Your brain does not process information and it is not a computer - <AUTHOR> https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer <comment><USER2> >Computers, quite literally, process information – numbers, letters, words, formulas, images. The information first has to be encoded into a format computers can use, which means patterns of ones and zeroes ('bits') organised into small chunks ('bytes').

Sorry, now you are looking at a computer at the logical level, not the physical, what is it REALLY doing. If you are going to claim there is no place in the brain where a word or a piece of music is stored (presumably because there is no literal, printed word representation in your brain?) then you can't quite make the same claim of a computer.

We consider the components of a computer to be logically digital, but under the covers all transistors are analog, and all the workings of the computer are analog. We just throw away voltage transitions and we lump some range of voltages as "on" logically and some other range of voltages as "off" logically. It takes time for the circuits to reach their final state.

I assume the same is true of the brain. At some level, there are no symbols or numbers or memories to be found. There's just neurons firing or not, in context with other neurons. Same with computers, there's just little amplifiers supporting some voltage in some context with other amplifiers. That's it.

Or not, depending on what level you want to look it.

</comment><comment><USER3> > Senses, reflexes and learning mechanisms – this is what we start with, and > it is quite a lot, when you think about it. If we lacked any of these > capabilities at birth, we would probably have trouble surviving.

> But here is what we are not born with: information, data, rules, software, > knowledge, lexicons, representations, algorithms, programs, models, > memories, images, processors, subroutines, encoders, decoders, symbols, or > buffers – design elements that allow digital computers to behave somewhat > intelligently. Not only are we not born with such things, we also don't > develop them – ever.

Looks like a terminological difference?

<comment><USER4> > Looks like a terminological difference?

Yes. Another very clear example is where he states:

>> That is all well and good if we functioned as computers do, but McBeath and his colleagues gave a simpler account: to catch the ball, the player simply needs to keep moving in a way that keeps the ball in a constant visual relationship with respect to home plate and the surrounding scenery (technically, in a 'linear optical trajectory'). This might sound complicated, but it is actually incredibly simple, and completely free of computations, representations and algorithms.

It boggles my mind that the author doesn't realize that "keeping the ball in a linear optical trajectory" is in fact, canonically, an algorithm.

As a matter of fact, it's pretty much exactly the algorithm that computers on (earlier model) antiaircraft missiles use to collide with their targets.

The author exhibits similarly muddled thoughts about "memories". The dollar bill drawing exercise shows nothing except that our brains (rather obviously) employ lossy techniques when storing information. By default, our brains don't remember "irrelevant" details like all the scrollwork on the bill. We remember "1", George Washington, and perhaps a couple other details.

However, our brains must be able to correctly retrieve information at times, or I would have been unable to type this message...

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11729499](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11729499)

A comment I very much agree with:

> radarsat1 on May 19, 2016 [-]

> It's not even pedantic, it's just wrong. He's ignoring years of > neuroscience.

> We know that the brain uses signals, and that these signals are composed of > codes. We know that to interpret the world, certain information processing > must take place. We are learning more about the exact nature of this > processing, more about how neurons and even other fundamentals of the body > code information and contribute to processing (e.g. chemical processes), but > they definitely process information. We even know some of the codes.

> On the other hand, if the author wants to argue about the nature of what is > information, what is processing.. he's going to have a steep hill to climb.

</comment><comment><USER6> I think the author has confused himself into thinking that just like a computer has discrete physical components called RAM, CPU and Hard Disk, the human brain at some physical level has similar components. However when neuroscientists are talking about these terms they are talking in logical terms and not physical terms. The 'chemical changes' and 'rewiring of brain' that the author thinks are the reality of how the brain works are still compatible with the logical way in which computers work. The memory and computation and storage are distributed across large collection of neurons in the brain yet they logically conform to computer design principles.

<comment><USER7> "The memory and computation and storage are distributed across large collection of neurons in the brain yet they logically conform to computer design principles."

That is an opinion not a statement of fact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The author seems to have missed out on the fact that information theory is a part of physics now. Not only are human brains computers. The entire universe is a computer. The author seems to think that a computer must use bus lines, clock signals and silicon in order to be a computer. In actual fact, a computer doesn't even need to have software. You can make a computer with just analog components, without any digital chips in sight.

<comment><USER4> Another way of saying it is: "Apparently the author forgot about _analog_ computers."</comment></comment>


Has Desktop Internet Use Peaked? - T-A http://www.wsj.com/articles/has-desktop-internet-use-peaked-1460714718 <comment><AUTHOR> I think desktop internet use will expand even further because many more people who have never owned will get desktops/laptops in the future.

The illusion that the desktop has peaked is created by comparison to the amazing rate of growth of mobile. Between now and 2020, 3 billion more people are going to get a smartphone. That's a doubling of the current user base.

In the meantime, desktops and laptops are more expensive, complex and less portable so they grow at a lesser rate. Even if there was a local peak in desktop use in 2015, if we remember how many billions of people have never afforded one, then there is a lot of potential growth left in there, too.

<comment> T-A I am not sure that desktop devices can still be said to be growing: [http://www.pcworld.com/article/3054605/computers/pc-sales- pl...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/3054605/computers/pc-sales-plunge- further-as-windows-10-and-skylake-cpus-fail-to-inspire-upgrades.html)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: last.fm for classical fans? - <AUTHOR>

As a fan of both last.fm and classical music I've found that the two really don't mix well. There can be far too much relevant metadata about a given classical track (performer(s), composer, work, movement, conductor, recording date, etc.) to fit into last.fm's Artist/Album/Title system and the various attempts to reconcile the two leave a lot to be desired. Does anyone know of a last.fm type service/community that is geared towards classical music? I'm mainly interested in being able to scrobble my tracks, browse my listening history and use that to discover other things I might be interested in.<p>If such a site existed, would you make use of it? What features would you like to see? <comment><USER2> I wasn't/am-not a lastfm person so I can't say - but IIRC doesn't lala.com have something similar? Perhaps they are better for classical? I don't know.

And I'm a classical "fan" but I have my favorites. I would not likely listen to anything other than a recommendation engine's suggestions at this stage.</comment>


Eagle Energy – Caffeine vapourizer - <AUTHOR> http://www.eagleenergyvapor.com/

<comment><USER2> >With our proprietary blend of caffeine (guarana extract), taurine, and ginseng always within reach, Eagle Energy gives you the freedom to get you the energy you need whenever and wherever. Oh, and it tastes great!

Can you prove that taurine and ginseng do anything at all?

</comment><comment><USER2> How dangerous is this?</comment>


Behind the Scenes, Billionaires' Growing Control of News - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/business/media/behind-the-scenes-billionaires-growing-control-of-news.html?ref=dealbook&_r=0 <comment><USER2> Berkshire-Hathaway [Warren Buffet's investment firm] has moved more heavily into newspapers over the past five years. And according to Wikipedia, Carlos Slim is the largest owner of the New York Times.</comment>


StartEncrypt considered harmful today - <AUTHOR> https://www.computest.nl/blog/startencrypt-considered-harmful-today/ <comment><USER3> I can't believe that they not only decided not to implement ACME (the protocol behind Let's Encrypt), but also not to at least reuse large portions of ACME, like the way HTTP ownership validation was implemented. It's simply mind- boggling how they would discard a protocol that has received a lot of attention from various security experts. What's more, this design could not have been reviewed by _anyone_ familiar with how the web works - <USER2> users to chose the path for HTTP domain validation is so incredibly dangerous ... sigh.

If you're curious if there are any rules for CAs that describe how domain validation must be performed, the current Baseline Requirements can be summarized with "do something that's safe" on that topic. A working group within the CA/B Forum[1] is currently working on revising the document and adding explicit rules declaring which methods are permitted. I believe [2] is the latest draft.

[1]: [https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation](https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation)

[2]: [https://github.com/cabforum/documents/pull/25/files?short_pa...](https://github.com/cabforum/documents/pull/25/files?short_path=7f6d14a#diff-7f6d14a20e7f3beb696b45e1bf8196f2)

<comment><USER4> FWIW I got in contact with their R&D team earlier last week and they told me:

        no StartEncrypt API now, later it will support IETF ACME, maybe open source.

<comment><USER5> I really don't understand why they wouldn't just implement ACME first if they really do plan on getting around to it. What benefit do they really have of trying to go out on their own on this?

<comment><USER6> "What benefit do they really have of trying to go out on their own on this?"

Apparently, "substantially negative".

Grabbing an open-source ACME implementation really is the canonical value proposition for open source. Work together to make it secure, every individual contributor (once it exists) does less work over all, and even _had_ they successfully implemented StartEncrypt the first time, the value would be in hosting it and attaching their reputation to it, not the API design. So even the usual objections to using open source in a commercial setting hardly apply. There's not much in the way of "look and feel", and no matter how this was going to happen the actual "polish" was going to be done by creating a new website that they could make as polished as they like with no trouble.

In other words, they have _comprehensively_ flubbed this. Even once the code is fixed, the reputation damage is done.

Don't. Implement. Crypto.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> tl;dr: StartSSL would issue certificates for sites like Github and Dropbox, and practically any site offering OAuth2, without having to have control over the domain.

StartEncrypt by StartCom/StartSSL has a LetsEncrypt-like verification process wherin the ownership of the domain is verified by doing a HTTP request, and having the listening webserver return a specific token.

The problem was that they allowed the user to choose the path on the domain, and so when you for example would host a raw file on Github or Dropbox, you could issue a certificate for that domain. Also, it would follow redirects, even to other domains, and with OAuth2 practically mandating open redirects, this was easy to do on many sites.

<comment><USER8> Thank you. Wow.

<comment><USER9> Woah. I have zero security experience or acumen and I probably could have found that vulnerability. Remarkably poor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is there any way to semi-blacklist CAs in the browser?

I'd like to be warned about certificates from certain CAs without access to that site being blocked. That way I can still reach these sites, but know not to trust them with confidential data. It also allows me to ask those sites to use a CA I trust.

The point being to be able to punish CAs less harshly than the death-sentence that is root removal.

<comment><USER11> There is, but how depends on the browser. Luckily :( we have precedents:

[http://www.techfleece.com/2011/09/09/how-to-delete-the- digin...](http://www.techfleece.com/2011/09/09/how-to-delete-the-diginotar-ca- certificate-in-chrome-firefox-and-ie/)

<comment><USER10> The issue with that solution is that it will treat such certificates as essentially self-signed. This means that it will essentially blocks access to sites. I want a softer approach. Say one that strikes through the https in the URL.

Essentially I am looking to be told about certificates signed by certain CAs without them actually interfering with my browsing. Kinda like this: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tlsa- validator/gmg...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tlsa- validator/gmgeefghnadlmkpbjfamblomkoknhjga)

</comment></comment></comment><comment> Ruud-v-A I distrusted all StartCom certificates anyway after 2014; StartCom is a rogue CA who certify the authenticity of sites which they _know_ have been compromised. Read the story here: [https://web.archive.org/web/20140412085458/https://revokame....](https://web.archive.org/web/20140412085458/https://revokame.tonylampada.com.br/) (the original page disappeared mysteriously a few days after the story was published). And the HN thread about the incident: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7577290](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7577290)

<comment><USER12> That publicity stunt by some over-zealous guy cannot be called a "compromised key".

Intentionally publishing something is diametrically opposed to having something compromised.

That was simply an attempt to shirk his contractual obligations with StartCom and get internet points at the same time.

<comment><USER13> Yeah, IMO it would have been entirely reasonable for StartCom to revoke the cert for free and cancel the account.

Also, the flip side of this is that occasionally (but very rarely), people _want_ their private key to be a publicly accessible. See [http://readme.localtest.me/](http://readme.localtest.me/), where everything else .localtest.me resolves to 127.0.0.1, and they tried to post a wildcard, but it got revoked.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Certificate authorities are the (shaky af) basis of the entire trust chain of the web.

Because its root certificate is in everybody's CA bundle, StartCom had a moral responsibility to understand the security around this product. This is negligence.

I don't have any StartCom certificates right now, but I sure won't have any in the future after this display.

What would a "CA death penalty" look like? They're a "root" CA, is there an entity that signed their root certificate that could issue a revocation? Or would we have to get all the OS and browser vendors to agree to phase out their root after some time?

<comment><USER15> > Or would we have to get all the OS and browser vendors to agree to phase out > their root after some time?

Yup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> For those of you that wish to ensure your Macs never trust these amateurs ever again:

* Applications -> Utilities -> Keychain Access

* Select System Roots on the top bar, then Certificates on the bottom one

* Double click on the 3 StartCom certificates in the list, and flag them as "Never Trust".

Verify by trying to access [https://startssl.com](https://startssl.com)

</comment><comment><USER17> Let's Encrypt had a similar vulnerability late last year.[1] That was successfully exploited in a malware attack. There's also a potential BGP attack.[2]

Validating that a host is on the correct domain is very hard in the presence of attacks. DNS can be spoofed. If there was an easy way to verify domains, CA-issued SSL certs would be unnecessary.

[1] [http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security- intelligence/l...](http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security- intelligence/lets-encrypt-now-being-abused-by-malvertisers/) [2] [https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/attack-on-domain- verific...](https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/attack-on-domain-verification- with-bgp-hijacking/169/12)

<comment><USER3> > How was this attack carried out? The malvertisers used a technique called > "domain shadowing". Attackers who have gained the ability to create > subdomains under a legitimate domain do so, but the created subdomain leads > to a server under the control of the attackers. In this particular case, the > attackers created ad.{legitimate domain}.com under the legitimate site.

That's quite different. The attackers appear to have had full control of DNS in that case. Being able to control DNS is essentially the definition of domain ownership. Fraudulent issuance would be the smallest problem for a site affected by this. They'd have gotten a certificate from practically any CA issuing DV certificates.

Domain validation is messy and far from perfect, but this vulnerability is just inexcusable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Welcome to the world of certificate authorities, where the dumbest decision maker means the whole system is a joke.

If you're a government authority or even just a individual looking to get a nice signed certificate for some big domains you need look no further than that giant CA list. Any one of thousands. It's damn hard to have one developer write something reasonably secure, how hard do you think it is to have thousands write everything perfect?

</comment><comment><USER19> Will StartSSL suffer any negative consequences of this? They've presumably issued certificates they shouldn't have. What happens to them?

<comment><USER3> It's unlikely that they'll suffer any consequences. The CA death penalty (i.e. root removal) is usually only used in cases of massive breaches, like in the case of DigiNotar. Sometimes, root programs force CAs to adopt things like Certificate Transparency or limit CAs to certain TLDs as a result (i.e. a CA that primarily issues certificates for a specific country might be name- constrained to that ccTLD to minimize the risk for other TLDs), but that wouldn't apply here as StartCom already uses Certificate Transparency and they don't really have a "primary" ccTLD they issue for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> So this is actually huge. The StartCom CA is trusted in almost every damn browser (mobile or otherwise).

This is basically saying the CA's private key has been leaked. Because the end result is the same: I can now issue a certificate for any damn domain I want and have it trusted.

The certificate authority system is broken.

</comment><comment><USER21> Vulnerafeature is my new favourite word.

</comment><comment><USER22> Shame that these elemental security issues were present in the first case, and that StartCom went live with such an 'untested' and 'unaudited' product without doing a public-beta like Lets-Encrypt did (with non-trusted-by-default certificates).

<comment><USER23> During Let's Encrypt's beta, the certificates were already publicly trusted.

<comment><USER24> They were untrusted for about a month at least. September 14 - October 19 [https://letsencrypt.org/blog/](https://letsencrypt.org/blog/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Is there a guide out there for how browser users can protect themselves from untrustworthy CAs?

<comment><USER26> First of all, how do you define "untrustworthy"? Usually you delegate that decision to your browser vendor or OS distribution. If you no longer trust them for a specific CA, why trust them for any of the others?

Browsers may rely on the certificate store and trust settings provided by your OS. For example, Firefox always uses their own certificate store, while Chrome relies on the system.

certsimple has this guide on how to remove or distrust certificates in various browsers:

[https://certsimple.com/blog/control-the-ssl-cas-your- browser...](https://certsimple.com/blog/control-the-ssl-cas-your-browser- trusts)

<comment><USER27> Does anyone know how browsers go about deciding which CAs to trust? It seems like browsers should be auditing CAs if they are going to be making this decision on our behalf. An audit should have caught this design flaw.

<comment><USER26> The requirements and procedures are discussed in the CA Browser Forum: [https://cabforum.org/](https://cabforum.org/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> SSL/info sec/whatever noob here. Why _can_ they produce certificates for, say, google.com without the permission of Google? Or am I reading the article wrong?

<comment><USER3> Slightly simplified: Each and every CA that's trusted by your browser is capable of issuing a certificate for _every single domain_ on the internet. A certificate is basically nothing more than a document saying "StartSSL has verified that the certificate you're seeing right now belongs to the owner of google.com", with some crypto sprinkled on top.

The only thing that's preventing you from getting a certificate for any domain are software checks implemented on their end. If one of these checks fail (i.e. because the methodology is broken, or there's a bug, or they can be bypassed), you can get a certificate for any domain.</comment></comment>


Google Reader still working despite claims to the contrary - <AUTHOR> https://www.google.com/reader/view/?hl=en#overview-page

<comment><USER2> who cares. am good with feedly</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone here have more than two revenue streams? - <AUTHOR>

Preferrably from different revenue models. If so, please walk us through the process of when you decided to add on a revenue stream, to how you have managed to balance them all so far. <comment><USER2> I run two eCommerce sites with one-off payments for products.

I run three content sites that run ads for revenue.

I run one web application where you deposit money into a pool and service usage deducts from that pool.

I run one web application which is free with optional paid subscription upgrades.

I run one web application which requires a paid subscription.

I never decided to add on a revenue stream, I decided to build products, and chose the business model that made sense for the product and customers that would be using it.

You should be able to figure out what the sites are by poking around my profile. Feel free to ping me if you had some specific question.

<comment><USER3> Just curious, what kind of site are we talking with your 3rd model? IOW, what would I Google to find sites like that.

Thanks

<comment><USER2> Prepay, I guess. Some examples would include prepaid cell phones, Twilio, MaxMind, 7Search, online gambling.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I own a large tech blog that runs ads for revenue.

I have a few apps on the App Store that do well.

I run a few SaaS products.

These revenue streams generate enough income to give me, my business partner, and our employees a comfortable life. We have an amazing office in Ann Arbor. The business has no debt. We don't need funding. I designed and developed all of our products myself.

At the time, maximizing my current revenue streams is far more important to me than generating new ones. It's not easy managing multiple products and websites.

<comment><USER5> You should have listed all those products...another way to promote! Great to hear stories like this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think you are asking about a diversified business? well, though its not mine, I'm a integral part of one, where we have 8 different streams.

1- Tender Procurement business for Airtel/Aircel. 2\. Coaching Institute 3\. Software Arm etc etc.

well the biggest problem we solved recently was the heirarchy, my friend who actually owns all of them, was having lot of problems, everything was taking too much time, we got into the root of the problem, and it was because he had appointed only 1 business head for each of his firms, so whenever that particular person was having trouble, that arm was getting hurt, and taking more time out of my friend.

solution to this was a 2+1 system, where the current business head will now share power with one of the senior employees of that arm, designated as Chief Technical Officer and my friend will only help out when both of them can't handle a certain situation, the 2 guys will run the business, and my friend the actual owner would only be a silent supervisor. With time, as the business would grow, there would be additions on both sides of the equation 2+1+1....|1+1+1...

and according to need we will adjust. That is perhaps what I can best use to answer what you seek.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you regularly use remote desktop? - <AUTHOR> I am thinking of making a product in this domain and I wonder if people here use remote desktop clients regularly (rdp, vnc).<p>What client software do you use? and for what purpose do you use remote desktop. <comment><USER2> Yep I regularly use both standard windows RDP and TeamViewer for various reasons including maintaining bitcoin mining rigs and even using multiple systems on a single monitor (I prefer it to a KVM setup)

I also use a lot of various usbip solutions at work</comment>


Moving the Linux desktop to another reality - <AUTHOR> https://www.collabora.com/news-and-blog/news-and-events/moving-the-linux-desktop-to-another-reality.html <comment><USER3> This is going to be another compiz cube. It looks cool, but I doubt it will be very useful outside of showing off some cool tech.

Also Valve tbh have dropped a lot of their more interesting tech. I had one of their steam links which isn't even sold anymore. The steam link was actually pretty useful for steaming anything on your desktop, I am sure you can do the same with a Raspberry Pi and some scripts but it worked pretty well if you hooked up a mouse and keyboard.

<comment><USER4> Compiz cube was what convinced me to try Linux in the first place - I had always thought of it as a boring server OS, but then I saw the desktop cube and wobbly windows and thought "that looks cool enough to try it out." Hopefully this could have a similar result for some people who have VR headsets.

<comment><USER5> Same. And I like many, I turned that damn cube off after 2-3 months of use.

<comment><USER6> "came for the cube, stayed for the freedom"

This is more common than you would suspect

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> One of the authors of Simula[1] here (mentioned in this article).

xrdesktop looks very impressive. We've been working on our compositor (in particular: XWayland support) for quite a while. Getting a prototype up and running was relatively easy. But it has been incredibly difficult to get everything actually stable/usable.

Congrats to your team.

[1] [https://github.com/SimulaVR/Simula](https://github.com/SimulaVR/Simula)

<comment><USER8> Thanks so much for working on this!

I really like multi-monitor setups, and in the limit this can far surpass physical hardware and space limitations. You can scroll more than 360 degrees for a near-infinite workspace. (Just spin around a hyper-sphere repeatedly.)

I really want to see this tech succeed. I'd look like an idiot using this at work, but I'm already sold.

I'm forced to use a Mac at work -- do you know of similar tech for MacOS? I'm gladly going to investigate this at home.

<comment><USER7> Thanks. This gives us motivation to keep going. If you have any feature suggestions or want to check on our progress, drop by our chatroom in discord ([https://discordapp.com/channels/603723949586644997/603723949...](https://discordapp.com/channels/603723949586644997/603723949586645005).

I don't know of any similar tech for MacOS at this time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Why do people think this worth trying to implement? Is it because it looked cool in movies like _Minority Report_? What is the target demographic for this? What is the use case? Why would I want to add additional and unnecessary complexity to my workflow?

<comment><USER8> I want this _right now_.

I use four monitors at work and two 4K monitors at home. A high-resolution VR setup gives you infinite workspace. Couple that with intelligent auto window management and you can forget moving windows around _EVER_ again -- this is the ultimate mouseless experience that a tiling window manager can't even get close to.

This is a huge productivity gain. The micro context switches that stem from moving between windows and tabs (or worse, virtual desktops each with windows and tabs) goes away. Workspaces become spatial, and you can leverage your brain's innate spatial reasoning to find and organize things.

Physical project workspaces are laid out logically. We've been constrained to screens and haven't had the freedom of doing this for our virtual ones.

<comment><USER10> Have you done a lot of VR gaming? My eyes are killing me after an hour. I can't imagine doing 8 hours a day. Not saying this everyone's experience, and I'm curious if others are more tolerant of spending long periods of time in VR.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> That page crashes my Firefox mobile... Is that some kind of inside joke I don't get?

</comment><comment><USER12> I have a VR setup and would love a fully immersive desktop environment to develop/program in. The display quality of the new Index (for instance) is sufficient... however, the critical show-stopper is not being able to use your hands to type onto a real keyboard (i.e. augmented reality-ish).

A real keyboard that you can feel and see as you type on. Both hands would need to be tracked (in addition to the keyboard location) using something like leap motion not by wearing some gloves/controllers or attaching anything - <USER2> one is going to do any amount of typing on a virtual keyboard.

When there's a good solution to this I suspect quite a few developers will give it a go when they want a fully immersive in-the-zone experience.

<comment><USER13> Once your hands are on the keys, you don't actually need to see them. So the real question is, how do you find your keyboard in VR?

I think the Index's cameras would be sufficient. Alternately, you could place tracking pucks (or just controllers) on either side.

<comment><USER14> Your real keyboard can have a virtual representation in your VR space, just like controllers are

<comment><USER13> Well, it has to get tracked somehow. Or it has to be "calibrated" on every run, in case it was moved slightly when you tried to clean your desk or what have you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Looking at the screenshot of Wikipedia rendered on an angled window, this _really_ needs sharper text rendering with [https://blog.mozvr.com/pathfinder- a-first-look/](https://blog.mozvr.com/pathfinder-a-first-look/) or similar.

With something like that integrated into rendering libraries, I'd love to have the field-of-view of a motion-sensitive environment. (I don't actually want pseudo-3D, just a high-res 2D display attached to orientation sensors.)

</comment><comment><USER16> In case you experience slow loading of this hackernews'ed website, here's the archive: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190730153132/https://www.colla...](https://web.archive.org/web/20190730153132/https://www.collabora.com/news- and-blog/news-and-events/moving-the-linux-desktop-to-another-reality.html)

</comment><comment><USER17> I've been wanting the option of a VR desktop for a while now. Last I looked, it wasn't ready for prime time, and that's still my impression now. I find a small 16:9 screen pretty unacceptable for coding, and the market currently offers very limited options for anything taller in a laptop.

I'm eager to see where this goes, and may need to start shopping for a head- mounted display.

<comment><USER18> The current generation of headsets is unsuited for showing large amounts of reasonably sized text. The display resolution is not there yet. If you map your desktop into a plane in VR space at the proper distance, your UI text shows up heavily aliased and barely readable due to the texture resampling that happens in that process. You need to increase resolution by another factor of two or three to make that actually convenient.

And then there is the issue with holding 3d pointing devices for prolonged amounts of time. This is taxing upper body strength if you do. The weight of thenheadset itself is also straining the neck muscles.

All of this taken together usually means that I want out of VR after about 2 hours. I barely have sessions that are longer.

<comment><USER19> > And then there is the issue with holding 3d pointing devices for prolonged > amounts of time. This is taxing upper body strength if you do. The weight of > the headset itself is also straining the neck muscles.

You could use a real mouse and keyboard, if you're presented with some kind of virtual workstation. And even for navigation outside the workstation, of your broader "environment", 3D video games have been using a mouse & keyboard to navigate complex interfaces & environments for a long time, with more than a little success. Granted that means you still need a surface of some sort, but I think non-touch-typing text input inside a VR space would be kinda hellish anyway, so you're at least gonna want a real keyboard regardless.

<comment><USER18> Navigation in VR is a barely solved problem. Most games have players teleport between positions instantly because a continous motion would create a sensation of conflict between balance reported by the inner ear and the perceived motion. That means instant nausea.

Positioning objects in 3D precisely and conveniently without a 3D pointing device is hard, too. The best option for that is a mouse and crutches like handles oriented along coordinate axes. But that only works because the mouse pointer has a reference plane it moves on (the projection plane for the 3D view). In VR, this plane is tracking the head precisely. You cannot reasonably put the mouse cursor on that plane. You would need a different reference plane and then you're back to all the problems that 3D input on a 2D screen has. And a positioning objects in 3D with a keyboard is even more tedious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I can sort of see this as an incentivizing stepping stone through generally alternate 3d interfaces to to really get at AR desktops, which could be used in conjunction keyboads and gestures which is alot more viable to even code with/in.

</comment><comment><USER21> Goodness this website is slow

</comment><comment><USER22> [https://www.collabora.com/assets/images/blog/xrdesktop/xrdes...](https://www.collabora.com/assets/images/blog/xrdesktop/xrdesktop_gnome.png)

Oh god... where's your anisotropic filtering? That looks like a screenshot from Doom.

<comment><USER23> Some antialiasing wouldn't go amiss, either...

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I really wish the "Yay, linux on the desktop" crowd would rally around ChromeOS. ChromeOS is literally what the "linux on the desktop" crowd has been wanted for decades now.

<comment><USER25> Can you run a 'normal' Linux desktop application written in C or C++ on a Chromebook? Or is it just Android Apps and Web Apps?

<comment><USER26> You certainly can if you install Linux on your Chromebook. I've been using my Chromebook this way for years. But I use a real Linux distro independent of Google (my system will _not_ run Android apps). I have no idea if Google's relatively recent Linux offering works as well.</comment></comment></comment>


The Healing Power of Gardens - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/opinion/sunday/oliver-sacks-gardens.html <comment><USER3> This article focuses a lot on large, well curated gardens, but I'm an engineer who found a lot of solace and safety in managing my own garden. (As someone who has faced burnout and anxiety from work before.)

There's something about planning, planting, and then caring for a garden that appeals to my engineer brain. It's an exercise in organization and planning that scales from "throw seeds at dirt" to "these plants will attract bees near these other plants, these plants will repel insects. These will bloom early, these bloom late".

You can grow flowers, you can grow vegetables which you can turn into cooked, canned, or pickled food.

There's something about putting food on a plate that came from your yard, from your care. There's something about sitting in a green (or red, or blue, or yellow, etc.) space that you made.

I'm a sucker for games like Minecraft, Factorio, etc. Raising a garden is like a slow motion version of those things. It's a fusion of creative and scientific/engineering brains. It's great.

<comment><USER4> > There's something about planning, planting, and then caring for a garden > that appeals to my engineer brain

Agreed, and it's also not a stressful task in itself for some reason. I'm somebody that's over analytical and tends to succumb to analysis paralysis, but when it comes to garden work I never experience that. (possibly because I know plants are resilient and it's hard to mess up?)

<comment><USER3> The only thing that stresses me is when my plants fail and I don't know why.

<comment><USER5> Edit: I just saw your other post, this one in isolation made me think you had tried gardening once and given up.

That just happens sometimes!

Hard to explain failures are often caused by one or more of over watering, pests (including at the root level), too little soil, or bad soil PH. Symptoms of pests include visible bugs, mold, eggs, or webs (check under the leaves) or a weird smell. PH problems sometimes manifest as discolored leaves.

Also like animals plants have very different levels of vitality, there is strength in numbers!

If you want to try again let me recommend herbs and leaf vegetables. Mint, basil, arugula, lettuce, and mustard greens grow fast and mint in particular is somewhat invasive and hard to stop it gets going.

It can be tough to grow a tomato that looks like the ones at the grocery store without experience and more time and care. There's an art to it.

<comment><USER6> i've had great results growing basil. I had a plant we named Harry, who thrived in Palo Alto despite erratic care. Harry would drink as much water as we could give it and would be visibly wilted when thirsty. Otherwise, incredibly happy sitting in the sun and producing leaves.

<comment><USER3> I'm in the Pacific Northwest, and I've had mixed experience with basil. I'm trying to grow it hydroponically at home now, and it seems to be going pretty well.

<comment><USER5> Yeah basil really takes well to that kind of setup and has the ability, given sufficient light, to grow so vigorously that it creates a wide band of acceptable fertilizer levels which can be a real challenge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've had a theory for some time now based on my own observations:

A big part of why nature is so calming is the absence of repeating patterns. In our artificial life everything follows standardized forms and patterns. It's a sterile world. The most obvious example being rectangles and perfect 90 degree angles everywhere. But I would also count things like uniform colors, evenly spread (artificial) light, predictable sounds etc.

That makes me think that somehow something like this absence of patterns - <USER2> the knowledge/assumption for our brain that they are not to be expected in nature - helps us.

The beauty in this is that nature _is_ full of patterns. But on a different level, no two patterns are ever the same. When you look at a green tree you simply won't assume to find two leaves with the same color and shape. That's the difference.

Some years ago I got myself an empty canvas frame and put natural linen fabric ([https://www.fabric.com/buy/ff-357/kaufman-antwerp-linen- natu...](https://www.fabric.com/buy/ff-357/kaufman-antwerp-linen-natural)) on it. No painting, just the linen. For the same reason: It's calming to look at

Or maybe I'm just weird :)

<comment><USER8> Sort of off topic: One of the more frustrating things about going out in nature where I live at least, is seeing the pattern of invasive plants over and over again. I can identify every plant in my area, an area that would have been full of thousands of different trees and bushes now has repeating landscape of about two dozen different plants.

<comment><USER9> At some point in time, every plant was invasive.

<comment><USER10> No, invasiveness is a quantitative measure. A plant can force other plants out, or it can coexist. The amount of net pressure on other species dictates whether a plant is invasive. A Eucalyptus and a Live Oak will both use the same sunlight but the Eucalyptus will lol everything underneath it.

Also, it is true that sunlight is a fixed resource, but the earth is not 100% covered, even in mature forests. There are disturbances everywhere that can be moved into and stengthening the ecosystem.

There are also resources which are not sunlight. The resource competition is so multidimensional and open that you cannot conceive of life as a zero sum game. Not yet anyway. Maybe in another billion years of evolution we will be at the point where every movement is an invasion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Of all the plants, trees by far give me the most pleasure. A suburb with trees is a thousand times better than one without. The shade of a tree is completely transformative. It gives me a fuzzy warm feeling inside.

It's concerning to me that such an important aesthetic component is so transient and difficult to control. When you build a house, you control every aspect of its design. It's materials are tough and long lasting. But the trees around the house are prone to dying. They get too old or they get sick or whatever. And when they do, you can't really replace them. I've seen tons of houses where they had great atmosphere but then one of their large trees died and the feeling of the house is totally ruined. I'm not sure if you can order a grown tree and have it implanted but it's probably really expensive. We need artificial trees that last longer and are easy to replace.

Humans are drawn to vistas. Standing on the top of a hill and looking at the vista is something everyone agrees is beautiful and feels good. I think it might be because our ancestors were tree-dwelling monkeys. The higher in the tree you climb, the better the view, the safer you are from predators. If we are drawn to views then we would likely spend more time high up in the tree. Maybe that's also why we find trees themselves so appealing. Ancient wiring.

<comment><USER12> I am fortunate to have a house on a larger plot of land considering it's in a dense urban environment, and on the land are very impressive trees such as an oak, a maple, a few birch, and a black cherry. Regrettably the birch are short lived, and while they still produce leaves they are getting weak and I will need to bring them down in a few years. The cherry still produces leaves and may even flower this year, but its wood is very brittle and it will probably come down this fall. It truly is sad as their loss will definitely impact why I moved into the house.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Before we had kids, my wife and I would work in the garden almost every weekend. After spending a week dealing with servers on fire, doing mindless repetitive work was exactly what I needed to rest my mind.

At one point I dug out a garden that was 37' x 14' and over a foot deep. I did the math once and figured out that I moved more than 2000 lbs of dirt (a literal ton) and then I moved a literal ton of bricks to the back yard to build the retaining walls.

Measuring your accomplishments in tonnage is very satisfying.

<comment><USER14> "Before we had kids"

Why did you stop? Personally I make an extra effort to get them outside, for young kids theres so much to learn in a garden, or out for a walk.

<comment><USER13> The garden is too dangerous for the kids because there are a lot of sharp things around. :) I didn't build it with kids in mind, so for example all the wire fencing is just cut with no ends. We'll get out there with them in a few years. My daughter helps with the front yard sometimes.

<comment><USER14> Fair enough.

Its all rusty barbed wire fence by us, so rationally it doesn't make a difference, wouldn't want my kids injuring themselves on something like that in the garden though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> >I cannot say exactly how nature exerts its calming and organizing effects on our brains, but I have seen in my patients the restorative and healing powers of nature and gardens, even for those who are deeply disabled neurologically. In many cases, gardens and nature are more powerful than any medication. \---

I have witnessed this with my wife who's neurological disorder causes her to be in a "fright or flight" state virtually all day every day.

When she is either planning the garden, tending to the garden or just enjoying the garden I can see a reduced level of stress and increased ability to focus and multitask. All things which are very difficult outside of the garden.

<comment><USER4> Not only is it visually pleasing, as an escape fro our usual concrete-filled world (probably because we evolved living in nature), but without doing any research to look up studies I feel like the reduced stress might also come from the smell (pheromones).

<comment><USER16> It goes deep in our psyche. In 101 Principles Of Design they mention a hospital that put up photos of bamboo trees in their hallways, so that it feels like you're walking through a forest, because of the calming effect it has on patients. Photos of trees, not even real trees.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> One of the gardens pictured in the article, Elizabeth Street Garden, is a great spot in the middle of retail chaos in New York. Sadly a real estate development filed a lawsuit this month in hopes of destroying it: [https://static1.squarespace.com/static/581fb257b8a79bf741c67...](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/581fb257b8a79bf741c673a9/t/5c41f63242bfc10641576ff6/1547826743141/know+the+facts+-+v3.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER18> We are, despite our pretenses, also products of the natural world, and do well to reside amongst our kind.

<comment><USER19> There's something about this I read on Slate Star Codex that I found entertaining and insightful. It's easy to forget that we needed to be in a fertile place in the past, and for the most part we don't need to now, except for emotional reasons.

"Most people are happier when they're in at least some Nature, whether this means a grand national park or just a leafy suburb with lots of chirping birds. The average person would consider a concrete lot full of Brutalist apartments a little soul-crushing. This probably comes from an evolutionary heuristic in favor of fertile areas and against barren ones; the closest chimpanzee-parseable equivalent to a concrete lot would be a desert or lava flow, where food and shelter are scarce. But nowadays we can order takeout, and the Brutalist apartment buildings provide all the shelter we need. This is probably another obsolete evolutionary relic, but it's a very persistent one."

[https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/07/24/value-differences- as-d...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/07/24/value-differences-as- differently-crystallized-metaphysical-heuristics/)

<comment><USER20> I'd think it'd be well to also note, aside a evolutionary analysis based on the past, in the present, plants take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen.

<comment><USER19> We also need plants to eat. We don't need direct access to the plants to eat them, nor do we need direct access to plants to benefit from carbon dioxide to oxygen conversion. I'm not aware of where the plants I eat come from, most of the time. I'm not saying I don't need plants, I just don't necessarily need to live among them, but I like being able to see plants frequently. I have no desire to have my own garden though, I would rather appreciate nature in a public place where everyone can enjoy them, such as parks and along streets.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm (hopefully) on the tail-end of dealing with mental health issues. I was dealing with burnout, depression, substance abuse, trauma, psychosis, and severe anxiety. Right about then I started this backyard project to create a chemical-free, sustainable, and diverse "forest garden". Currently, about two years later that Eco-system is starting to explode with more bugs, fungus, and birds.

I found solitude, peace, and healing in the process of working with nature. I worked hard to revitalize the natural environment around me, and through that process I want to believe that nature found a way to heal me too.

Also, I had a therapist and a supporting partner who helped me through the tough times.

Anyways, I can't recommend enough getting your hands in the dirt, appreciating all forms of nature, and learning about the various Eco-systems that are needed for nature to thrive.

</comment><comment><USER22> I miss Oliver Sacks. To see that there are still some writings by him to discover is a treat.

</comment><comment><USER23> My wife and I have been gardening for around 15 years.

We spent a couple of years, maybe 5 or 7 years ago, trying straw bale gardens.

It was quite interesting. I would recommend giving it a try some time. You can do it even with just one bale. We did it with about 10-12 bales of oat straw from a farm we knew.

E.g., [https://www.amazon.com/Straw-Bale-Gardens-Complete- Karsten/d...](https://www.amazon.com/Straw-Bale-Gardens-Complete- Karsten/dp/1591869072/) was the author of the book we used, though this seems to be an updated version to the one we used.

I prefer raised soil beds, but this straw bale style was quite enjoyable.

</comment><comment><USER24> Does anyone recommend a particular guide for getting started in gardening?

<comment><USER25> Square Foot Gardening is a great introduction; an retired aerospace engineer finds the world of gardening full of contradictions and myths.

He boils it all down to fundamentals that are easy to apply.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Given the author's observations, I would draw a different conclusion. I would conclude it isn't so much that gardens are good for you but that urban living, surrounding yourself with noise, strangers, glass, and concrete is bad for you.

</comment><comment><USER27> Oddly, I have never felt the allure of gardens, I don't have any plants myself, and if I'd have to choose between a city environment and nature, I'd in most cases choose the city (and not because of its parks). Both when I am happy and when I am sad. I like a good sunset but that's it. I'm clearly in a minority with this, it seems.

</comment><comment><USER28> I am actively working on a startup to encourage gardening for all the mentioned benefits. If someone wants to chat about it please reach out. Email in profile.

</comment><comment><USER29> Gardens and other natural spaces absolutely affect social and mental wellbeing.

An interesting piece of research into the effects of greenery and nature on wellbeing was conducted back in 2001 by Ming Kuo and William Sullivan [0]. I love referencing it in discussions like these as it's a rather opportunistic experimental setting that might have otherwise never occurred, and gives us some pretty great data to recount when we only otherwise have anecdotes.

In Chicago there was a set of high-rise public-housing buildings. The residents of these buildings had been assigned randomly by the public housing system. Attrition over time had left some buildings surrounded by only concrete and asphalt and others with pockets of green. Kuo and Sullivan were able to compare levels of aggression of 145 residents. They found higher levels of aggression and familial conflict recalled by those living less close to nature. They backed up this data by looking at similar low-rise developments [1]. Controlling for other factors, they compared crime rates of inhabitants who experienced less natural proximity to those with more. They found that roughly 7% of the variation in crime that couldn't be accounted for by other factors could be accounted for by the amount of trees.

Ming Kuo has gone on to research the link between nature and school performance, one of her recent studies concluding that "greening has the potential to mitigate academic underachievement in high-poverty urban schools."[2] In another fascinating piece of research she has also found that "Children with ADHD have fewer symptoms after outdoor activities in lush environments."[3]

Many of this research matches our collective anecdotes. We know that we are somehow hard-wired for nature. Yet we keep ourselves locked away in buildings for hours on end with little of it except corporate potted plants (often fake) and the odd photo or poster on the wall. To pile on with another opinion... I think there's something about 'wild' greenery that is distinctly effective versus manicured greenery. Its chaos and growth somehow synchronise with the minds' inherent nature. In an incredibly fundamental way, we are supposed to be amongst that wildness.

[0] [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245234610_Aggressio...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245234610_Aggression_and_Violence_in_the_Inner_City)

[1] [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249624302_Environme...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249624302_Environment_and_Crime_in_the_Inner_City_Does_Vegetation_Reduce_Crime)

[2] [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327876862_Might_Sch...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327876862_Might_School_Performance_Grow_on_Trees_Examining_the_Link_Between_Greenness_and_Academic_Achievement_in_Urban_High- Poverty_Schools)

[3] [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23192434_Children_W...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23192434_Children_With_Attention_Deficits_Concentrate_Better_After_Walk_in_the_Park)

</comment><comment><USER30> I hate having to pay for an article, can this be stopped from promotions on HN?

<comment><USER31> > _It 's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. In > comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do > so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic._

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html)</comment></comment>


My Mac Apps - <AUTHOR> https://joshstrange.com/my-mac-apps/ <comment><USER2> Not bad choices. I, as a rule, hate password stores, because it makes all of your personal information available with just one password in most cases if locally stored. (Some have 2 factor, I hear.) I also refuse to use remote password stores also for fear of creating a high enough stakes target to make others want to readily compromise it. I mean for me, intelligent "pre-hashing" is your friend. The reason people break passwords is that they are easily guessed and pre-established as something easy to figure out. Remove the easy to figure out (and the reuse), and you're mostly done. Not too much other lifting to engage in.</comment>


New court software is so awful it's getting people wrongly arrested - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/court-software-glitches-result-in-erroneous-arrests-defense-lawyers-say/ <comment><USER2> So close to not being a political story, except:

"Our criminal justice system is beset by racial and economic biases and ongoing examples of wrongful convictions [...]". Since the software isn't racist I think it's fair to say this has a political component. Flagged.</comment>


Ask HN: What happened to 'Deleting Uber is the least you can do' - <AUTHOR> This post[0] was on the frontpage at #2, but suddenly dropped several pages in the span of a few minutes[1]. What happened?
0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13687493
1: http://hnrankings.info/13687493/ <comment><USER2> You can see some feedback from one of the moderators here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13689174](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13689174)

</comment><comment><USER3> Presumably flagged by users, that has strong negative ranking weight.</comment>


Show HN: DOG WHISTLE, the multidisciplinary data driven marketing plan - <AUTHOR> https://mrjonesedition.com/superclass <comment><USER2> Just so you know "dog whistle" can have a negative connotation where it refers to saying one thing as a code word for something else, usually derogatory and aimed at a minority or other group.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog- whistle_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN! I made this. Here's some info on the data before everyone goes berzerk :)

Building and executing a multidisciplinary marketing plan and identifying your target audience in mass media can be difficult. DOG WHISTLE is a lifeline for anyone struggling to get started or refine their social media marketing strategy. Plus it's automated with no pricey consultants or marketing agencies.</comment>


HN Show: Visualizing the Syrian Refugee Crisis Using D3 - <AUTHOR> http://visualizations.manassra.com/syria

<comment><USER2> Upvoted, you built something cool :)</comment>


Ask HN: Can I know who hacked my twitter - <AUTHOR>

Hi
Just a few hours back, my twitter was hacked putting me in a very embarrassing situation.  I wanted to know if it is possible to zero-in on the hacker through twitter API. Are there any services that let me know what location was my account accessed from, what tweets or DMs were recently deleted and any other similar info.
I have also heard that some twitter bug is responsible for logging people into random accounts. How true is that ?
many thanks. <comment><USER2> Twitter support are generally helpful, I've known people contact them and be provided with recent IP logins etc.

(Though, if you were hacked, and they logged in not directly to twitter, e.g. a 3rd party app, Twitter might not have the IP themselves)</comment>


Ask HN: Client won't pay me my invoice and disputed Paypal payment 3 months ago - <AUTHOR> I have been working with a client now for 6 months.  He has paid me around 3k each month.  While my invoices were well above the prescribed amount.  He chose to do that saying that we would add it to equity later.  Sweat equity.  Just a week ago, we had a falling out and closing up my work, I sent him an invoice for 17k.  After which things got worse.  He has attacked me, my family and called me names.  He is trying to intimidate me.  He also took the stance that he doesn't want to speak to me anymore.  After which, I did threaten to share the details of this with his client base and all his buyers.  He wasn't happy with that.  I did not do so, but now he is unwilling to talk.
After him shutting down communication, I reached out to his investors, which got him talking again.
He has since said he is only willing to pay me $3500 on my invoice.  Second, he disputed 3k he paid me in March, so I now owe 3k towards Paypal because of the dispute.
He has also done this to other contractors, which I can count as 5 for now.  I have 2 others willing to follow through with legal action.  I guess I am wondering what has your experience been and is it worth it?  Is it worth the time in court for just 17k?  Will the lawyer I speak to even look at a contract dispute that low?
Can I also be sued for threatening him with reaching out to his customer base and buyers.
I didn't take the 3500, as I would like to see at least 9k.  But he isn't willing to reach to that.
Help and any advise would be wonderful! <comment><USER2> This is a complicated multi-facetted issue so I'm only going to comment on one aspect of it. Your attitude and mental health.

Just think carefully about each avenue you want to take and how that will impact your well-being and productivity.

There's an opportunity cost to chasing the money. In the time spent chasing it, you could instead be earning it back doing other work and be happier for it. Then it may be worth considering. I don't have a full picture of your earning potential and financial situation so I can't comment either way here.

Anecdotally, I was over billed by my electricity suppliers by ~£50. I could have let it go but I chased it and spent hours on the phone and writing emails to them. I filed complaints and threatened to go the regulator. It made me very angry and I could have spent that time far more productively and earned £50 doing something else. So with hindsight, I would do things differently.

I know my example is small compared to yours but useful none the less.

<comment><USER3> Fantastic input.

That said, this would be a good learning experience as they don't teach "How to be a free lancer" in college.

I shared my thoughts here and would like to hear what you think (besides the awful formatting)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17148628](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17148628)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Honestly nothing about that seems very professional from either side. You called him names, he called you names, and everyone's feelings got hurt. That sounds like one of those "friendship" business arrangements.

Agreeing to equity might muddy the waters. Equity is worthless, but by agreeing to it in lieu of a fixed amount, you've set a value. So you likely aren't getting 17K but may get the equity you agreed to in writing (assuming you haven't already).

Hopefully your invoices contained a due date, and your contract a clause allowing interest or penalty on late payment. If he is passed due, continue to send him notices but do them via tracked postage (and include interest if applicable).

If you plan to sue, which it sounds like you'll need to, start getting everything in writing. No more phone calls at all.

If he ignores your late notices get a lawyer to write a letter giving him a final settlement amount before the suit is filed, and then have them file if he ignores it.

A layer will take this, but expect them to take the lion's share. It still might make financial sense, even based on the settlement figures you yourself suggested in the OP.

By the way:

> After him shutting down communication, I reached out to his investors, which > got him talking again.

I'd make sure to honestly tell the lawyer exactly what you said to his investors, a countersuit for defamation could ruin the case (make it cost-not- viable).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. I agree. It is not professional. I didn't call him names, but I would say feelings got hurt.

Equity won't happen now.

There was no contract. It was verbal mainly.

Thank you for the final settlement amount. I appreciate that advice!

I don't really care about the money now, rather the principle that he can't renegotiate invoices when he feels like it. His integrity is lost.

Defamation for what? For speaking to his investors? I sent them notice that I was informing them. I didn't want to threaten them. But I guess by notifying his customer base and buyers, it could be seen as that?

Cost-not-viable. Appreciate you lining that up!

<comment><USER5> If you don't have a written contract, and everything was verbal - you don't have a chance whatsoever to sue and come out victorious.

It sounds like unless you can pressure the individuals involved, a judge will be a sore disappointment. Feel free to talk to a lawyer, but no lawyer will take this case unless you pay them upfront and they will likely tell you that you are going to lose this and its not worth your time/money.

<comment><USER6> Nothing having a contract does not mean everything is lost. Many people are giving this advise, "oh but you don't have a contract".

Even if you don't have a contract It does not mean someone can keep your money.

As long as you can prove it's your money which is unlawfully kept hostage, you can sue.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Hey there,

While I can't offer any legal advice (I would recommend not trying to sue this person, especially if they have more resources than you do - they'll just counter-use you to such a degree it won't be worth it).

I'm working on a project over here that is aimed to help freelancers avoid situations like these: www.knowtheypay.com.

You are exactly the sort of person I'm hoping to help in the future - unfortunately, I've found that the best method for dealing with clients like these is avoiding them at all costs.

Again, I'm really sorry this happened to you. Wish I could send you a beer (or coffee) via HN!

</comment><comment><USER8> Go get a free consultation from some lawyers and see what they have to say. I personal would sue If you don't mind burning that bridge for good. But I think no matter what you do talk to some lawyers.

</comment><comment><USER9> I once had a client refuse to pay €600. That amount is just not worth going to court over. Suck it up and move on.

But $17k? That definitely sounds like court material. Talk to a lawyer. Did you keep all of your invoices and your communication about this?

One thing that might work against you is that you continued working for him after he underpaid your invoices. When a client refuses to pay, quit. If they promise to compensate in other ways that are acceptable to you, make sure you get it in contract.

Most of all, though: talk to a lawyer.

<comment><USER10> It depends on the country.

In the UK, a small claims court will happily take on such small amounts, with no lawyers involved. It usually won't take up more than a few hours of your time, especially if you've done the process before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> You might be able to win your paypal dispute if there are emails from him indicating to you that he had made that payment amount. Upload all the emails relating to that payment from him. You could include one that shows he's making threats against you around the time he filed the dispute.

I had a client's wife dispute a payment through paypal because she didn't recognize the charge. I uploaded an email from him indicating he had sent me the paypal payment and they dismissed the dispute without input from him. (he said he'd just send me another payment if they reversed it)

I would offer to accept him cancelling the paypal dispute and take the $3500 (or even a lesser amount) and move on.

In the future don't keep working for clients if they aren't paying the full amount of your invoices and invoice them frequently so they don't owe you too much at one time.

If they are getting slow to pay you can get slow to provide services. Sometimes companies need time to get their cash flow caught up so that's understandable. But try to minimize the time/money you extend during those times.

Good luck. (Move On)

</comment><comment><USER2> In a fight the person who steps up and says "I'm going to f*k you up no matter what it costs me", is crazy and will make the other person re-think whether or not they want to confront this person. They may think about running away.

It sounds like your client is trying this with you. He's told you that he's crazy and willing to go the distance. So the question you have to ask yourself, is are you willing to signal that you are willing to go the distance no matter what? or do you want to go home?

I used the word "signal" very deliberately. You may only need to signal for a time and back it up with some actions (hopefully that require minimal time and money). Then he may change his mind and choose to pay you because you're crazy and just wants to get rid of you.

<comment><USER2> So how would you signal that you're willing to go the distance? I would tell him "I'm coming for that $17k even if it costs me more that $17k. I'm coming for your clients and your business. I'm start speaking to other contracts and we are going to bring a class action against you.

We're going to see if your clients have been impacted by your business practise and see if they want to join the lawsuit. Our lawyers will be in with your clients and employees...blablabla"

Tell what you are going to do next then do it. Hold a little back at every stage i.e. don't tell him just yet that you've spoken to other contracts. Keep that up your sleeve for later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> There are often such problems with contract work. My attorney explained to me that if the developer does not sign over the rights of the code developed it could be subject to license fees. If you seek an attorney for this they will say something like pay this invoice or pay a license fee for the code. Once they pay, you will need to sign over all rights to the code. There are attorneys that work with developers on these type of subjects as everyone I know has issues on both sides of contract work.

</comment><comment><USER13> I'd suggest putting it down as a learning experience and moving on. People will rip you off from time to time. Unless you have a good chance at a quick, profitable, resolution I'd suggest getting on with your life.

I've been ripped off for amounts in the tens of thousands of dollars on 3 occasions. I was pretty angry each time, but the only time I pursued it (and got my money) was the case where the counter-party was a large firm with plenty of sensible lawyers. Trying to get money back from individuals or small organisations where people have hurt feelings is an enormous hassle.

</comment><comment><USER14> You developed all the SW? You have access to the clients? Can you replicate the business?

Also. PayPal is not a company to trust when you are on the receiving end at least. Learnt that the hard way.

</comment><comment><USER15> > _" Can I also be sued for threatening him with reaching out to his customer > base and buyers."_

Since you didn't actually talk to his customers or buyers, I don't think there would be any damages that he could sue you for.

However, threatening to harm someone if they don't pay you sounds like it could be extortion, so if he has proof that you did that (like an e-mail), he might be able to press criminal charges against you.

You really need to talk to a lawyer.

<comment><AUTHOR> Harm? Physically? I did not do so. He was threatening me...

I will go see a lawyer. Thank you.

<comment><USER9> If he threatened you physically, you might want to inform the police.

<comment><USER15> Involving the police could end up being a very costly decision if he also committed a crime. That's why he really needs to see a lawyer before he talks to this guy again or makes any more public statements about what happened. (The comments he made here admitting to threatening the non-payer's business interests can be connected to his real identity through all the information in his profile. All you'd need is a subpoena for domain registration or ISP records.)

A lawyer, if given _all_ the above information, would be able to tell him whether it would be better for him to fight or just walk away (and also give him advice on how to better handle this kind of situation in the future).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is why lawyers work on a retainer. I would adopt a similar practice in the future. It has always eliminated the troublesome clients.

You can get a lawyer and send a letter to him and the investors if your lawyer advises.

</comment><comment><USER17> completely wrong place to ask. just hire a lawyer. for $500 - $1500 you can get 2 actually valid and actually useful legal opinions.

if you just wanted to vent and hear some jabber until you get answers that confirm your inner thoughts, ok then you've come to the right place.

</comment><comment><USER3> IANAL and this is not legal advice. This is an opinion and if you are really serious about this, you should really be talking to an attorney, an IRS Enrolled Agent AND a collection agency instead of a bunch of people who know more about software than what a Civil Code is.

First, SORRY to see this happen to you, but in my two decades of dealings, this is nothing new, infact pretty mild, so if I were you, I would chalk this up as a learning experience.

Here are my thoughts:

1\. Stop extending credit to your clients.

      You are in the software business. What were you doing extending a NET30 to your customers? Sign up with a invoice agency and let them do what they do best and you focus on what you do best.
      Hate paying 5% of your receivables as fees? How does it feel paying 150% of your receivables as fees now?

2\. f#k Paypal.

      I only use Paypal to pay when Chase Freedom gives me 5% cashback for using Paypal or Paypal sends me a coupon because I have not used them in a while. I NEVER receive money over Paypal unless it's a really close friend.
      Karma just got you buddy for supporting a f#ked up company that tries to be a bank but is not competent enough to be one. Stop using Paypal unless you use it to loan money to friends you won't mind never recovering from.
      f#k Paypal.

3\. You will not do business with this client ever.

      You will, while working with an attorney AND a collection agency be advised to report the delinquent amount over to all the credit reporting agencies.
      You will also have to notify the IRS for not only your lost income but also their income (the amount they did not pay you).
      They owe the IRS taxes on the "discount".

4\. > I have 2 others willing to follow through with legal action

      That's bullsh*t.

      They have done nothing so far and will do nothing. It's all just hot air. I have been screwed over so many times by clients and their "ex" consultants who wanted to "follow through with legal action".
      Those "ex" consultants became "current" consultants as soon as they got paid.
      Don't want to trust a stranger on the internet? Good, you're learning fast. Also, Try this: "Hey pissed off ex consultants. I have this fascinating lawyer that will represent us for $2000/pop. Flat fee, great deal. When do you guys wire me the $1000 upfront and $1000 after our initial meeting?".
      Tell us how this goes.

5\. > Can I also be sued for threatening him with reaching out to his customer base and buyers.

      You can be sued for farting in my general direction.

      Will the judge throw the case out? Depends on what you have.
      Will the judge hold you in contempt if you continued to stay and argued there is merit? Report back and let us know.

6\. > I didn't take the 3500, as I would like to see at least 9k. But he isn't willing to reach to that.

      That's not how it works if you have a half decent contract.

      A half decent contract will mention that any amounts paid will apply to the balance on the account but will not be considered a full and final payment unless the terms of the contract are adhered to.

      You have this in your contract, don't you?

So the three questions are:

A. What the hell was your billing rate? I charge $350/hr in general. All these tirekicking f#kers say Thank you and get the hell out of my way. They go and target the poor clueless souls that charge $50/hr (aka those who have no clue about the overhead of running a sustainable business)

      My clients are happy to pay me this rate because they know I work with clients who let me live a happy, sustainable life allowing me to focus on high quality work instead of bullshit. They want their business to run smoothly and unless I deliver, that won't happen.

B. Was this a "startup" thing? In that case, Sweat equity only applies to founders. It only rarely works for anyone else unless the company becomes mega successful. If you want to learn how to gamble, do it right and learn about Slicing Pie models. No? They wont follow a Slicing Pie model? OK, then they need to pay cash. Now. Today

C. What's your and your "client's" jurisdiction? How much of your gross income does this "client" account for?

PS: ANY attorney will represent you if you have a case and pay them money.

In my experience, you will get back your $10k back and more if you create a VLOG of this from start to finish than you will from your "client". Just make sure to call them, say, "GongBanger" instead of their real name in your vlogs. Sign me up.

<comment><USER18> Great response - since OP has no written contract seems like they are stuffed though?

<comment><USER6> No, if it's your money - not having a contract does not matter.

Imagine if a thief robbed your store, not having a contract with thief does not stop you from recovering theft amount from the thief.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> sounds like a perfect opportunity to release some open source software</comment>


China is building a GitHub alternative called Gitee - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/21/china-is-building-its-github-alternative-gitee/ <comment><USER2> Makes sense. Lots depend on Github for CI/CD.

Having your country shut off from Github could break a lot of stuff.</comment>


Ask HN: ZumoDrive vs. Dropbox - <AUTHOR>

Which one are people using most often.  I am partial to Dropbox but am curious what others think. <comment><USER2> ZumoDrive is an awesome idea -- be truly _extra_ space, not just a mirror of a folder that has to exist locally, too. But it's been extremely unstable on Mac OS X for me. I wish it worked and toyed with it for a long time, but it kept doing things like hanging my entire machine at startup for 5 or 6 minutes until it crashed and quit and the rest of the startup sequence resumed. Or showing as mounted but acting as if all my files are gone (they'd always still show up in the online interface though). Great idea, questionable execution so far. I'm still open to hoping it gets stable for mac and coming back to it though... but not now, not as a primary location for important information.

<comment><USER3> It's the same story on Windows. I'm closing my account over the next few weeks after having used it for a year. It's simply not stable enough, and I've lost patience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Can you make a poll instead?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Dropbox

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> ZumoDrive

</comment><comment><USER5> Tarsnap.</comment>


Amazon introduces Silk: a cloud-based browser - <AUTHOR> http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/28/amazon-tablet-silk-web-browser/ <comment><USER2> Do they really need a special browser for this? Why not use a proxy like Google's web accelerator?

<comment><USER3> Opera Mini does the same thing. I would err on the side of it being useful.</comment></comment>


Applying Satisfiability to the Analysis of Cryptography - <AUTHOR> http://galois.com/news/applying-satisfiability-analysis-cryptography-sat-2015-talk-aaron-tomb/ <comment><USER2> Err, The site is pretty sparse on info, but "Applying SAT to crypto" wouldn't really gain you much would it? "Applying an NP-complete problem to the analysis of a definitely-not-NP-complete-&-maybe-not-even-NP-hard problem" ?

<comment><USER3> As for info: there is a link to full slides.

SAT-solvers are (mostly) not used to directly attack cryptography software in this talk; they are used to rule out some classes of attacks.

In the most general case, program property verification is intractable, but specific instances can still be solved. When you have some industry-standard key sizes, you need to verify only a specific program, and then constants matter. So a good SAT solver can give you some useful information in a few minutes on a modern desktop computer about some real cryptography implementations.</comment></comment>


M 6.6 – 218km SW of Port Hardy, Canada - <AUTHOR> https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000hfgn/executive <comment><AUTHOR> The other two:

[https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000hfgv...](https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000hfgv/executive)

[https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000hfh3...](https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000hfh3/executive)</comment>


Fed Pledges Top $7.4 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit - <AUTHOR> http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=arEE1iClqDrk&refer=home <comment><USER2> According to the article, the Fed wants to make trillions of dollars in loans but they won't disclose who gets what or what terms / collateral is being offered. Why haven't we thrown these jokers in federal prison yet?

<comment><USER3> Especially since neither the Fed, nor the Treasury actually have $7.76T.

What people keep forgetting is that the problem isn't what we're seeing now. The problem is NOT that consumers aren't spending 'enough' money, or that banks aren't making 'enough' loans, or that people aren't buying 'enough' houses.

The problem was that (induced by a loose monetary policy) consumers were spending too much relative to their incomes, banks were making loans to wealth-destroying ventures, and developers were building condos that no one needed.

The symptoms we are observing now are part of the correction. The government is attempting to move us back into the situation that caused the problem in the first place.

<comment><USER4> Another problem is consumers, and investment in general has been made on frivolous things that don't increase are productivity.

I guess the easiest way to explain this is by looking at how people invest their time. We would be better of if the nation invested time in becoming a better worker, learned a skill, fixed things than if the the nation spent that time watching tv, drinking, or destroying things (war).We have spent our money on houses that are bigger than we need, cars that are bigger and less fuel efficient than we need rather than plants that we need, investment in companies building new products, even arguably infrastructure.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The Federal Reserve (NYSE: FED) is becoming highly leveraged. They may be next in line for a bailout, hopefully Bernanke will know to sell the jet before the congressional hearing.

<comment><USER6> NYSE:FED is not the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States. It is a bank in California.

And the US cannot bail out the Federal Reserve. The United States borrows from the Federal Reserve and pays the Federal Reserve interest on that money. In other words, the US gets its money from the Fed.

A bailout of the Fed would require the US to borrow money from the Fed, who doesn't actually have any money because they need a bailout.

<comment><USER5> My joke was just meant to illustrate that taking on too much debt was exactly what got us into this mess.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> this is such bullshit, why not give the money to actual tax payers?

That 7.4 trillion, divided by 300 million people(babies included), would mean that every person in the country would get $24,666, so an average family would get $100K to spend.

Don't tell me, that wouldn't stimulate spending.

Instead they give it to banks, who will just use that money to buy some other banks, while they are cheap

<comment><AUTHOR> I got an answer to my same question below. It's a loan to the banks. It wouldn't be a loan to ordinary Americans.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This may indeed be the crisis that we can't spend out way out of.

First they will try to borrow all that money, when that doesn't work they will start printing money, that still won't work but it will have the added "benefit" of destroying savings thanks to hyper inflation.

</comment><comment><USER9> This was done to avoid a recession which would have likely reduced GDP by 5% or so for a year. Not smart, but that's political decision making for you. Politicians always benefit when they spend more money, so they do.

Edit: There has been no year of >2% GDP decline since the end of WWII. The Great Depression saw an annual drop in GDP of 13.0% in real dollars.

Just to let you know what we're risking 50% of GDP for (some portion of which will actually be spent).

</comment><comment><USER10> They had better do this right, or this recession is going to become a serious, serious depression.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Can one of you more economically-savvy hackers explain to me why $10,000 to every American, at a cost of $3 trillion, wouldn't bailout the economy as well? Seems like that would lead to an broad injection of capital into almost every market sector. Some would choose to save (banks), some spend (retail/autos/mortgages/loans), and some would invest in stocks, and/or all of the above. What am I missing? Instead of these top-down strategies, why not go completely bottom-up?

<comment><USER11> 10k to each person wouldn't unfreeze the credit markets, though.

Credit is "frozen" now b/c banks won't lend, in some cases not even to each other, over fears that the borrowing institution is not going to be able to pay back the loan.

So the $7.4 trillion posted by the government is more about restoring confidence than anything else.

There are some good papers on the subject by Stephen Figlewski at <http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~sfiglews/FinCrisis.htm> particularly the one titled "Viewing the Financial Crisis from 20,000 Feet Up".

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, I'm not sure I buy that explanation. It's what the top-down folks are saying, but plainly, and perhaps naively, I just think of what credit is used for - to buy what you can't with cash. Giving everyone cash would filter _up_ to businesses; mortgage payments to brokerages, savings to banks, investments into the stock market and bonds, and purchases to retailers including automakers. Americans would have to do something with that money and there wouldn't be the huge management/distribution fees that are now going to get collected. In effect, you'd be giving the American people a vote about where the money should go based on their everyday needs. And that huge of a sum wouldn't be as easy to fritter away as a $300 "stimulus" plan. Heck, at $7.4 trillion you could give every man, woman, and child over $20,000 (for argument's sake, ignoring infrastructure which would be a mistake).

<comment><USER11> " _Americans would have to do something with that money_ "

That was the assumption behind the last stimulus plan, too, but it turns out only 10% to 20% of it was actually spent ([http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJ-2008Sti...](http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJ-2008StimulusStudy.pdf))

Even if people did spend the $10k you'd like to give them, it wouldn't make a dent in terms of home or auto sales unless there was financing available, too.

<comment><USER12> "the average family spent around 20 percent of their rebate in the first month after receipt." Which is not to say the rest was saved for the long term.

"Low wealth households households that reported not having at least two months in savings in case of an emergency also raised their spending more than the average household when the rebate arrived."

"Our findings underscore the potency of the economic stimulus payments in stabilizing consumer spending during recessions."

This would suggest a trickle up vs trickle down economy where a stimulus package targeted at poor people would have the greatest impact.

PS: Poor people spend more of their money than rich people film at 11.

<comment><USER13> _Poor people spend more of their money than rich people film at 11_

Yeah, duh, but even if you gave poor people $20,000 and they spend it all, how does it do anything about the housing crisis?

Without lending, that $20,000 won't change the market at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If I was the Chinese et al I honestly wouldn't write the cheque. At what point does national debt drown an economy? Does crippling debt not normally precipitate war with the debtees? I'm a little worried.

<comment><USER15> The Chinese would never do something so rash... they know they have to keep loaning us money, because it's either that or have their debt become worthless. They would also never go to war with us, outside of a battle over Taiwan that has become increasingly unlikely. What's the point? No one wins with war.

And yeah, crippling debt is normally a bad thing, but you have to remember that we are making up economics we go along. As long as economists keep saying that crippling debt is ok, everything functions. As soon as the theory changes, then we're all screwed.

<comment><USER14> I would also like to believe that everyone will behave rationally but sometimes people don't especially when they get panicky. Here's hoping they do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Its about time, Federal Reserve was brought under some regulation. They are just printing too many dollars and lending.

<comment><USER17> There is concern about inflation from the level of Fed lending & rate of M1 creation. However the bigger inflationary threat is when banks start lending again and this huge amount of money starts moving. There is also a threat of deflation though, offsetting this inflationary pressure, at least to some degree. For example, falling house & stock prices do wipe out a lot of wealth (real or otherwise, and perhaps good or bad) - which adds deflationary pressure.

So it is a balance between inflation & deflation. Clearly the fed sees deflation as a bigger issue right now - the fed can fight inflation, negative interest rates that plagued japan for a decade are much harder for a central bank to fix. They've cut short term lending rates as much as they can, effectively wiping out interest rates. Personally, I don't know if they're lending too much or too little, and I'm sure Congress doesn't either, so I'm not convinced regulation (and the attendant political pressure) would be a net gain.

<comment><USER16> I would say transparency is very important, for the government as well as Federal Reserve. Fed is responsible for the nations money supply, they are responsible for printing currency as well as deciding at what rates it should be lent(even to US Government). To me these are the powers with which you can control the whole country and its people.

Print more currency, make it easy to borrow which results in people borrowing to buy overpriced things(due to inflation as money supply increases) which sooner or later results in Bubble. When the bubble bursts, people lose their jobs and the value of overpriced things comes back to normal and people end up with Debts. We are in the phase where people are in debt and are losing jobs every quarter, by giving them more money or to the corporations which fired them, it does not make sense at all. In Simple words, It was a Bubble, it Burst. It really does not make sense when someone is infusing more money in the markets assuming prices of houses will go back like they were during Bubble or corporations will hire people assuming 40 or 50% growth every quarter, It's time to wake up now and think rationally. If growth is not organic, its not growth at all, It's Bubble.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> excellent. i am ready for hyperinflation. are you?</comment>