platform. I'll be honest: I just really want to play Overwatch on Linux without using Wine. So by targeting PC gamers specifically I hope to draw more attention.

> Furthermore, can you better explain why a "walled garden" is bad for gamers? > A lot of gamers (in fact, the long standing majority) are perfectly happy > with their PlayStations, Nintendos, and Xboxes.

That's true. I'm not here to tell gamers what they want. I think that PC gamers are a different breed; we love our freedom of choice. We all build our computers differently. We can buy DRM free games, games on Steam, games on the Windows store or on Origin or physical copies. My fear is that Microsoft might be trying to limit our freedom of choice and I want people to know about it.

> Maybe it's not a massive conspiracy to endanger "PC master race gamers" but > a company trying to make "I want a good console" gamers happier on Windows?

Platform lock-in usually begins a set of exclusive features. The problems arise whenever the company does something to make you not want to be a customer anymore; how can you switch whenever all of your games are on the Windows store?

I think a good demonstration of this is Apple and iCloud. iOS is a pretty locked-down platform. iCloud is a huge convenience for a normal user. Apple has done a number of things that may make a consumer unhappy, but it is a hassle for them to switch to a competitor whenever they've tightly integrated with iCloud.

> A rising tide floats all boats and it is better for everyone if there are > strong gaming ecosystems on other platforms such as Linux and macOS, so > instead of focusing on what you perceive to be Microsoft's problems and > behaviors, can you try to focus more on Linux's benefits and be passionate > about "Why gamers should love Linux" more than "Why gamers should be worried > about Microsoft"?

You know what: I absolutely agree. I'll try to focus on the positive more than the negative next time around. I tried to do that with the website I made to accompany the article.

Thanks a lot for your input. I really appreciate you taking the time to give me your opinion and constructive criticism.</comment></comment></comment>


Google Acquires CodePen - <AUTHOR> https://ihatetomatoes.net/google-acquires-codepen/

<comment><AUTHOR> Can anyone actually access this? Is this an April Fools prank?

<comment> nacker-hews Yeah it's a prank</comment></comment>


Ask HN: any automated tool to diagnose a slow PC? - <AUTHOR>

My PC with Windows 7 (yes I know I should be using Linux but habits die hard) is slow, dead-slow. I have tried every trick of the trade to find out what is causing it to slow down but no success till date. Anti-spyware check, antivirus check, hardware is up to date (4G RAM, Core 2 Duo), defragmentation check, startup list check, services check. I have exhausted all possibilities, and am extremely frustated by my inability to fix the issue. Is there any system-level tool (or automated) that can help me find out what is slowing down my PC?
The first two browsers I open (no matter which ones) bring the whole system to a crawl; third one is the one that works. And if I load a flash movie on Youtube, it causes the system to completely stop responding. Sometimes the audio is choppy too.
PS: I realize HN may not be the best place to ask this question but then I also realize that inspite of being a techie if I am unable to diagnose my slow PC, what about millions of other non-technical users. Is the only option for them (and perhaps me) is to format and reinstall (or perhaps move to a different OS). Is there an opportunity for a startup here? <comment><USER2> Reboot into safe mode with networking (press F8 during system startup) and run your web test. If everything runs fine there, you're almost certainly loading some piece of malware that's stealthy or malevolent enough to be hidden from the scans and inspection you're running during a normal boot.

If you're still seeing broken performance in safe mode, then dig deeper with tools. But safe mode eliminates most driver issues and all but the most ridiculously sneaky malware.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. What kind of tools are you talking about?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You can check your hardware drivers, and see if they really up-to-date. Then try all kinds of antivirus and scan your system for malware and spyware. Then try a registry cleaner to clean your registry file. OR Just install linux you won't regret it ;) that was my best decision ever.

</comment><comment><USER4> Try downloading Windows Fix-It - <http://support.microsoft.com/gp/slow_windows_performance>

</comment><comment><USER5> Soluto, the winner of TechCrunch Disrupt, is a startup that goes after this problem. Try their software - <http://soluto.com/>

</comment><comment><USER6> I am sure you have checked which processes consume the most CPU from taskbar. Is there anything suspicious going there?</comment>


Palo Alto struggles to provide housing that's affordable - <AUTHOR> http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/08/19/palo-alto-struggles-to-provide-housing-thats-affordable <comment><USER2> Palo Alto is in serious trouble - little (new) housing stock, tremendous affordability issues, no zoning reform, most housing projects rejected... The city is bleeding human capital at an astonishing rate - and not just teachers and fire fighters, even those earning high salaries such as techies and attorneys struggle to afford to live here. The response ... "move some place cheaper", "don't buy expensive lattes and you'll be able to afford a home here some day", "your generation is entitled", "we have too much traffic already", "stop the jobs", "it's Palantir's fault"...

What do you say to this? Young people in Palo Alto and renters are subsidizing existing residents. By heavily restricting housing supply residents have built an investment machine. Foreign-owned "ghost houses" are a testament to that.

Questions: Can anything be done to build more housing in Palo Alto? Should we do it? Does Palo Alto care? And at the end - is Palo Alto even worth it? Maybe we all should move away...</comment>


Apple's New North Carolina Data Center Ready to Roll - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/gigaom/mobile/2010_10_25_apples_new_north_carolina_data_center_ready_to_roll.html

<comment><USER2> Let me give you a handle on how big (physically) this farm is: half a million square feet, with another half million they're planning on building.

In comparison, the Boeing Everett plant, where they manufacture half the world's airliners, is 4.2 million square feet. That building contains, IIRC, four production lines.

The Apple server farm, when finished, will be the size of the Boeing 747 assembly line.

<comment><USER3> Or if you prefer, the Empire State building has about a quarter of a million square feet of floorspace, so it'll fill two Empire State Buildings.

Or for a somewhat less impressive measure, the average size of a Wal-Mart Supercenter is 180,000 square feet, so it's about two and a half of those.

<comment><USER4> I believe the "Wal-Mart" is too American to ever make it as a SI unit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I presume there's no info about what kit they're actually using in there? I'm guessing it's not XServes?

<comment><USER6> Sadly, this is the one piece of the operation about which there _doesn't_ seem to be a flood of rumors, let-alone informed ones.

Being Apple, could they possible have a joint announcement planned for both the facility and for a total makeover of XServe line (emphasizing GreenPower, price-wise farm-suitable servers). Would it not be embarrassing for Apple to stock the place with a non-Apple product? At the same time, would it not be absurd to risk the success of a data center this size on an (relatively) inefficient, second-rate hardware config?

Either way, it should be an _opportunity_ for a huge Apple PR event.

<comment><USER7> Gruber seems to believe that they are most certainly not using Xserves: "You don't think Apple is filling that North Carolina data center with Xserves, do you?" ([http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/10/22/gosling-java- mac...](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/10/22/gosling-java-mac-os-x)) He, however, doesn't indicate whether that's speculation or whether he has sources.

<comment><USER4> Another question would be to the OS on the servers. Darwin running headless, maybe?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


NSA panicked deprecation of suite B - <AUTHOR> http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2015/10/a-riddle-wrapped-in-curve.html?m=1 <comment><USER2> It breaks the HN guidelines to editorialize the titles of stories like this, so please don't.

This post is a dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10430367](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10430367).

</comment><comment><USER3> If this is sound, the theory that bitcoin is just the first cryptocurrency of its generation is now confirmed: bitcoin is dead.

If that website about bitcoin obituaries is around this update should be added there.

Clarifications as requested:

1) The article is about ECC

2) The article doesn't mention secp256k1, but it mentions EC curves in general and special those in the 256 bit field -- which secp256k1 is one of them

3) If NSA is able to crack 256 bits curves, what makes secp256k1 special to all this? Nothing.

<comment><USER4> What? There's absolutely no connection between bitcoin and anything in that article, especially not with ECC.

<comment><USER5> Bitcoin uses P-256 that the NSA just deprecated.

<comment><USER6> Nope, by a stroke of luck Bitcoin uses secp256k1 instead, which is not included in Suite B.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Here [0] is the link to discussion on this article from few hours earlier.

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10430367](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10430367)</comment>


News app seeks to help users "balance their media diet" - <AUTHOR> http://www.niemanlab.org/2017/03/a-news-app-aims-to-burst-filter-bubbles-by-nudging-readers-toward-a-more-balanced-media-diet/ <comment><USER2> Until this is stock behavior in web browsers, I can't see it having much of an effect unfortunately. There also seems to me to be a huge question of what that effect would ultimately be.

<comment><AUTHOR> Creator here. We're planning to build a Chrome extension also. We've actually been pleasantly surprised by the app's stickiness with users. Some say that just seeing the app icon on their home screen is enough of a reminder to get them to open up the app and read some news outside their bubble.

Not sure what effects you're wondering about in the second sentence. Are you worried that people would read too far outside their bubble and get angry? We actually don't include sites that are extraordinarily partisan (breitbart, occupy democrats), partly for that reason.

<comment><USER2> Honestly I don't know what the effects would be. I imagine a definite impact on personal relationships, particularly with individuals who remain more fully enveloped by their own filter bubbles. I do however think it's a great idea and I'm excited to see your idea as an extension.</comment></comment></comment>


Amazon RDS - The Beginner's Guide  - <AUTHOR> http://www.webyog.com/blog/2009/11/06/amazon-rds-the-beginners-guide/

<comment><USER2> Nice writeup. I also spent a few hours kicking the tires of RDS the first day it was released.

I use Amazon AWS a lot for both customer work and my own projects. The two things I most want to see are continued improvements to cloud watch and better proxy support for failover.</comment>


Create Maps Online: A comparison of 6 webmap providers - <AUTHOR> http://www.digital-geography.com/create-maps-online-a-comparison-webmap-providers

<comment><USER2> Awesome stuff... If you're looking into the more social desktop area there's Mapme out of Israel... What are people's take on Google's My Maps? (esp on mobile)</comment>


Inevitable Minds - <AUTHOR> http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2009/04/inevitable_mind.php

<comment><USER2> I've played, and marvelled at, the $10 20Q game, and wondered how they created something so smart and so cheap. Turns out the answer was time - based on a learning program that's been running since 1988.

And time, too, is what gives life intelligence, through Darwinian processes of advantage. If the dinosaurs hadn't been 'wiped out', how would their intelligence have developed? If the Roman Empire hadn't collapsed and been replaced by a fundamentalist religion, would man have had heavier-than-air flight in the 8th century instead of the 20th?

<comment><USER3> Hmm. Why was this downvoted?

<comment><USER4> Don't ask questions like that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Excellent read. Just excellent. I know this comment is a little pointless, but there's just nothing to add.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yea I'm a big fan of his writing. His writing gives me ideas and let's me think about a variety of topics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> referring to 20Q as a mind seems stretching things a bit far. 20Q is just a huge decision tree that has been built by trial and error.

<comment><USER7> What exactly do you think a _mind_ is? The definition you gave is not far from the biological definition (much debated on, by the way, and mixed with the forever escaping concept of consciousness.)

<comment><USER6> inference is different from a static tree.

<comment><USER4> I would say the system that was used to build and train 20Q is a mind.

Keep in mind (heh) that calling something a mind doesn't mean "human level consciousness".</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Nomad Loot – The Best Gear for Digital Nomads - <AUTHOR>

Hello friends,
I recently launched Nomad Loot - https://nomadloot.com - with a friend of mine with the goal of covering gear that is useful to digital nomads.
The purpose is twofold:

    - List the best products for each category
    - Discovery for less known but useful products
 We'd love any feedback you guys might have and please suggest your favorite products!
Thank you!
PS: The links to Amazon are affiliate links, we're not really counting on that to make money but it'd be nice if it paid for hosting maybe! More details in the about section. <comment><USER2> Its a good start, I was impressed with the selection of backpacks.

</comment><comment><USER3> cool! i can get behind this. may i suggest something, though? it would be really cool if the site was more interactive. i'd love to be able to submit/rate my own gear.

</comment><comment><USER4> seems like another simple amazon affiliate store looking to steal SEO rankings with bad reviews of products they have never really laid eyes on. wasn't panda created to help stop this kind of stuff? sorry to be critical, but i think review sites should be thought out, honest and real, rather then a money grab.

or am i missing something?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback, I totally understand your reservations with all the crap out there on the internet.

We just thought a thorough resource for digital nomad gear should exist so we did a weekend project to create one.

A lot of the products aren't even on Amazon. It's a mix of stuff that we own and use, suggestions from friends and people on the nomad slack gear channel. Almost all of our content is original by the way.

Right now we're thinking of ways to make it more user content based, like finding experienced nomads to share what they use (gear lists). Also ranking products by users and/or user entered products.</comment></comment>


The Curious, Crumbling Cult of Elon Musk - <AUTHOR> https://www.nathanrabin.com/happy-place/2020/5/27/the-curious-crumbling-cult-of-elon-musk <comment><USER2> Despite his bizarre behavior, Musk has done some things that inspire people, such as:

1\. mainstreaming electric cars

2\. developing the first reusable orbital rocket

3\. starting development of a new rocket (Starship) that could dramatically lower the cost of space access

Despite the insane things he says and does, the Starship plan is remarkably pragmatic -- the Department of Defense asked the question of "How do you dramatically lower launch costs" and the resulting report describes something very much like the Falcon/Starship plan but says that "it will never happen because of misaligned incentives".

In particular, programs such as the X-33 and the National Aerospace Plane bet the farm on sexy technologies that were difficult if not impossible to develop. Musk gave up on single-stage-to-orbit even if it means developing two launch vehicles. SSTO is just so hard that it gets in the way of reusability. Same with aerospike engines, scramjets, composite fuel tanks, etc.

From my perspective the "pedo guy" and other stupid incidents endanger the positive goals that he's working on. If there is any way he's going to "lose Mars" it will be trying to out-Trump Trump.</comment>


Use of AI to select Superstars in sports - <AUTHOR> https://thinkml.ai/artificial-intelligence-in-cricket-is-a-significant-prediction-strategy-for-players-luck-assessment/ <comment><USER2> This article seemed as if GPT-3 had written it: the article is coherent as a whole, but somewhat meaningless in particular areas.

<comment><USER3> Yes exactly this is not written by a human. It doesn't make sense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > Data transfer from the bat to broadcasters for on-time analysis requires > transfer speed equals to speed of light.

Oh dear this author does not seem to understand a few things.

<comment><USER5> Probably not within the awareness of the author, but he's kind of right as data transfer happens at the medium's material specific speed of light. I wouldn't call it a requirement, though. :^)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> "AI meant to select superstars in computer science selects for computer scientists mostly likely to give implement AI in positions of power"

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice, this will just reinforce whatever bias the AI has, polluting its data with its choices.

Probably ruining a few careers along the way.

</comment><comment><USER8> So, moneyball?

</comment><comment><USER9> if you had included "Cricket" in the title, I would've known this wasn't worth clicking on

<comment><USER10> Second. I regularly laugh with my friends at how different subsets of the group dominate the conversation depending on the subject. Cricket has a few fanatic followers, and the rest of us quickly tune out.

Recommend using the article's own title: Artificial Intelligence in Cricket is a Significant Prediction Strategy for Player's Luck Assessment

<comment><USER11> A few fanatic followers? Try 2.5B followers. It's the second most popular sport in the world: [https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-are-the-most- popula...](https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-are-the-most-popular- sports-in-the-world.html)

<comment><USER12> But first in India

<comment><USER13> No doubt, Cricket is in the DNA of the people of subcontinent</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What are you most looking forward to in tech this year? - <AUTHOR>

Interested to hear everyone's thoughts about what you're most looking forward to in tech this year.
I posted mine earlier today here: http://www.gordonbowman.com/what-im-looking-forward-to-in-tech-in-2012
Summary:
- The digital living room. - The mobile wallet. - The connected car. - Microsoft and Mobile.
How about you? <comment><USER2> The raspberry pi(<http://www.raspberrypi.org/>) and cotton candy (<http://www.fxitech.com/products/>) computers to be released. I desire the raspberry pi to be released soon because, it represents computers getting to the point where you can use them in almost any hobby project cheaply and effective. I'm really excited to see what projects it will get put into and ways people will use it.

I want the cotton candy to come out, because its well rather cool and i would love to be able to have my development tools and release candidate software in a package that is easy to transport.

<comment><AUTHOR> Raspberry pi does look very interesting. Hopefully it inspires more kids to get involved at an earlier age. When is it supposed to be released?</comment></comment>


Apple's Mac App Store to Open on January 6  - <AUTHOR> http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/12/16macappstore.html

<comment><USER2> That being the case, then the Mac App store is no longer a key feature of Lion. I suppose then that by releasing the Mac App store now, Apple is increasing demand for the new app launcher in Lion.

<comment><USER3> Jobs said that the Mac App Store was launching before Lion when they presented Lion itself. No surprise here.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Curious that instead of saying 'desktop apps' Steve Jobs refers to them as 'PC apps'. Twice in the same sentence.</comment>


Why was this secret? - <AUTHOR> https://sivers.org/ws

<comment><USER2> I've been giving people advice on marketing strategy as I meet people here and there. For quite a while I've held the best ideas back. I always figured I should tell them enough to get them thinking but no more. Then I read a passage in a book that got me thinking so I tried something different. I decided to tell the next person i meet everything he/she needed to know.

I met an assistant director for a local project. I spent over 30mins telling her everything i could to help her. Next thing i know she's telling me how amazing i am, telling all her work colleagues and then asking me to come back to do a workshop.

All in all, went well. I then decided to do the same with my next blog. I laid it all out as much as I could. One reader emailed his whole team and the email got circulated to 133 people from just one person.

Then another guy stopped me in the street and told me how he loved my latest article and passed it onto the management team and that he thinks they should meet me.

I could never have expected that kind of response. Just goes to show how irrational our fears can be and how we project things based on our experience instead of what might be possible which - let's face it - might just be better than you've imagined.

</comment><comment><USER3> What the author seems to be missing is that most of what we keep secret can be taken by someone with a malicious intent and used against us. This is a major reason some things are best kept private.</comment>


Please, give us feedback on Spottiness.com - <AUTHOR>

We recently launched Spottiness.com for people to express their opinions about anything anonymously and be heard by their targets. Every post (spot) is moderated and can be positive (goldspot), negative (blackspot), or amorous (lovespot). Spots are sent to their targets by email for free or by regular mail for a small fee. Thanks!!! <comment><USER2> 1\. The name is terrible. A lot of things come to mind when thinking of spottiness and "spotty," none of them especially good or related to anonymous reviews. I defy you to find a single positive use of the word "spottiness" in native English text.

2\. The site is overwhelmingly busy. There is way too much of everything on the site. Too many pictures. Too much text. Too many colors.

3\. Mixing reviews and confessions of love makes absolutely no sense. Again, too much. What exactly are you trying to do? Everything?

4\. Your product is, aside from the confusing terminology, love notes and mail service, exactly the same as GetSatisfaction.

I don't mean to sound so negative, I just can't think of any reason anyone would need your site. Are there really people out there who can't find a place to post anonymous reviews? Are there people who don't already know about Google, Yelp, TripAdvisor, UrbanSpoon, and GetSatisfaction? If the letter service (whatever that is) is your way of drawing people in, make it much, much more obvious, and trim away the unrelated stuff which dilutes the message.</comment>