Timezone updates need to be fixed - <AUTHOR> http://www.creativedeletion.com/2015/12/03/timezone-updates-need-fixing.html <comment><USER2> Where I work we deal a lot with events (yoga gyms, community sports centers, etc.) and the old code was saving EVERYTHING in UTC. Every 6 months we'd have some bug report coming in saying that some event was now one hour later or earlier on the website, or in some report, or in an admin edit screen.

I got fed up with this and migrated all the data so it's saved in local time with the timezone information in a separate column. If an admin creates an event for 4pm, we save 4pm with the event location's timezone. Since an event only takes place at one specific location, it makes no sense to have the data in UTC in the database. We can convert to UTC if we want but it's not really useful. The thinking is that if a client is shopping for a class in a different timezone, why would we convert the class's time to the client's timezone? It makes no sense. It's always in local time. This has helped so much.

<comment><USER3> Seems a misguided practice to me.

* Store datetime values in UTC. Else you get inconsistent values, which has unpredictable consequences.

* Detect user's expected timezone using one of : a) user preference setting, b) the region the app is supposed to be running for, c) IP geolocation. Choice depends on the app requirements. Don't default to any timezone unless considered 100% safe.

* Present DB values in the UI using said detected timezone.

* UI-wise, slways display timezone information for datetime values. At the very least in a tooltip.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is not misguided, it is a good practice. Read more about why here: [http://www.creativedeletion.com/2015/03/19/persisting_future...](http://www.creativedeletion.com/2015/03/19/persisting_future_datetimes.html)

<comment><USER4> I disagree. Storing as UTC is the only sane way. It will never get corrupted. Calculating the timezone difference for the user is not that hard and won't result in a database full of mistakes you have to scramble to fix.

<comment><USER5> Not for events like shows, movies, work hours, etc. An event starts and stops at a specific local time. If the DST rules change then the UTC version will be wrong but the one stored in local time + TZ will be correct.

Intervals should be stored in UTC. If you're supposed to drop the control rods in a reactor in 24 hours you store the time it's supposed to happen in UTC. DST transitions and rule changes would mess this up if stored in local time.

Timestamps for logs and files should also always be UTC.

<comment><USER4> UTC is an anchor. It does not change, it is never wrong. Your application or environment may live under different rules because of location but that problem can be solved by the timezone-aware application.

If I am scheduling an event at 08:00 and my TZ is -5, the event is at 13:00 UTC. If my timezone changes due to a new law UTC is not wrong; the event is still going to happen at 13:00 UTC! If the event was previously stored as a local time and not UTC the _EVENT_ is wrong! You solve this by handling the TZ conversion elsewhere and making sure it always has the latest rules.

Always store in UTC. Your argument makes no sense.

<comment><AUTHOR> If the user expects 8:00 local time then it should stay 8:00 local time. That is at least how people would want their applications to work 99% of the time. If someone enters 8:00 and then the software suddenly changes it to something else, that is confusing.

If you actually look at what happens when timezone laws change, people continue to anchor to their local times.

<comment><USER4> Congratulations you literally just rescheduled the event. This is not a timezone issue. The date should still be stored as UTC.

<comment><USER5> Wrong. Let's say an event is scheduled for 6pm daily in Toronto (EST -0500). You store it as 11pm UTC. Now eventually we switch to EDT -0400 due to DST. Now your system will say the event is at 7pm local time.

YOU just rescheduled the event.

Works the same with dates and not just times. If you store each of those events individually and the politicians move the DST switch date (or an error was corrected in the TZ database) then some of your event times will now be an hour off.

<comment><USER4> The event was literally moved to a different time UTC. I'm glad we agreed that it was rescheduled.

UTC is still the correct way to store it if you want it to be timezone-aware.

If every event a specific application needs to be at local time regardless of what the timezone is, stop storing any reference to a timezone.

<comment><USER5> We don't agree. It was not rescheduled in reality. Your system would have said it was rescheduled to 7pm Toronto time while in reality the event would still be 6pm Tronto time. The people using your site/app/whatever would be an hour late.

UTC is the correct was to store timestamps (things that happened) and intervals (things that need to happen x seconds/minutes/hours from now).

For future events at a specific geographical location you need to store it as local time + timezone. Many databases have a time+timezone type.

<comment><USER6> I would go as far to say that the timezone stored should be a _named, geographically-based_ timezone (e.g., America/New York or Canada/Eastern) as opposed to a timezone _offset_. (If you store the timezone as EDT or EST, you have still encoded -0400 or -0500.)

<comment><USER5> The postgres documentations says exactly that. Other databases might do something else so it's best to read the documentation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7>
      But the data itself is not new software. It is just data.
      Functionality should not change because of new data.

Well, _ideally_ , yes. But software breaks all the time when you give it data the programmer didn't expect, which happens especially often with time.

DST, for example. What if a state _stops_ observing DST? Arizona observed DST in 1967, but hasn't since then. A couple other states are considering abolishing it, too. You can easily imagine software doing something dumb when it can't find its DST entry in tzdata.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't think it is a good idea to shield bad software at the expensive of having incorrect out-of-date data. Developers should be aware that tzdata changes all the time, and create software that can deal with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I got programs connecting to servers in different countries. It was such a pain to keep the time in sync with all the different time zones and daylight savings. So i ended up using utc everywhere. i even set the clock on the wall and my wrist watch to utc. That way I'm also in sync with my programs. People who visit tell me my clocks are wrong. But i know its the the rest of the world that is wrong.

<comment><USER7> Use unix time and NTP.

<comment><USER8> Yes. Unix time is utc based. I used manual syncing to ntp server once in a while. Automatic syncing scares me a bit. What happens when it adjust backwards in time. Programs that are running and use elapsed time logic might get very confused. Elapsed time since an event happened might become negative.

<comment><USER9> > What happens when it adjust backwards in time.

NTP deliberately makes only very tiny changes gradually when adjusting clock time backwards. Automatic updates also normally abort if the time difference would be more than 1000s (~16m). This is all fairly well-documented.

[https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/index.html](https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/index.html)

<comment><USER8> Interesting. Still any backward adjustment however small seems potentially dangerous. I googled a bit and it seems many ntp services can slow down the time until its in sync instead of adjusting it backwards. That seems safer.

<comment><USER10> Generally it isn't a backward adjustment but simply a slowing down of the clock until the 'real time' catches up. On the other side, you speed up a clock to catch up to the real time rather than catching up all at once.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Looking at this from a 'Unix in Europe' perspective, the timezone data has rules. So as long as the rules don't change you don't need updates. And due to the need to coordinate with many countries, timezone rules in the EU essentially don't change.

It seems that in some countries, time zones just change randomly. Maybe people should just stop doing that. Countries only move a couple of centuries a year. And there is no reason to mess with DST other than to get rid of it all together.

<comment><USER12> _Maybe people should just stop doing that._

I don't disagree, but how do we get there from here? Our "betters" have even had the gall to make this type of change in the recent past, and even to claim "energy efficiency" as a motivation. This is is--how do I put this?--a wronger than wrong version of not even wrong.

<comment><USER11> One option is to get one of those big name companies to write a report on how much that change cost to the economy due equipment that had to be written off, downtime, etc.

Doesn't have to accurate, just impressive. And then maybe next time, circulate the report just before the decision has to be taken.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> One of the biggest problems with tzdata is only mentioned in passing in the article:

> If you make a system that uses timezone data, think ahead. The timezone data > is updated as often as 10 times a year or more. In case you have an embedded > system that is not connected to the internet all the time, how can that > processes be put in place to make sure it is updated?

A decade or so ago, nothing updated, and when DST changed, you had to reset every clock in the house. There was maybe a day or two of confusion where you couldn't remember if you changed a clock or not, but easily dealt with.

Now, in my house anyway, _almost_ everything automatically switches (with the notable exception of my stove and microwave clocks, but heck, those still don't even have battery backup for when the power flickers). This is probably even more annoying, because now it's not a matter of remembering if _I_ switched it (in the last day or so) or not, it's remembering if the _device itself switches automatically_ or not. I can't remember stuff like that, so basically for a day or two after DST I don't trust any clocks at all.

Worse is when the devices still have the old (pre-2007) DST rules built-in. We're lucky in NA that the rules don't change _that_ much, but when they do, they do break all these old devices. The most annoying item I had (notice past tense) was a beside clock that auto-set itself I believe based on the WWV [1] signal, and had a setting for time-zone and would of course do DST shifts automatically. Pretty neat, when I first got it, but after 2007, I had to manually change the timezone on this "auto-setting clock" 4 times a year.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWV_(radio_station)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWV_\(radio_station\))

<comment><USER14> > Pretty neat, when I first got it, but after 2007, I had to manually change > the timezone on this "auto-setting clock" 4 times a year.

That's odd, because the WWV signal contains extra flag bits that authoritatively tell you when DST is starting and ending. I guess the manufacturers decided to ignore that data and reimplement the time change themselves.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWV_(radio_station)#Daylight_s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWV_\(radio_station\)#Daylight_saving_time_and_leap_seconds)

<comment><USER13> Wow, that actually makes me very frustrated, because it means not only did they ignore that flag (not read the documentation?), they actually did more work to implement a tzdata database and check against the current date to change it.

Of course, IIRC it also only had 4 timezone settings, so I guess if you lived in Hawaii, Alaska, the Atlantic time zone, or Newfoundland, you were out of luck. And if you lived in Arizona or Saskatchewan or any other place that didn't observe DST, you were also out of luck. (Well, you could at least manually adjust the time, which I think turned off the auto-DST stuff).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> My HTC One still uses years old timezone information for its clock widget. I fixed the main clock by setting timezone to a different timezone that I'm actually in, but the clock widget is still off by one hour. It's extremely infuriating. Apparently you can't update timezone information in Android unless you have root, which is completely idiotic.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> 2016a has been released: [https://www.iana.org/time- zones](https://www.iana.org/time-zones)

If you use the Elixir library mentioned in the article, it will already have been updated. If you use Mac OS X Yosemite it will probably never be updated.

</comment><comment><USER16> Timezone problems (cf The Problem with Time & Timezones - Computerphile on youtube or postgres doc on why not to use TZ) are not solvable.

TZ are politics and politic is very bad at making stuff engineerable. Politics are inconsistent, unstable and lack of rigor in propagating the information to the coders.

The TZ definitions are handled by clerks that writes an XML files manually that are embedded in your libs and that no one cares to update.

TZ are not versioned. So if you want to know what was the local time 12years ago in any place of the world : good luck.

But international exchange are bound to delays workhours and SLA requiring delays to be measurable ... With arbitrary changes (EST shit).

Timezones are broken by design and all our applications too.

The only way to solve the problem is to forbid politics to come anywhere near science, history and standardization of measurement. Corporation don't do any better. I abide by International System (metric) and the idea that there should be a monotonic non disrupted absolute time whose origin IS NOT the birth of Christ but since when we are able to have continuous "rigorous" measurement of time.

Which is exactly the opposite of what people calls for.

The begining of the year should be the aphelia (3~4 jan) and not some religious bat shit conventions. Noon should be when the sun is at its top. And 13 month of 28 days (+intercalar days) would make our lives easier.

Time as a political and religious construct is shit.

</comment><comment><USER17> The IETF has been working on distribution issues and, amongst other documents from the tzdist working group, produced this: [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tzdist- service](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tzdist-service)

</comment><comment><USER18> As someone who just spent some time figuring out why Australians were getting errors on the site I work for, I fully support standardizing automatic updates. Since the site is running a two year old version of PHP, it looks like I either have to update the PHP version to the latest (just to be safe) or add the timezonedb PECL package. This seems to be a ton of work just to get something that should be updated automatically.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are up-to-date Rails applications exposed to this issue?

Not 100% sure, but from what I know, Rails gets timezone handling right. Specifically, it leverages the [https://github.com/tzinfo/tzinfo](https://github.com/tzinfo/tzinfo) gem. So, correct me if I wrong, by performing `bundle update` you're all good?

<comment><AUTHOR> AFAIK you can use the tzinfo-data gem. Someone needs to manually update it though. So far it looks like it is still on the previous 2015g and not on 2016a that just got released: [https://github.com/tzinfo/tzinfo- data](https://github.com/tzinfo/tzinfo-data)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> How about a way to encode future timezone changes? If a country votes for a timezone change it doesn't become law tomorrow. Usually they schedule it for a date in a few months. If a week after the vote tzdata knew this then there would be no rush.

<comment><USER20> Here's an example from Argentina in 2007: [http://blogs.technet.com/b/dst2007/archive/2007/12/29/argent...](http://blogs.technet.com/b/dst2007/archive/2007/12/29/argentina-122907.aspx)

Less than a week's notice of the change, and it was between Christmas and New Year. Ouch.

<comment><USER19> They deserved all the wrong times they probably got.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> All use utc and stop the daylight saving and timezone...

Use gps coord. And utc to know if you have a lunch or breakfast, dinner meeting

Time zones have no precision so why use them?

<comment><USER22> I agree, but to do that you need root to the World.

As long as we're regular users, we need to work around these realities.</comment></comment>


Can the Academic Write? - <AUTHOR> https://theawl.com/can-the-academic-write-part-i-24fdaf8bf422#.r4dp9gjon <comment><USER2> Another issue I didn't see in this interview is that academics (at least in the sciences) aren't trained to write, but they are often held to the same standards as those who are trained. Moreover, a scientist's job isn't primarily to write for a general audience, so it's hard to say they've failed in that regard. Whereas a journalist who gets the science wrong when reporting on it (beyond simply dumbing it down or massaging the truth for comprehension) fails at the defining feature of the job: reporting the facts.

<comment><USER3> Unfortunately, when the journalist fails and gets the science wrong, the result is a whole bunch of people with silly ideas about science (as if we didn't have enough of those already). When the scientist fails and gets the language wrong, the result is a whole bunch of people whose silly ideas about science aren't corrected because they never read the article.

Science loses either way.

<comment><USER2> > When the scientist fails and gets the language wrong

I think you mean, when a scientist writes technically precise jargon that is misinterpreted? If you mean that the scientist did bad science, science self- corrects for that (at least in theory, and it has worked pretty well in practice).

<comment><USER3> Yes, that's what I meant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think this interview misses a _very_ important point. Academic writing is necessarily in English, which is by far not the native language of most academic writers. In journalism or even science dissemination to the general public, people usually write in their native language, which helps _a lot_ to be perceived as a good writer compared to an academic paper written in English by a non-native speaker who will thus attempt to mimic the academic style of writing of their scientific community.

</comment><comment><USER5> I see this often as a criticism of legal writing as well, and while some of it is legitimate, there's also an element of academic writing having a specific purpose. And that purpose _isn 't_ entertainment or pleasantness - it's precision.

Like recently, when I had a sentence using the phase "missing completely at random" and someone deleted "completely" for clarity. That word was there for a very specific purpose - "missing completely at random" and "missing at random" mean different things.

<comment><USER6> While that is true, it is very often used as an excuse of obtuse writing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Academics seem prone to what Language Log terms "nerdview", the baffling but usually implicit assumption that lay audiences are intimately familiar with the terminology, idioms and house style of your academic niche.

[http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4509](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4509)

<comment><USER3> Absolutely. Surround yourself daily with people using the same language as you, and you begin to forget that the language your group uses is not the language most other people use.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> No, for the most part they cannot. That's why it is so exceptional when there is an academic that has a solid grasp of the subject and can make that intelligible to the general public.

</comment><comment><USER9> When I read computer science papers, I often find them written in a rigid, academic style compared to a blog post or a book. I sometimes skip reading papers for that reason. This is sad — there's all this human knowledge that was painstakingly discovered that readers are skipping because it was poorly presented.

One good writing technique is to take a complex idea, simplify it by eliminating some details, and present the simplified version. Then, once readers have understood that, present the details that you left out.

Maybe academics are afraid that someone will take the earlier sentences out of context and claim they're "wrong". When I was in college, my advisor picked out such an introductory sentence and said that I should be more accurate. I explained that it's just a simplification and that the details he's worried about are in the next para. He said, "That's fine, but this sentence should be correct by itself." The earlier sentence was wrong only if one picks nits. Actually, it was simplified, not wrong.

I wonder if academics don't understand or respect (enough) the principles of good writing.

<comment><USER10> Hmm, I think you should aim for sentences to be correct on their own _and_ be arranged such that understanding & precision is built incrementally (in the way you suggest). This is harder, but that's what good writing does---I want my "simplified" parts to be real approximations of the precise parts; we mustn't settle for the simplifications failing to approximate the precise versions.

It may be easy for experts to avoid getting confused by a literally false claim, which is clarified in the next paragraph. But your paper will often be read by people who are not experts in the paper's topic, so some will end up being confused by this.

It's stressful for me to read that kind of paper, since it causes a lot of cognitive dissonance as you read! Maybe it's not like that for everyone, but I prefer to read papers that don't use the approach you appear to suggest.

<comment><USER9> I agree with you that simplifications should approximate the precise versions. Mine did approximate them. Note that approximate means "not perfectly agreeing with". But my advisor wanted them to agree perfectly, at which point they are no longer approximations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> A very interesting article! Being in academia myself (though admittedly still as a student) and having done some writing for magazines, I can thoroughly relate to this discussion.

Academic writing is all about compressing complex topics and ideas with a long history into as concise a form as possible without losing accuracy. (At least in the natural sciences, where I come from; some people would say otherwise about some humanities, but that is beside the point.) This is why we use technical jargon: it helps us express precisely what we mean in as few words as possible. If you've ever tried explaining something highly scientific to a lay audience, you'll know how tedious it can be if you can't use your technical terms. One of my readers doesn't know a word I used? That's what dictionaries and textbooks are for. I can expect all my readers to already have a sufficient background knowledge to understand what I have written. In academic writing, the greatest sins I can commit are misrepresenting something, omitting something important, or - heaven forbid - not citing somebody correctly (= plagiarizing).

When writing for a nonacademic audience, everything changes. Suddenly I can no longer assume any background knowledge on the part of my readers, every word that sounds vaguely technical needs to be explained. Also, my readers really don't care who said xyz or who disagrees with him, they "just want the facts". Oftentimes, they do not understand that nobody actually knows exactly what these "facts" are yet, and that all we have are various hypotheses and theories vying for the upper hand. So how do I as a writer present them with as understandable an overview as possible, while still doing justice to the different points of view? It is a constant balancing act that all too often doesn't have a satisfactory solution.

Apart from the question of content, the language I use is quite another issue. As j2kun pointed out, scientists aren't trained to write - at least not in the sense journalists are. Scientists are taught to write for scientists: concisely and accurately. Writing in a way that is easy or pleasant to read is not a criterion. So when they do write for the general public, they need to completely overthrow whatever they _have_ learnt about writing and go with a totally different style. That is not easy. All the time I have to keep in mind that the greatest sins here are a) being uninteresting and b) being unintelligible - even when clarity is bought at the expense of accuracy.

So yes, academics can write. It just isn't the type of writing lay audiences appreciate. All in all, a little more patience on both sides of the divide would probably be a good thing.

<comment><USER11> As a graduate student at a top research university I have to ask: where do scientists write concisely and accurately? That is the opposite of my experience. Academic writing is very obfuscatory and frequently full of typos, grammatical mistakes, or just straight-up inaccuracies. I blame the conference publication review process.

<comment><USER3> > That is the opposite of my experience.

I can't deny you your experience (especially as you have more of it than I do), at the same time, I can only echo my own. I don't know what your field is, mine is biology, and while we too have our share of obfuscated papers we also have many that are indeed as I described them above.

<comment><USER11> Ah, computer science! You should stay in real science.

<comment><USER3> I'm hoping the remark about "real science" was ironic, otherwise I would have to take pretty strong offense now ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I write "Analogous to the above construction, we now have the following." This is stilted for a normal article, but is the expected academic style. Academics can write well enough to reach their peers. Complaining that every academic is not good at writing (see, I did it again!) is a bit like saying that policemen are not good novelists.

<comment><USER13> How does the meaning of "analogous to the above construction, we now have the following" differ from "by analogy"? Is the difference worth the higher word count?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It might be hard to hear the truth from a non-academic as in this article. Some of you might feel better to hear it from a peer. Those I refer to "The Science of Scientific Writing" by George Gopen & Judith Swan published 1990 in the American Scientist: [http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/the- science-of-s...](http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/the-science-of- scientific-writing/99999) However many scientific publications are awful to read. Including mine.

</comment><comment><USER15> OK, if nothing else, TIL that there is a legit journal called _Speculum_ which specializes in the history of the Middle Ages. ([http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/spc/current](http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/spc/current)) Other than that, this article didn't seem to say anything new.

</comment><comment><USER16> I can't.

Don't know how I even got my degree. Probably because my prof. was nice and thought I know my shit despite writing badly about it :/

</comment><comment><USER17> People that write articles about computers most certainly cannot. Words are often misspelled and their grammar is atrocious. It's so sad...</comment>


Getting ready to start promoting a new web app, recommendations where to start? - <AUTHOR>

I've been working on a side project for a few weeks that I'm getting ready to launch soon. I've seen a lot of postings recently about various ways to start promoting a project before you release it. What are some of the better methods? <comment><USER2> It depends a lot of the topic of your company, but in general, you can do different things:

Contact with bloggers and journalist once your project is on air.

Also start writing a blog about your company and try to create relevant content, it is really amazing how a blog can help you at the beginning (seo, traffic, value).

Algo create a Facebook Page and invite (spam) all your friends asking them for help to spread the word. Do not underestimate your social graph, it could be really valuable.

Create a Twitter account and start sharing interesting content related to your project.

</comment><comment><USER3> Probably depends on the kind of app it is. (I think we're assuming iPhone?) I'd say to start, make sure people can share it on fb and twitter everywhere possible. Then, share it yourself, spam your friends, write blog posts about it, contact bloggers and get people to write about it. If all else fails, spend some money, but hopefully it shouldn't come to that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Its a website, but does have potential as a mobile app at some point.

<comment><USER3> Well, I tried to make my answer as platform-agnostic as possible, but in that case, I'd work on the SEO to drive some serp traffic in, and maybe use those adwords coupons you have lying around to promote a landing page with prominently placed share links. You'll get a lot of mileage out of facebook links.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> SF-Dude Depends if you $$ to spend... if so, Flurry is quite effective with their AppCircle program. Or see if you know someone who knows someone at the right position at Apple ;-)

</comment><comment><USER4> I guess you can get more input if people can see what it is about.

Is there at least a landing page that you can post here? If not, I suggest you make one and post here.</comment>


The age of loneliness is killing us - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/14/age-of-loneliness-killing-us <comment><USER2> > British children no longer aspire to be train drivers or nurses – more than > a fifth say they "just want to be rich"

British socialism is the least comprehensible of all socialisms.

</comment><comment><USER3> Simply delightful!</comment>


Google Is Searching For Beautiful Minds at MIT - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/21/google-is-searching-for-beautiful-minds-but-so-far-no-m-i-t-students-have-broken-its-code/

<comment><USER3> Maybe 5 years ago there was a billboard on the corner of Vassar and Mass Ave that was "[the first 10-digit prime in consecutive digits of pi].com"

Obviously that piqued my interest. Once solved and visited, it was simply an upload link for your resume for generic jobs at google.

So anti-climactic.

</comment><comment><USER4> Recruiters are always pulling this "let's be edgy and relevant crap." It's two extremes, Googlers with the "Prove that you're smart enough for us!" and Microsoftees with the "You're sooooo smart, you should apply here!" (Actually, "Hey, Genius!" Oddly enough, once you've put in your paperwork the hiring processes are exactly the same.

This is the kind of crap that gets freshmen excited, but no one else is going to stop doing real work.

</comment><comment><USER5> What is with TC constantly offering up its t-shirts as petty tributes? Who the hell actually wants one?

</comment><comment><USER6> Or maybe MIT students don't want to work at Google.

<comment><USER7> As far as I can see from the outside, Google is much like any other Java/Web 2.0 cube farm: miserable salt-mine drudgery - though with above-average pay, plush armchairs, and free lunches.

Here is what one notable Google escapee had to say after doing his time:

 _"The interchangeable component model of software engineers seemed to work reasonably well there. It's just not a business model in which I wish to be involved, at least not on the component-provider side. So after a year at Google I quit and returned to JPL."_

\- Erann Gat: "Lisping at JPL"

(<http://www.flownet.com/gat/jpl-lisp.html>)

If you have any creativity in you, being a fungible cog will _always_ suck. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Maybe the best at MIT don't feel like being the new kids at a club full of Standford alumni.

<comment><USER9> TechCrunch assumes the answer is a phone number. But maybe you're on to something. And the answer is something like "QUIT MIT JOIN STANFORD".

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here's the solution if you are interested:

"Congratulations Keep Seaching or call 617-639-0570 x10"

Here's the mapping of the solution:

0123456789ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

456789ABCDE2FGHIJKL0MNOP1QRS3TUVWXYZ

Here's how you solve it if you are interested:

1) Pick out CONGRATULATIONS

The mapping is pretty straight forward with some gaps in the letters and some ambiguities.

2) Among the ambiguities are the letters J,O,B,S which map to 0,1,2,3

3) That resolves the ambiguities and the resulting map above is the logical result.

</comment><comment><USER11> You have to wonder whether the CS faculty at Stanford, MIT, et al are thrilled or disappointed with the perception that they've become a pipeline for 9-5 coders (even if it is google).

</comment><comment><USER12> 617-274-8660

If that's the correct answer (which according to a TechCrunch commenter, with working showed, it is), it's not Google. There's a voicemail system saying something along the lines of "Congratulations on solving the second, harder puzzle. Unfortunately, we're not Google, but leave your name and number - <USER2> won't regret it."

</comment><comment><USER13> Looks like the banner is haning inside the athletic center/hockey rink, your ad placement is all wrong. It's should be in 36-100 or something.</comment>


North Korean Officials Flood to China, Possible Mass Defection - <AUTHOR> http://www.koreabang.com/2013/stories/north-korean-officials-flood-to-china-possible-mass-defection.html <comment><USER2> I'm never sure how to take these stories, but they provide a good litmus test of my emotions.

I wonder sometimes if these sorts of things are 'leaked' to see if anyone inside the country will flinch and take action, sometimes I wonder if they are wishful thinking on the part of people would like to see the PRK gone. It is always unsettling though to have a nuclear power that is quite unstable near a critical resource to the work (S. Korea). So emphasizing that instability is a great tool for news services to ratchet of the fear views.

Lets consider three possible scenarios:

1) I its a hoax.

Ok, so far (5:30PST) the mainstream press hasn't picked it up (and they would if they had any sort of confirmation). Who benefits? Asia Press?

2) Its disinformation.

So if the PRK "leaked" this to flush out malcontents in the PRK, how would that work? Would people who read this self identify as potential targets and head for the hills? (Thus calling them out as targets for the current government)

3) Its "real"

And there are a bunch of high level military and diplomatic personnel in China waiting to be processed through into the country. What is the PRK reaction? Anger? Retailiation? Do they do something stupid and try to kill their missing minions in China?

All it does it raise questions.

<comment><USER3> I also wonder about the degree of Western propaganda at work too. Stories about the evilness of specific regimes conveniently saturate the press before governments want to take action.

<comment><USER4> I am not so sure you have to go about inventing stuff to target North Korea though. Anything you invent is going to be nowhere near as batshit as the official pronouncements of the regime itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> For anybody unaware, there is a whole network of sites like this that translate native language stories and commentary into English (depends on the editors, but the content varies from serious news stories like this to silly/interesting slice-of-life stuff from reaction on internet forums).

China: [http://www.chinasmack.com](http://www.chinasmack.com) Indonesia: [http://www.indoboom.com](http://www.indoboom.com) Russia: [http://www.russiaslam.com](http://www.russiaslam.com) Japan: [http://www.japancrush.com](http://www.japancrush.com) Korea: [http://www.koreabang.com](http://www.koreabang.com)

</comment><comment><USER6> I've checked twice in the last hour, and so far I'm not seeing any uptake of this story by any other news organization. One of the best illustrations of what a tyrannical country the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is is the news vacuum most of the world encounters when trying to find out what's going on there. The ruling party doesn't want the common people of north Korea to know what's going on in their own country, so pervasive censorship and government surveillance make it difficult for anyone to find out what's going on there. I look forward to the day when the people of north Korea can make a transition to civil liberty and democratic, constitutional government.

<comment><USER7> Wouldn't verification of this story just require talking to the North Korean expatriates in China, though? They have no particular reason to censor their speech.

<comment><USER8> Except any family, including extended, left behind.

<comment><USER9> Any family they haven't brought along are doomed anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Oh wow, those comments were interesting to read. Why the hostility towards North-korean spies? That spy program must have an exceptionally low success rate given that once you're outside North Korea, you will find out what the state of your country actually is compared to the rest of the world, and then what motication would you have to do your job?

The only thing I can think of that would keep them in check is that their family is being held hostage, but that would also make all of them extremely motivated to become double agents?

<comment><USER11> Ever heard of the Amish? Some people aren't all that impressed with the state of the wider world or have any interest in its pleasures.

Gosh, why doesn't everyone want to have the same ruling government, the same local culture, and the same new iPhone? Bellies will be full too!

<comment><USER12> The Amish do that by choice.

Based on my limited experience of Korean culture (I have a dozen or so Korean friends) the number of Koreans who would willingly choose to live a primitive lifestyle is....minimal.

<comment><USER11> Do Amish children do that by choice? But you missed my point.

How much do you know of North Korea? Are you under the impression their culture is the same as the South's? Do you think the spies live a primitive lifestyle? Do you think these athletes live a primitive lifestyle? [http://www.funis2cool.com/wp- content/uploads/2008/02/north_k...](http://www.funis2cool.com/wp- content/uploads/2008/02/north_korea_stadium_show_011.jpg) How many people in Pyongyang do you think live a primitive lifestyle? And if they suddenly learned of the outside world (assuming they were completely ignorant beforehand!) they would probably notice the impoverished, the starving, the homeless, the unjustly imprisoned -- in other words, the same types of problems, if perhaps of different local magnitudes. They might also notice a bunch of problems they don't have. They may even just see some of their own problems as caused by the West and reinforce their distaste.

My point is that it's ridiculous to suggest one's way of living will be instantly recognized as superior by someone else one assumed to have an inferior lifestyle. It's also ridiculous to imagine no one in North Korea actually believes in the legitimacy of the government and its goals.

<comment><USER12> "Are you under the impression their culture is the same as the South's?"

Korean culture is at least 2,000 years old, and yes, it's quite homogeneous.

"They would probably notice the impoverished, the starving, the homeless, the unjustly imprisoned"

What in the world are you talking about? Their entire country is an impoverished prison/slave-state, and it's estimated that 2-3 million North Korean people starved to death as recently as the 1990s.

So, yeah, I'm pretty sure they'd see the outside world as superior.

Too bad they're not given the chance to make that decision for themselves, isn't it?

A good rule of thumb on whether people actually want to live in a country: go to the border and check to see how many of the guns are pointed inward.

<comment><USER13> Age of the named culture notwithstanding, the cultures have become divergent in the last 40 years due to the Kim family as well as the extremist christian nationalists. You make these broad generalizations about a group of people we as "the world" know very little about. Many Jews in Ukraine were supportive of the Nazi invasion due to the awful treatment received from the Russians. Iraq was a complete wreck, and America still managed to have thousands of adversaries. There are many examples of people acting irrationally in the face of "the facts" of their situation. Your border comment is colorful but misleading. You act as if the guns are cemented pointing one direction.

<comment><USER12> What "broad generalizations" would those be?

That South Korea allows people to leave if they want, while North Korea doesn't?

That millions of North Koreans have been starved to death or otherwise murdered by their own government?

Sorry, those are facts, your attempts to change the subject notwithstanding.

<comment><USER13> Good job sighting your sources.

For you to just say, "i know a few Koreans" and "they are 2 thousand years old and therefore predictable" are the generalizations i mentioned.

I am not arguing that NK is doing anything right. Far from it. I just happen to have some familiarity with the subject (my uncle is an adopted Korean refugee, i live in a place that is 30%+/\- Korean, i can read more than a web page). It is an ugly problem, but it is the way it is now because of the US and China. Both the North and The South have had dictators and have caused unnecessary trouble to the other. As an American, i want to stay on the side of human rights and personal liberty. Through that lens, both governments are shit (...as well as US and most of Europe.)

<comment><USER12> "Good job sighting your sources."

[http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM](http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM)

Also:

[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Korean_peninsula_at_n...](http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Korean_peninsula_at_night.jpg)

"Both the North and The South have had dictators and have caused unnecessary trouble to the other"

The fact remains that South Koreans are allowed to leave the country, and North Koreans aren't, your attempts to spin some kind of bogus moral equivalence between "dictators" notwithstanding.

<comment><USER13> So your only metric for "better" is the ability to leave? How do refugees fit into your world view?

[Edit]Excellent links. So much reading to do. Thank you. If the argument of which side of Korea is Better Korea, then it is obvious that it is the South. If the argument is about which side of Korea is Best Korea, then there is no debate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I hate democracy, but I will choose it over any other method for transfer of power. The only credit I can give to democracy is, it ensures transfer of power without bloodshed and in a civilized manner, rest is all crap as we know it.

<comment><USER15> Why do you hate democracy?

<comment><USER14> because it counts people not value them.

<comment><USER15> That's really only true of first-past-the-post voting. Other voting systems give a far more nuanced picture of the voter's opinion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's not on Chosun Ibo and that is the most reliable source for actual defections and general DPRK instability warning.

[http://english.chosun.com/](http://english.chosun.com/)

<comment><USER17> Chosun Ilbo might sometimes have some information, but they are basically South Korea's Fox News. You can trust them to have more misinformation than anyone else.

A typical example: in 1998, Chosun Ilbo led a witch hunt against a liberal historian (Choi Jangjip) based on one of his history paper contained the phrase "...thus Kim Il-Sung made the historic decision of invading South Korea." Chosun Ilbo's rationale: only good things can be called "historic". Choi just described Kim's invasion as a historic decision. Clearly he thinks North Korea was right in starting the Korean War: he's a commie!

Apparently the Korean wikipedia has a whole article on the shitness of Chosun Ilbo: [http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%A1%B0%EC%84%A0%EC%9D%BC%EB%...](http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%A1%B0%EC%84%A0%EC%9D%BC%EB%B3%B4%EC%97%90_%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C_%EB%B9%84%ED%8C%90)

These "conservatives" also have been saying North Korea will fall any day since Kim Il-Sung died in 1994, so take their "instability warning" with a grain of salt. Somehow the NK government keeps defying everybody's hope that it would die (or change) someday.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's basically the 386 generation (just like Intel 386!) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/386_Generation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/386_Generation) in Korea, now holding the jobs as professors, teachers, politicians, lawyers and judges that arouse a lot of suspicion from the previous generation which were right wing unlike the 386 who are left wing. The 386 were largely responsible for electing a left wing government from 1998 to 2003, and 2003 to 2008. That's 10 years of anti-American, pro-sunshine policy (billions of slush funds sent to North Korea used to build their ICBM today) which has largely turned into a gun pointed at South Korea. Because of the naive blinding trust that South Korean left wings placed in Nouth Korea, it has resulted in an increasingly dangerous standoff with North Korea (supposedly has mini nukes now thanks to the 1998~2008 administration), much of South Korea understandably has growing animosity towards left-wing supporters. I admit, there is a blanket identification with left-wing being pro-North Korea which is simply not true, but this is unfortunately the case with South Korea, where herd mentality is still rampant.

The fear of North Korean support within South Korea from the left leaning group is well founded. Recently, a member of the national assembly was found to have been part of a group called RO (Revolutionary Organization, how original) and evidence of coordinated sabotage on sensitive infrasturcture in case a war breaks out with the North. RO was found to have been in contact with North Korean agents in the United States.

It's no wonder the 'red scare' is very real in Korea. The list of spies currently operating in South Korea is in the unknown figure but widely suspected to be hiding in plain sights (if a national assemblyman was actively promoting terrorism, imagine where else they could be).

Various professors and educational board in South Korea have been caught attempting to change the history of Korean War by putting North Korea in a favorable light.

The list goes on and on.

However, I would agree Chosun Ilbo is the most right wing out of all.

I think that there is even more chance of collapse in Korea because of the recent purge (Jang was China's go-to-guy, practical and a moderate), Kim Jong Un would be unbridled and trigger happy and that their revenue streams have taken a toll. All the more reasons to build

<comment><USER18> And I should point out West Germany found out after the Germany reunification that East Germany had thousands of spies working for East Germany in West Germany.

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/shocking-new- res...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/shocking-new-research- stasi-had-thousands-of-spies-in-west-germany-a-799335.html)

I have NO DOUBT what so ever that there are thousands of spies in S Korea working for N Korea, because of money/ideology/stupidity.

Come on people, the ex national assembly now being tried as a spy REFUSED to sing the S Korean national anthem in national assembly hall, claiming S Korean govt wasn't legit or something of that line. Of course when he was finally exposed and under threat of prison, he sang the S Korean national anthem just fine.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's pretty scary....what drives these people I wonder. Is it revenge against Korean society? Is it the honest belief that North Korea is a better place to live? If they believe in it so much, why don't they go over there? Why not experience what it's like to live under the glorious leader that they revere so much? It makes no sense!

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Why go to China when you want to defect to South Korea? I mean I know the obvious answer: the border between the two can't be passed.

But what's in it for China to pass them on to the South?

Also of course, general disclaimer: this may be misinformation by SK to help a perceived revolutionary tide.

<comment><USER18> Yes, that's why China is helping N Korean agents hunt down and return the would be refugees.

Nah, I doubt even S Korean govt would welcome a reunified korea. The cost and turmoil will be enormous...

<comment><USER20> Horseshit. A reunified Korea would be a global economic powerhouse within a generation, anybody with eyes in their skull can see that. And the humanitarian benefits to the entire population of the North would be immense, turmoil and cost be damned.

<comment><USER21> _A reunified Korea would be a global economic powerhouse within a generation, anybody with eyes in their skull can see that._

Alternatively, combining a modern, hi-tech, highly educated nation of 50 million with a nation of 25 million badly-educated, borderline-starving people, many of whom would never be able to adjust, would cripple the South Korean economy for two generations.

South Korea is an economic powerhouse now. Introducing an extra 50% population of which the vast majority are skilled only in subsistence-level farming with tools other nations abandoned a century ago will not be economically helpful. Maybe if South Korea was at the stage of development in which vast numbers of unskilled labourers underpinned the economy, it would be, but they aren't.

<comment><USER4> _would cripple the South Korean economy for two generations._

Firstly, that is a nonsensical figure. On what basis do you make a prediction that Korea would take two generations to recover from unification? It has been split up for only slightly longer than that and if you look to history, entire empires have come and gone in the timespan of two generations. Also, it just sounds like more of the same that was said by people about the reunification of Germany.

<comment><USER21> Very obviously a nonsense figure, would you say? Really, really obviously a nonsense figure with no evidence, wouldn't you say? Really, REALLY obviously? Funny coincidence too, presenting the timescale in terms of generations, just like in the parent post? I wonder if perhaps that's deliberate...

I deliberately echoed the post I was responding to, but increased it, to illustrate that the original statement was devoid of evidence; in essence, the point was to emphatically and obviously have no evidence of timescale in order to highlight the absurdity of the original post's timescale. You did get the point, though, so I suppose it worked.

<comment><USER4> I got the point that your argument was nonsensical, I wasn't aware you were doing it for effect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The titles in the sidebar:

>Korean Government Turns Its Back on Abandoned Babies

>Korean Woman Kills Stepdaughter By Force Feeding Her Salt

>Man Forces Three Runaway Middle School Girls into Prostitution

Wtf humans? Not that it compares to the atrocities in North Korea.

</comment><comment><USER4> I think the image in the article may have been photoshopped though.

</comment><comment><USER23> Regardless, gotta love how Dennis Rodman looks the other way and doesn't give a shit about people.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's the original Korean article translated to English

[http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ko&tl=en&prev...](http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ko&tl=en&prev=_dd&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.segye.com%2Fcontent%2Fhtml%2F2013%2F12%2F18%2F20131218006587.html)

Often South Korean newspapers are the first to get news about North Korea as South Korean intelligence groups have good source of HUMINT gathered from North Korean defectors and officials willing to give up state secrets in exchange for safety and money.

There were notable cases of high ranking North Korean officials defecting to the South, for example Mr. Hwang ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwang_Jang- yop](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwang_Jang-yop)) and even Kim Jong-Il's relatives like Mr. Yi ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Han- yong](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Han-yong)) who was gunned down in an elevator while living in South Korea by North Korean agents.

</comment><comment><USER24> Apparently the execution was over who controls profits from their shellfish exports.

You'd think they would maybe feed their people with the profits.

If they get that nuclear bomb in portable form, there is going to be hell with that child at the helm.

<comment><USER25> > Oh and he was educated in the USA, another one we raised.

Can you supply a source for that claim? I've only read into the the Kim family a bit, but my impression was that most of the family members were educated in other socialist countries or somewhere neutral/friendly like Switzerland.

<comment><USER24> I edited that one out, I was very mistaken. Thinking of someone else.

<comment><USER26> So is Switzerland a bad place for educating him or only when it's America?

<comment><USER27> Presumably the "we" is out of place if it's not your country.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Too Poor to Afford the Internet - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/opinion/too-poor-to-afford-the-internet.html <comment><USER3> Can I just say how much I love the way public libraries have navigated themselves into the digital age?

They are, as this piece points out, very popular places to access computers and the Internet, and many libraries offer a wealth of digital content. I can check out and instantly download e-books and audiobooks and movies from my library.

It's certainly conceivable that they might have transitioned less well. There is, after all, a healthy amount of government bureaucracy in the public library system, and that tends to stymie innovation. And then there's just the pain of transition. Bookstores have felt those pains hard; it's not that people don't want content, but they want content in different forms, and a lot of bookstores just couldn't move fast enough.

But I'm really glad to see libraries continue to be generally healthy, and important community resources.

<comment><USER4> Plus having a library card often gets you access (even remote access!) to lots of expensive services - I use the OED, J-stor, etc. from home with gusto. I will say there's a small dark side to having gone digital, many libraries have culled a lot of their holdings, and/or can't afford to buy as many books as they once did (have to pay for those licenses somehow...). It's likely that there's less demand, but it still makes me a little sad.

<comment><USER5> I haven't noticed any reduction in catalog size or variety over the years (US), maybe I've lived around well-funded systems? If anything it's become more varied with time. The only annoying thing is having to filter out eBooks every time searching the catalog.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Another huge aspect of poverty and internet access is the increasing number of households who _don 't_ have wifi but use only their phones for internet access. ("one-quarter of those earning below the median income and one-third of those living below poverty level accessed the Internet only through their mobile devices." [https://theconversation.com/many-low-income-students-use- onl...](https://theconversation.com/many-low-income-students-use-only-their- phone-to-get-online-what-are-they-missing-54213) and if you want more [http://qz.com/580024/more-americans-are-relying- exclusively-...](http://qz.com/580024/more-americans-are-relying-exclusively- on-their-phones-for-internet-access/) )

The world really looks different if you only have a handheld device -- it's more read-only and because of caps and expensive mobile plans, you will use it less.

In cities there's a chance that libraries can help, but with rural poverty it's really a trap!

<comment><USER7> I'm a little bit surprised: Raspberry Pi 3, say, 40$ (current price on Adafruit). Let's say 70$ for RPi + power adapter + enclosure + mouse + keyboard + SD card. You surely have a TV. Use your mobile phone to set up a hotspot - problem solved. If this is still too expensive: There are lots of hobbyists having old RPi lying around. Or companies that have old mouses and keyboards lying around that aren't used anymore and are happy to give them away for a symbolic sum.

<comment><USER8> Learning how to set all of that up is a massive barrier to entry for the technically average or below-average person. With a modern phone, all you have to do is turn it on and you're good to go.

<comment><USER7> There are lots of people that you can simply ask and are often willing to help (for example at hacker spaces or maker spaces).

<comment><USER9> So these lower income people are expected to a: know there's low cost ARM devices that can use their HDMI TV as an input, b: know hackerspaces exist and think they aren't for "hackers", c: walk in to one and say "set this up for me"?

That's highly, incredibly, improbable. Anyone meeting such criteria probably always got a device.

<comment><USER7> I know low-income people (living from unemployment benefits) who meet these criteria (thus surely not "highly, incredibly, improbable"). The example with the hacker space was just one illuminating example (though I don't consider it as strange: In the city where I live the hacker space organized some public technology tinkering project in the past). There are of course lots of other ways how you can find people who can explain how to set one up.

<comment><USER9> And have you given them an rpi yet?

<comment><USER7> For some I set up one, some prefer other ways to access the internet (for example a used computer that they got cheaply from who-knows-where).

I just gave the RPi as one example of a cheap example of a non-mobile-device for accessing the internet - there are of course lots of other ways, too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Interesting. I live in a country with a minimum wage of $58 a month (Ukraine) and yet the internet is one of the few things that pretty much anyone can afford: high speed connections (50-100mbps) cost about $2-4; rarely more.

Are american high prices the result of scummy pricing on the corporations' side or is it an actual infrastructural issue that prevents the ISPs from providing cheap connections to everyone?

<comment><USER11> The vast majority of the cost of any kind of infrastructure is labor, which scales with local wages.[1] A New York subway ticket is about $2.75. That's about 11x more than the cost of a ticket on the Kiev Metro. And it's not like the New York subway makes a profit--fares cover only about half the system's operating costs.[2]

In Baltimore, I paid about $50 for a 50mbps connection, or about 20x more than a subway ticket. Sounds like the ratio is about the same order of magnitude in Ukraine.

[1] A telecom field technican in the U.S. makes about $6,000-$7,000 per month, plus benefits. That's about 20x what the average Ukrainian in Kiev makes (according to the Internet).

[2] Fares on D.C.'s metro, which similarly cover only about 50% of costs, range from $1.75 to $5.90(!).

<comment><USER12> How did you get that $50/50Mbps deal in Baltimore? Was this part of a bundle for cable television?

<comment><USER13> It was remarkable how much the price per Mbps dropped in the area once Verizon FIOS entered the market. Just one real competitor to Comcast made a substantial difference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Rather than home internet access. I'd create safe study places for these kids to do their homework and even just hang around in.

Children in poverty often suffer from dysfunctional families that disrupt their studying and lack of life mentors to motivate them to pay attention in school.

If you could have supervised after school hours just for these kids to do their homework and maybe engage in a bit of self learning it would be much more useful than having home internet access.

<comment><USER15> Many / most schools have after school programs for this reason.

<comment><USER16> I have limited experience with these, but don't they tend to be like 45 minutes to an hour? You need to go at least as far as dinner time if you want kids to actually complete assignments there, not just start them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> You need water to be a productive member of society. (Or to survive at all, but that's a prerequisite.) You need food to be a productive member of society. (Or to survive at all, but that's a prerequisite.) You need shelter to be a productive member of society. More often that not, you need electricity to be a productive member of society. Increasingly so, you need internet to be a productive member of society.

In every case, the person consuming these resources either:

[a] pays for them on their own

[b] is provided them but paid by someone else, possibly in aggregate (family, government services, charity)

[c] not provided them at all, in which case they are no longer a productive member of society (or worse, near-starving, starving, or dead)

Ethics and economic systems notwithstanding, the first few are 'hard problems' that humanity has struggled with for millennia. Internet access is comparatively easy, because the marginal costs of distribution are low, but just like other 'utilities' and 'necessities', the capital cost is high.

One way to offset this is to create a market like for electricity, where multiple players, some private, some government-owned, compete at the supply- side and distribution-side, to provide capacity at prices that are close to the cost of (production+transmission) for the area.

Luckily, unlike electricity, water, food, or shelter, information can be duplicated, format-shifted, batched, compressed, time-delayed, and the like. If fixed-fiber-based Internet to arbitrary endpoints is too expensive despite the presence of a market, cache or store more content closer to the consumer on CDNs. If last-mile distribution is too expensive, switch to a different last-mile distribution paradigm -- this latter one is what public libraries (and public hotspots) currently accomplish. If bi-directional communication is desired, investigate peer-to-peer solutions. There's so much potential in LANs, WANs, sneakernet, (TV/radio/data) broadcast that goes untapped.

We're stuck here because right now telcos are a terrible market and the monopolies are granted at the wrong level; but also because we're assuming that getting direct, end-to-end connection from one of the big telcos is the only way to digitally communicate.

</comment><comment><USER18> Is it really $50 per month for basic internet in New York?

In the UK [https://www.uswitch.com/broadband/packages/](https://www.uswitch.com/broadband/packages/) shows the cheapest broadband package - which includes telephone line rental - to be £18 per month (average across the contract when delivered router is included). That's around $25 (you can get "free" with a telephone service).

What struck me was the kid in the header image has a swanky new laptop, the story confirms the kids bring their laptops with them. Could they pay their neighbour $10 to leech the neighbours wifi? Do they need swanky laptops or just an internet appliance (my work computer is a 3rd hand toshiba on WinXP! - good enough for net+email)?

Do people in the USA tend to go to libraries for wifi rather than [near] to a cafe or other private business leaking free wifi?

<comment><USER19> The kid's Macbook Air looked like a loaner or library machine (according to the stop sign sticker on the bottom). I doubt anybody that can't afford internet would buy a $899 machine.

<comment><USER20> I bought my cousin an 11" Macbook Air for $300 (refurbished, mid 2011 model) She's a bright kid, but living with her grandmother (not a great home situation) in rural Utah, and only had Internet access through her phone. Phones are usually more important than a computer, if you have to choose between the two (and don't have reliable Internet, or the skills/knowledge to set up Google Voice, or, say, VOIP software on your laptop), but a MacBook doesn't have to be more expensive than a smartphone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > They're there during the school year, too, even during the winter — it's the > only way they can complete their online math homework.

Why is there homework online? Has this been shown to be better in any way for children learning math or just a cop out by lazy teachers to be able to automatically grade the assignments?

I can't imagine learning math with anything besides a pencil and paper (yes even calculators are mostly bullshit).

<comment><USER22> Do you actually believe the public school system's goal is to educate children? More like freeing up parents to go to work (and tax), and employing teachers and administrators. It's nearly impossible to fire teachers, thanks to a public sector union who's got their back.

School is like a prison for kids. One form of punishment is detention - <USER2> school.

Also, "In the 2000 report, commissioned by the American Association of University Women, surveyors asked students between eighth and 11th grades whether they had ever experienced inappropriate sexual conduct at school. The list of such conduct included lewd comments, exposure to pornography, peeping in the locker room, and sexual touching or grabbing. Around one in 10 students said they had been the victim of one or more such things from a teacher or other school employee, and two-thirds of those reported the incident involved physical contact." \- [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/20...](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/02/is_sexual_abuse_in_schools_very_common_.html)

So, asking if something the public school system is doing is student focused betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of its purpose.

<comment><USER23> > Do you actually believe the public school system's goal is to educate > children?

Absolutely. It doesn't work out perfect every time in every place, but it does a pretty amazing job of that given the poor level of funding and constant bashing from the entitled anti-union right. Freeing up parents is a wonderful side effect that has worked out pretty well for contemporary society.

If you're surprised that kids going through puberty are engaging in sexual activity, you must be living under a rock.

<comment><USER13> > given the poor level of funding

Do you have a source for this? According to an OECD study I found, the US spends among the most in the world per pupil on education.

[https://data.oecd.org/eduresource/education- spending.htm](https://data.oecd.org/eduresource/education-spending.htm) [http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/apr/21/jeb...](http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/apr/21/jeb- bush/does-united-states-spend-more-student-most-countri/)

<comment><USER24> From your link:

> Traditionally the United States spends big parts of its educational budget > on non-instructional items such as security -- more so than some other > nations.

Whenever I read about the US I'm absolutely terrified

<comment><USER25> That quote is really without context. When I look at the "security" of the schools my children have been enrolled in, I see minimal security. Facilities security isn't like a prison by any stretch, and the cost can't be that high. The dominant cost factor for education is labor costs, not equipment/facilities costs.

And the "\--more than some other nations." tag is just poor journalism without added context. I'm sure that the US spends more money on metal detectors than a lot of the small countries in the world. But that doesn't tell us anything useful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> What they don't talk about is the real struggle the less-literate face, even when they have access to computers.

I tried to teach a class on computers in my local library and that was often the hurdle. Adults who want 'computer training' are most excited about getting a job. But while it's easy to teach them to move the cursor and click on the browser, that doesn't do any good when they can't write enough to search, or read job descriptions, or write their resume.

</comment><comment><USER27> The road to Internet connectivity for the nation's poor originates in Detroit. I know that I've posted this before so forgive me.

[https://www.alliedmedia.org/dctp/digitalstewards](https://www.alliedmedia.org/dctp/digitalstewards)

A group of volunteers in Detroit are the pioneers in setting up mesh networks to provide connectivity to the poor. The recipe is to get some benefactors to sponsor one or two fiber connections, campaign with local businesses to open their connectivity and build a mesh network throughout the neighborhood.

I've met these people and have come away impressed and a little in awe of what they've done on - little or no money. They've also got some mean technical chops and have setup networks in other cities around the world like Brooklyn, Washington D.C. and India.

</comment><comment><USER28> If you know anyone who is too poor for the Internet, if they live in public housing, please let them know about [http://everyoneon.org/](http://everyoneon.org/)

This is a program that gives people in subsidized section 8 housing super cheap broadband. It's a bout $5 per month and gets you top quality broadband, such as a cable modem. Very similar to the old lifeline phone lines.

</comment><comment><USER29> In Seattle you can borrow a 4g hotspot from the library: [http://www.spl.org/library-collection/spl- hotspot](http://www.spl.org/library-collection/spl-hotspot)

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm genuinely curious as to why the kids aren't availing the FCC lifeline program. Can someone explain how and why a mechanism built to solve this exact problem isn't working, given that $7B was attributed to 3 communications related welfare programs by the FCC.

</comment><comment><USER31> My local library is trying out a pilot program to loan out hotspots[0] the same way they loan out books. The hotspots have unlimited data and it looks like the only real restriction on them, beyond the usual stuff you'd get from a normal ISP, is that you bring them back after the loan period is up. Hopefully the pilot project results in a permanent program. Library cards are now free, so cost isn't a barrier anymore.

The City of Edmonton provides free WiFi[1] in a number of places[2], albeit with more restrictions. These mainly seem to be at rec centres and LRT stations, but there are also some parks included.

If someone in Edmonton didn't have internet access and needed it, it's available without too much trouble.

[0] [http://www.epl.ca/hotspots/](http://www.epl.ca/hotspots/)

[1] [http://www.edmonton.ca/programs_services/open- wifi.aspx](http://www.edmonton.ca/programs_services/open-wifi.aspx)

[2] [https://data.edmonton.ca/Facilities-and-Structures/Open- City...](https://data.edmonton.ca/Facilities-and-Structures/Open-City-Wi-Fi- Locations-Map-View/mhj4-e4bq/data)

</comment><comment><USER32> I'm torn about this. On the one hand it's clear that access to the Internet is almost as important as other utilies, such as clean water and heating oil.

On the other hand regulation is exactly how broadband rollout has been stifled in the past and present by incumbents, and is at least partly to blame why it's so expensive right now.

I want it deregulated and opened up to very serious competition. I also want our government to build reliable infrastructure (fiber) as much as is possible.

<comment><USER33> > I want it deregulated and opened up to very serious competition. I also want > our government to build reliable infrastructure (fiber) as much as is > possible.

I'm not surprised that you feel torn. Those desires are in direct contradiction with each other.

Even if you're referring to splitting infra from service, there will still be regulation. You'll also see law enforcement becoming very interested in the fact that interconnects and the last mile are now government property.

<comment><USER34> I wish we could have more separation of government entities.

Community internet could/should be owned by the community, separate from the government.

It could be structured as a private company, where shares are only owned by people within the community and then they have voting rights. Still community owned, but very separate from the more general government.

Interestingly this would also allow community members to invest in their own internet infrastructure directly.

<comment><USER35> This is how many municipal electrical utilities are operated. Essentially as independently run entities. It's actually worth pointing out that many government bodies are overseen by politically appointees (library boards, parking commissions, liquor control boards, etc.) creating a space in which civil servants are working with much more direct civilian oversight. As lampooned as this is in comedy (see Parks and Rec or Yes Minister), it's generally a fairly effective check against what you are speaking of. My library, for example, has a fairly robust law enforcement inquiry policy set by its board.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I question the premise. I cannot think of anything I do online at home that is essential to my being a productive member of society. 90% of my internet use at home is for entertainment. It's today's cable TV. It's not essential.

<comment><USER37> How do you think your life would be if you couldn't access the 10% that is not entertainment? I'll argue this stuff will at times be a large quality of life issue especially if you are poor.

Like others have said, governments are moving things online. Some things, though available in person, are too far for travel and telephone hours are short. If you are working a couple of jobs, you might miss some work just to do basic things, which is really detrimental. Even simple tax returns give money sooner, which might be the difference between someone having housing and not.

Utility companies have started to charge people more if they get a physical bill instead of online billing. Reduced or witholding installation charges if you sign up for internet, cable, or whatnot online.

Maybe you just need a phone number. Increasingly phone books are becoming rarer, so you might not have access. Or the number changed, or you need some governement phone number that isn't listed. Maybe you simply need hours or a doctor's phone number. Internet provides this more readily.

More and more companies are using online only applications. I worked for a pharmacy that simply did not take paper applications or CVs. They did not have a kiosk in the store.

Libraries are great for access, until they are out of your range or you don't have one in your township and have to pay for a card. Many smaller libraries have too few computers, a short time limit (30 minutes), and a lack of privacy. Plus there are transportation costs.

Such transportation costs actually are most detrimental to the poor.

Now, most folks will have the biggest gain in entertainment. But really, this helps you be more productive as well. You can make small talk at work, you can relax after the day, interact with family, and other such things. It is good for mental health in some respects.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I have a weird question: How come the kids congregate outside the library for the wifi? Is there a thing that you can't go in just to use the wifi? I used to do that all the time in college, didn't even have a card.

<comment><USER6> when it's closed: "All summer, kids have been hanging out in front of the Morris Park Library in the Bronx, before opening hours and after closing."

<comment><USER38> Ah, of course. Should've thought of that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I relied on my public library for internet access for years ... luckily though, I had my own computer.

Do any libraries have some kind of persisted 'virtualized' environment that migrated between public-use machines?

For example, at the library I was at, you could not install software you needed - things were pretty locked down. And one day you may use machine #5, another day it might be machine #10.

Imagine you wanted to teach yourself programming. A few tools would need to be installed. I don't see how this would be possible in the library I was in (using public computers).

<comment><USER40> I don't recall the details, but the last time I was at the main library in Cleveland, there was a sticker advising everyone how to save to a "cloud drive" so all their files would be there the next time they came back. They had some sort of similar system for the tablets they let you use as well, pretty nifty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Why should one need a library card to use a library internet connection? Last time I used a public computer in the UK they were free for everyone with a time limit. But in Raleigh, NC, only registered card holders can use them.

</comment><comment><USER42> "Today's technology revolution promises to provide more information, more widely than ever. Yet we have left almost two million New Yorkers in the digital dark." \- That is NYC, imagine Detroit, or Athens..

</comment><comment><USER43> It's because of stuff like this that I thought facebook free basics in India wasn't such a bad idea. At least the kids there would have been able to get Wikipedia which you can learn most stuff from.

</comment><comment><USER44> Would it make sense to give libraries a new lease on life and turn them into mini-coworking spaces with micro-finance credit? Apart from how they serve as a conduit for free internet, there could be opportunities to use them to encourage entrepreneurship in those areas that are currently under- represented. Maybe even something worth replicating in other locales.

</comment><comment><USER45> Just steal your neighbors wifi..

</comment><comment><USER46> Most providers offer low income broadband which offers service for $9.95 per month with no installation/activation or modem rental fees. Cox even includes access to its Wi-Fi hotspot network.

<comment><USER47> Comcast charges $20 for its cheapest plan (10 Mbps), which increases to $50 after the first year. It's the only option on my area.

<comment><USER46> Comcast Internet Essentials

\- 10 Mbps Internet service for just $9.95 a month + tax \- No activation fees and no equipment rental fees \- Option to purchase a computer for just $149.99 + tax \- Access to free Internet training online, in print and in person \- A wireless gateway, delivering in-home WiFi at no additional cost

[https://customer.xfinity.com/help-and- support/internet/comca...](https://customer.xfinity.com/help-and- support/internet/comcast-broadband-opportunity-program/)

<comment><USER47> Oh yep, you are right. Thanks for linking.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> When TWC stops providing horrible internet service for astronomical prices then maybe things will change.

<comment><USER49> That will hopefully come soon enough - [https://www.charter.com/merger- twc](https://www.charter.com/merger-twc)

<comment><USER50> Doesn't reducing the number of suppliers of a product tend to reduce competition and increase prices?

<comment><USER51> Charter was the only cable company allowed to buy TWC because of their track record. Both Comcast and Cox considered it, and the FCC straight up said no, they would never approve it.

The former Adelphia areas that went to Comcast got marginally better (more uniform towards product offerings in line with existing Comcast), but are still overpriced shit, and the areas that TWC got worse to match TWC's existing shittyness.

Given how TWC is a toxic shithole of a company, and Comcast is _barely_ any different, Charter has actually made a name for themselves for being customer oriented, not short term anti-profit like the other two, and the FCC happily allowed the merger.

Charter's pricing is generally lower, their customer support is generally better, and they actually rebuild areas they buy instead of letting them rot like TWC (and also Verizon, on the teleco side).

tl;dr if the companies refuse to compete, how is any of it considered "competition"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Too poor for a NYT subscription :( ... actually just checked their prices, quite reasonable.</comment>


Show HN: Deploy your apps on your servers using Heroku buildpacks - <AUTHOR> https://www.opscaptain.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN, I am excited to show OpsCaptain, a cloud platform that enables you to deploy your apps to your own servers. You can use any server from AWS, Vultr, DO, or any IaaS provider as long as it runs Ubuntu 16.

Built using the latest cutting-edge technologies in containers and container orchestration, OpsCaptain frees you from the headaches of complex devops or relying on platform as a service and database as a service providers which come at significant cost.

We hope you will find this useful.</comment>


Want to use NEO smart contracts? Pay $11,500 or invest $1M - <AUTHOR> NOTE: It seems this hit a nerve because this post was removed from NEO subreddit really fast...
I started doing the math after familiarizing myself with how NEO works and seeing the smart contract fees blog post (https://neo.org/en-us/blog/details/68) published less than few weeks back.
Let's say I want to make a simple smart contract for a conference ticket sale. The blog post says GAS fee for creating a contract is 500. GAS = $23 now.
GAS = $23 means that 1 smart contract would cost me $11,500 to create.
Technically every NEO generates GAS and every NEO is "a vote." If it costs $11,500 to create a smart contract, you probably shouldn't invest in GAS but instead buy NEO and generate GAS, right?
According to neotogas.com, you need 35,000 NEOs to generate 500 GAS in ONE MONTH. With $30 per NEO, this means that I would have to own $1,045,660.00 worth of NEOs to get 1 smart contract per a month.
To use NEO for smart contracts, you either pay $11,500, or you invest over $1 million.
Obviously, this won't work which means that GAS fee structure won't hold. I saw someone guessing that in the future NEOs would set the GAS prices.
Here's the kicker.
If NEOs set the fees, it will follow supply/demand against everything else in the market. With ETH etc., realistically smart contract fee can't be more than few cents.
Why would anybody buy GAS if NEO changes the valuation on the fly?
The thing is that NEO is incredibly undervalued because NEO GAS setup splits the market between two tokens.
My conclusion based on all this is that GAS is not meant to be traded at all and the trading started simply because GAS could be moved technically. The problem is that the underlying scheme of NEO doesn't allow it to have a stable, tradable value. A lot people who hold a lot of NEO probably know this already but won't speak out loud because it's essentially free money for them. <comment><USER2> If something gets removed from a subreddit, post it in a different subreddit, not here.

It looks like you made a reddit post that links to this instead of being a text post and keeping it there. Not cool.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoMarkets/comments/73dkqz/want_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoMarkets/comments/73dkqz/want_to_use_neo_smart_contracts_pay_11500_or/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Are you going to keep switching usernames to post this? Just asking so I don't reply to another deleted comment.

So how is not cool? Because you don't like people using Reddit? There's a lot of cryptopeople here so it's very relevant. The fact that you don't like that a post here is being linked from Reddit is completely, utterly irrelevant.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Comment from another Reddit sub: "Thank you. Someone finally gets it. People simply do not realize that NEO can simply change the contract price to reflect whatever they need it to reflect. I remember mentioning this awhile ago that it made no sense to invest in gas. But oh well."</comment>


A new way to post jobs - <AUTHOR> http://www.workbee.co <comment><USER2> "Post Job -> Magic Happens = Perfect Candidate".

Well that's helpful. Don't see any indication of this "magic" is. I know, I know, once you know the magic it's not special anymore... but I think I want to know what the hell is going on here. At least break it down in really simple terms. You don't have to spill your secrets, just give me a hint.</comment>


On Chaucer: 'Kek kek kokkow quek quek' - <AUTHOR> https://www.lrb.co.uk/v41/n22/barbara-newman/kek-kek-kokkow-quek-quek <comment><USER2> the word Kek made me think of the alt-right meme. I was pleasantly surprised that is was something else.

<comment><USER3> Ok, we've frontloaded Chaucer for you in the title above.

<comment><USER2> Recency biases of the mind are at work here. How often do you see the work Chaucer in the news or on social media?</comment></comment></comment>


Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to Englert and Higgs - <AUTHOR> http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/ <comment><USER2> They say that professor Higgs is shy and not at all comfortable with the attention and almost as hard to find as his particle.

<comment><USER3> I'm sensing you're being facetious, but not knowing the personalities involved, what does this mean? Is he a notorious publicity hound?

<comment><USER4> Means pretty much what it says, Professor Higgs is quite uncomfortable with publicity.

Apparently, he's on holiday right now, with no phone / email. Almost certainly deliberately.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'd like to take this opportunity to remind people of the (sometimes a little forgotten) other person name-checked in the Higgs Boson: Satyendra Nath Bose.

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

He was an interesting chap!

<comment><USER6> He certainly had an interesting life, but I don't think the person giving their name to half the particles in the universe can be called 'a little forgotten'.

<comment><USER5> Ha. True.

But, I'm not sure people know that a Boson is named after him at all and if they do I'd bet they assume (like I once did) that Bose was some German or Hungarian bloke.

(Mind you, I also thought that the Bose of Bose Corporation[1] would have been a European rather than Indian descent, too. Clearly, I have some prejudice I need to work out).

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

<comment><USER7> That's funny because "böse" in German means "evil" or "nasty". I don't know if anybody has that surname, but I would suspect not.

<comment><USER6> Wikipedia mentions a couple of 'von Bose', and I have to admit that I don't see any particularly tight link between 'Bose' and 'böse' – the umlaut does have a special pronunciation, after all.

<comment><USER7> Good point, I guess native German speakers are better at forming that distinction automatically, whereas umlaut-free language speakers probably have a harder time of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "While standing around at the back of morning assembly Higgs noticed a name that appeared more than once on the school's honours board. Higgs wondered who PAM Dirac was and read up on the former pupil. He learned that Paul Dirac was a founding father of quantum theory, and the closest Britain had to an Einstein. Through Dirac, Higgs came to relish the arcane world of theoretical physics."

[http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/02/peter- higgs-p...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/02/peter-higgs- profile-physicist)

</comment><comment><USER9> This is great news, and comes as a bit of relief to some. I remember talking with a professor at the University of Edinburgh who was concerned about delays with CERN referencing the fact that the Nobel prize isn't awarded posthumously, and not as many are saying, not for theory without proof. Really glad to see he made it!

</comment><comment><USER10> is the nobel prize still the cornerstone of rewarding achievement in the sciences?

sorry to be so snarky, but i am genuinely interested, having long lost any trust in the peace prize comittee[0]. not to speak of the economics prize (which is not really a nobel prize [1])

[0] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_Peace_Prize_laure...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_Peace_Prize_laureates)

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences)

edit: formatting

<comment><USER11> I certainly lost a lot of faith in the Nobel peace prize when they gave it to Obama. It seemed like a political gesture more than a true recognition of significant accomplishments.

<comment><USER12> it took you this long? They awarded it to Al Gore for climate change awareness (has alot to do with peace i guess?) Even worse, they have awarded it to supporters of terrorism(Arafat), and other violent types of people(Mandela).

<comment><USER13> Gandhi never won the prize.

<comment><USER14> One reason being he died unexpectedly (assassination). The Nobel Peace Prize also wasn't awarded that year due to no suitable living candidates, which can be considered an acknowledgement of him.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This article provides some historical context to today's prize.

[http://profmattstrassler.com/2013/10/08/the-twists-and- turns...](http://profmattstrassler.com/2013/10/08/the-twists-and-turns-of- higgstory/)

</comment><comment><USER16> Robert Brout would almost surely be sharing the prize if it could be awarded posthumously.

I often saw him and Francois Anglert when doing my Ph.D. Robert Brout in particular struck me as the kindest man on earth, and was perhaps someone who though even deeper and more profoundly than Francois Anglert.

</comment><comment><USER17> Anyone with more insight know if this was overdue, but finally awarded after confirmation last year at CERN, or if it was pushed forward while last year's work was fresh in people's minds?

<comment><USER18> The Nobel committee doesn't give out the prize for theoretical advances that aren't backed up by experiment. Since the data was not yet overwhelmingly conclusive at this time last year, this year's award was basically the earliest possible award date for a decades-old idea.

<comment><USER19> Really? What do you call Obama peace prize then.

<comment><USER20> The peace prize isn't awarded by the Nobel Committee, but by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which is an entirely separate organization.

<comment><USER21> With a much deeper sense of irony

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Feynman on the Nobel Prize: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMaBmik4VYg](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMaBmik4VYg)

</comment><comment><USER23> Apparently most commentators were expecting it. I wonder if there was a possibility that also the CERN team could be awarded the prize?

<comment><USER24> The award is for the theory that is confirmed. The people of CERN didn't get awarded because they didn't come up with the theory, they just tested it.

<comment><USER25> Well... no. Carlo Rubbia and Simon van der Meer were awarded the Nobel prize in 1984 for the discovery of the W and Z particles (January 1983). Glashow, Salam and Weinberg were awarded with it in 1979, before the Electroweak Theory was fully confirmed, although there were solid hints at that time, it was a bit premature.

I'm really not too happy about this because the Nobel prize has shunned deserving scientists again. The consensus is that this mechanism can be attributed to three papers, One from Englert and Brout, another from Higgs, and yet another from Guralnik, Hagen and Kibble.

The silly rule of having to give the award to at most three living authors rules out Brout and, as it would be a problem to choose one of GHK (because they signed in alphabetical order, good for them) it's too obvious why they're out, even when the current understanding of the theory can be traced back to their string of papers.

This is not the first time: for instance, nobody really understands why Cabibbo wasn't awarded some years ago along with Kobayashi and Maskawa... for the CKM matrix!

<comment><USER26> Civilized behavior would imply private splitting of the cash, at least. I can't remember an example of that ever happening with any Nobel award in any field, although its probably happened. One of those things I'm not sure how to google for without getting 99% unrelated. If done completely privately there may be no public record of any sort...

<comment><USER27> I've always had the impression that the cash is the _least_ important part of a Nobel prize. Even if you're being purely mercenary about it, Nobel laureates can probably get paid speaking engagements whenever they want. But it's the prestige that really matters, and I suspect that for most scientists a share of the cash would be a poor substitute.

<comment><USER28> As a physicist: There are lots of good reasons to go into physics. Doing it for the money probably isn't one of them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> the theoretical foundation for Higgs mechanism was first discovered by Jeffrey Goldstone from MIT:[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambu- Goldstone_boson](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambu-Goldstone_boson)

</comment><comment><USER30> Thanks, Englert and Higgs, thanks to you we won £300 at the pub quiz last night. You rock.

</comment><comment><USER31> I think that there are about 15 events in the 125Gev bump.

Just sayin'....</comment>


Girls exposed to electronic babies more likely to become pregnant - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/26/girls-exposed-electronic-babies-more-likely-pregnant-study?CMP=share_btn_tw <comment><USER2> I like the title the Australian public broadcaster went with: "Small robots are getting teenagers pregnant, study finds"

[http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/small-robots- are...](http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/small-robots-are-getting- teenagers-pregnant-study-finds/7785992)</comment>


Vulcans and Apes - <AUTHOR> http://alarmingdevelopment.org/?p=440

<comment><USER2> Sometimes my brain is in Vulcan mode, and sometimes in Ape mode. I suspect that Vulcans alone, while they may be able to program, could never develop software.</comment>


Psychological warfare waged on kids - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@richardnfreed/the-tech-industrys-psychological-war-on-kids-c452870464ce <comment><USER2> Thought the title was clickbaity and would not deliver, but it very much meant what it said:

>"These parents have no idea that lurking behind their kids' screens and phones are a multitude of psychologists, neuroscientists, and social science experts who use their knowledge of psychological vulnerabilities to devise products that capture kids' attention for the sake of industry profit. What these parents and most of the world have yet to grasp is that psychology — a discipline that we associate with healing — is now being used as a weapon against children."

</comment><comment><USER3> While the article raises some valid and disturbing points, I feel like it's missing the fact that kids have always been subjected to psychological warfare. "Be good and do what you're told, or He'll awaits!" The problem now is that the war is automated and online, but I feel like the solution is the same! Teach critical thinking skills. Prepare young people for the complexity of the world, the ads, the religion, the appeals to emotion. We're not getting rid of phones and the internet, so prepare them for it.

Limit screen time, limit access as best you can, but think in terms of what you can add and not just take away. Give them the tools to fight the war. Yes, it means they're going to be less likely to believe in your brand of god or political ideology just on your say-so, and that's probably hard for some to swallow. It also means that some manicured and coiffed shill can't do the same through a screen.</comment>


Ask HN: Why is HN still using CloudFlare? - <AUTHOR> I think HN of all places should show an example and stop using CF in order to protect its users from their TLS MITM and CloudBleed-like scenarios.<p>We all know that this kind of centralization is bad for security and privacy but still continue using CF because it's convenient. Please, do the right thing, stop using CF. The way they are dealing with Tor users should be enough reason to not use their services. <comment><USER2> I don't think anyone will move out of cloudflare because of the incident. Like most news these days, there is a lot of noise but very little action.

</comment><comment><USER3> What would you propose as an alternative?

<comment><AUTHOR> It depends on the answer to why exactly HN is using CF. Is it for DDoS protection, or just as a general purpose CDN?</comment></comment>


Why String Theory Is Not A Scientific Theory - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/12/23/why-string-theory-is-not-science/ <comment><USER2> Why Forbes is not the one to decide what is scientific or not.</comment>