Blockchain's Next Big Test: Trillion-Dollar Repo Market - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/article_email/bitcoin-technologys-next-big-test-trillion-dollar-repo-market-1459256400-lMyQjAxMTA2NDI0OTAyMzkwWj <comment><USER2> This is really huge news for blockchain tech. DTCC is _the_ clearinghouse for securities in the US, they facilitate ownership transfer for the entire stock market and most of the derivatives market. DTCC processes so much wealth it's beyond silly, last year they processed something like $1.6 quadrillion worth. it's Anyway, DTCC published a whitepaper [1] where they explained some of the benefits of a blockchain based system. One enormous benefit (that the WSJ authors missed) is that with a distributed blockchain-based system you can reduce the current 3-business-day settlement period to a 0-business-day settlement period (hours). A lower settlement time would make it easier to evaluate positions and reconcile them. There'd need to be regulatory change for this to happen, but if the current trial goes well and DTCC can show it works, the system can be changed for the better.

We live in very exciting times :)

BTW, if the whitepaper is a bit too long to read, there's a great summary of the DTCC blockchain situation here [https://medium.com/@Magnr/settlement- authority-dtcc-wants-to...](https://medium.com/@Magnr/settlement-authority- dtcc-wants-to-embrace-blockchain-technology-ad8253a49422) . Found it through this HN thread [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11011805](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11011805)

Link to the whitepaper: [https://www.finextra.com/finextra- downloads/newsdocs/embraci...](https://www.finextra.com/finextra- downloads/newsdocs/embracing%20disruption%20white%20paper_final_jan-16.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER3> Not sure how this can be done given the blockchain's extremely low throughput.

If they want a database with complete history over time, why not choose a solution like Dataomic?</comment>


SQL Server 2016 is generally available today - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/dataplatforminsider/2016/06/01/sql-server-2016-is-generally-available-today/ <comment><USER2> We made the mistake of buying a 20 core server for running SQL Server 2008, which was fine then, but the upgrade to 2016 would be really expensive due to the new per-core licensing, which means we'll probably be stuck with 2008. Microsoft doesn't leave us much choice than to use Postgres from now on.

<comment><USER3> Not fun... don't know what the pricing structure is for self-hosted SQL...

I have been considering using either Amazon's Postgres RDS or Azure SQL for a couple of side projects, with the app itself running on Digital Ocean... Kind of leaning towards the Azure SQL option for easier scaling, and a little more hands-off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "in-memory capabilities also includes unique features such as JSON support"

Does this mean JSON data is not stored on disk?

<comment><USER5> For some value of unique.

<comment><USER6> "Unique" in unorthodox meaning of this word.</comment></comment></comment>


VW plans to sell electric Tesla rival for less than $23K: source - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-strategy-electric/volkswagen-plans-to-sell-electric-tesla-rival-for-less-than-23000-source-idUSKBN1ND2C2 <comment><USER2> At this stage, no automaker will be able to seriously compete with Tesla without securing 50+ GWh / yr. in battery supply. Tesla's lead in building such capacity is 3.5 years and counting.

Bidding for for LG's scraps is not a viable strategy.

VW group has been leading the world in electric vehicle press releases while Tesla has secured control of half the world's lithium ion battery supply and crushed every "Tesla killer" — Bolt, Volt, Leaf, i3, ELR - and is pulling away from the pack at an ACCELERATING pace.

Time to put up or shut up.

<comment><USER3> If we're going to make fun of companies leading with press releases before actual product, we can't ignore the fact that Tesla has been pretending they can make a $35k car, when it has now been several years and their cars are nearly twice as much as that for the cheapest model.

<comment><USER4> All of Elon Musk's businesses rely on government subsidies.

<comment><USER5> Good. Name one major technological innovation that was not largely or wholly a product of government subsidies. The only ones I can think of were out of Bell Labs and Bell was a government backed monopoly so they don't really count. They were so profitable and protected they could spend like a government.

Nothing new is ever profitable until you get past the early prototype and scaling stages. For big capital intensive stuff only government historically has pockets deep enough to burn enough money to get big stuff off the ground (sometimes literally). Rockets, jet engines, microprocessors, huge scale power grids, the Internet, genomics, supercomputing, nuclear power, solar power, the list goes on and on.

Private investors just have too low a risk tolerance and too short a time horizon.

I actually wish this weren't so, but it is so.

It's also terribly hypocritical to bash Elon for taking government contracts when everyone does it. Why do you think Amazon's HQ2 is going to be in the DC area?

<comment><USER4> how am I personally benefitting from Elon Musk being a billionaire, taxpayer dollars shouldn't be reaching his pockets at that volume (meanwhile he prevents his employees from unionizing and suppresses injury reports at the cost of employee health...)

<comment><USER6> "how am I personally benefitting from Elon Musk being a billionaire, taxpayer dollars shouldn't be reaching his pockets at that volume"

The whole point of subsidy is to encourage business in a specific area. It would sound like it's working as intended, encouraging business and all.

Would you be happier if the subsidies were completely wasted on a non-viable business?

<comment><USER4> It's a business that exploits workers. We've seen this time and time again with Tesla.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Elon Musk won. This was his ultimate plan, to move automakers from fossil fuels. They all made fun of them, execs from traditional automakers, but here they are.

We have a lot to thank him for.

<comment><USER8> Oh please, Toyota and the Japanese carmakers started the transition away from fossil fuel decades ago when they made hybrids mainstream, and California's decades-old fuel standards system dragged the remaining automakers into investing in hybrid, natural gas, fuel cell, and EV technologies.

California politicians had the dream of moving automakers from fossil fuel even before Elon moved to the US. At least for this staed goal, they deserve far more credit than Elon, a latecomer to the game.

<comment><USER9> No. Toyota has a death grip on fossil fuels. While they did pioneer a lot of hybrid technology, they are going kicking and screaming into full electrics.

But agree with you that this is a rare instance where California legislation has had a meaningful and measurable positive impact on the environment and technology innovation.

<comment><USER8> Toyota does not have a death grip on fossil fuels, they simply prefer vehicles which use a fuel source that is easily and quickly resupplied. Hence, their decades-long research into hybrids, natural gas, and fuel cell cars.

Toyota has made the bet that a car that takes 30 seconds to fill up (i.e., a fuel cell or NG car) will ultimately win out over a car that needs to be "filled up" (i.e., charged) almost daily over the course of minutes or hours. Moreover, such vehicles can be filled up even in times of natural disasters, grid failures, or scheduled/rolling blackouts.

<comment><USER9> Your last statement is false for a variety of reasons:

1.) with sufficient research and decrease in cost, we can make it so that electric vehicles can be "refilled" as quickly as fossil fuel vehicles.

2.) for 99% of trips, having 200 miles or more of range is sufficient. across the aggregate of all trips made, it's very rare that people drive more than 200 miles without out a stop of a few hours in between. For those edge cases where people go on long haul trips, you can either elect to have a bigger battery or invest in dc fast charging.

3.) if you are optimizing for times of natural disasters, grid failures, or scheduled/rolling blackouts I would actually pick an electric vehicle. How can you fill up your fossil fuel vehicle when the infrastructure to harvest crude oil, refine it, distribute it, hold it, and sell it has been knocked out? it's easy to forget the massive massive logistics chain that goes into getting you a single gallon of gas. Whereas, I can throw up some solar panels on my home with a battery and have an renewable fuel source completely independent of everything else that is good for hundreds of thousands of miles. Fossil fuel just seems more viable because there is more infrastructure that has been built over time, but that can easily be disrupted. Whereas you could set up a windmill in the middle of nowhere connected to a battery pack that is collecting energy for electric cars that barely needs any maintenance. You're falling into the trap of assuming fossil fuel is "easier" because we have put so much effort behind it over the last 100 years. When in fact fossil fuels is an extremely difficult and disruptable energy distribution system.

<comment><USER8> All of your statements are false for a variety of reasons.

1) There is a roughly 15-20 year lag time between battery technology breakthroughs and their appearance in retail products. As their are no current battery technologies with meaningful lifespans, sufficient power output, and a recharge time measured in seconds, my point stands that for the foreseeable future EVs simply cannot compete. And that doesn't even take into account the 10-20 years of research into hybrid/fuel cell/NG technology to make those vehicles more efficient.

2) Clearly you've never commuted in Southern California. Commutes of 100 miles each way _aren 't rare._ SoCal is by far the largest market for EVs and other non-fuel vehicles.

3) Clearly you've never lived through a fire or rolling blackout. A pump can be powered by a short-lived battery at the refill site. Moreover, physical fuels have this amazing property called "physical storage" which allows them to be transported and stored entirely without the use of electricity. An electric recharge station is dead without power.

3b) Good luck with that. By the time your solar panels have recharged your car enough to make a trip to the corner market, a fuel cell car could have made a cross-country trip. And back.

3) Windmills are high-maintenance. EVs are almost as high-maintenance as ICEs. Engines are the most reliable parts of a car. The unreliable parts are common to EVs and ICEs. And as Tesla has demonstrated, it's quite possible for EVs to be even less reliable than the worse ICEs.

4) Electric charging would require us to make immense upgrades to the existing electrical transmission grid, which includes finding ways to improve transmission 100fold. That would cost tens of billions. Fuel/NG/fuel cell based distributions systems are far more efficient because there are many fewer "stations" that need to be built/upgraded to handle demand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> With no timeline, no pre-production vehicles to show, no specs, range, or even a rough outline of what one might get for $23k. Oh, and no batteries or factories set up for this yet.

In what sense is this even a 'Tesla rival', other than the fact that it will be electric? You might as well call a Golf an F-150 competitor.

<comment><USER11> don't worry. give them time, they'll figure it out. they've been building cars for a long time, far longer than Tesla.

<comment><USER12> Well, Tesla has been building electric vehicles infinitely longer than them, so

<comment><USER13> VW has been selling the e-Golf since 2014.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf#Volkswagen_e-G...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf#Volkswagen_e- Golf)

It's not a great car, particularly as it's an adaptation of a gas car platform rather than a redesign, but it exists.

<comment><USER14> The e-Up! is a year older, from 2013.

<comment><USER15> In 1976, Volkswagen made a Rabbit with a 20 horsepower DC electric motor and a pile of lead acid batteries in the trunk where the spare tire would normally go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Why weren't they interested in making this ten years ago? Too busy cheating on the emissions tests to care about something actually real like lowering the carbon foorprint of your vehicles. Tesla forced these companies to do this, plain and simple, so if you're going to clap this it should really be Tesla getting the props.

<comment><USER17> Nissan was producing and selling a mass market electric car eight years ago, when Tesla still only had the Roadster.

<comment><USER18> Tesla didn't sell mass market cars to jumpstart the industry, because that's not what the market wanted, very obviously. Elon correctly predicted the revolution needed to be an order of magnitude better in all competitive areas, not just slightly better or at par.

<comment><USER19> > Elon correctly predicted the revolution needed to be an order of magnitude > better in all competitive areas, not just slightly better or at par.

I don't think they are an order of magnitude better. Elon currently predicted that a personality cult and lies about futuristic capability sell cars

<comment><USER18> > I don't think they are an order of magnitude better.

Elon didn't require rohit2412 to think this, fortunately. Just everyone else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> You can buy a VW e-golf since at least 2015. It's a great car, but by no means a Tesla competitor. It retails for close to $30k, I got mine for under $20k after the federal rebate.

IIRC, VW only really got into the electric car game as a condition of their emissions cheating settlement. FWIW.

<comment><USER21> GM and Ford made EVs in the 90's to satisfy California. It didn't do them much good on the technology front.

<comment><USER22> GM made an electric car. People liked it. For whatever reason GM decided to stop selling them and crushed all the cars. Mainly because the laws changed saying they didn't have to lower emissions.Also gas was super cheap. There is a great doc called who killed the electic car.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> $23k hardly covers the battery, motor and controllers let alone the chassis or anything else, at all. I'd be surprised if this was any good at all. Would have to cut corners everywhere.

Source: I design electric trucks.

<comment><USER24> >I'd be surprised if this was any good at all. Would have to cut corners everywhere.

It's "engineering trade offs" when you do it and "cutting corners" when the competition does it.

<comment><USER23> It's one thing to say someone cuts corners but in the world of electric vehicles you really can cut corners.

For example, have no precharge system. Don't monitor the temperature of every battery cell. No manual disconnect for the high voltage battery. Put cab heater on the same coolant circuit as the engine so that if you use the heater the drivetrain efficiency plummets (but not on paper). Use an electric vacuum brake booster so you can leverage cheap components from petrol cars (although every single one I've seen has been prone to early failure). Skimp on your front brakes/calipers because you have regen. Completely ignore battery impact protection. Use non automotive components that are only rated to 60C because you can on an EV and not necessarily because you should. Select cheap low voltage components with barely a safety factor on HV bus without considering that IGBTs derate approx. 50% during a solar event.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> "Exploratory talks" "...due to be discussed"

Good luck! Hope to drive one soon. But talk to me when they've pushed the first one off the line.

<comment><USER26> Talk to me when they have a concept at a car show.

Heck, talk to me when they have a rendering and a spec sheet!

<comment><USER27> We've got renders

Notice how they all look like cars from Altered Carbon? And how the specs mention autonomous driving with a retractable steering wheel, augmented reality, and rear-facing front seats? VW will have these out by 2020 for sure.

[1] [https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric- hybrid/id](https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric-hybrid/id)

[2] [https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric-hybrid/concept- cars](https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric-hybrid/concept-cars)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> The e-Golf costs $30k and goes 125 miles and they're going to sell a 220 mile range Tesla rival for $23k?

It's great that they want to make more EVs, but don't expect any car company to have anything like that for at least another car generation (4 years?). Or they'll ship something with 125 miles and call it a Tesla rival.

</comment><comment><USER29> How stupid am I for reading the title and thinking they were trying to sell a company for 23k?

<comment><USER30> You're not alone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I have no idea new cars were that expensive in Europe.

I mean, salaries there are not like in the US, 40k€/y (net) is already a good salary, even for a developer. So you have to take a 5 years loan to buy a new car? 10 years if you have a low salary?

<comment><USER32> Europeans don't have an American standard of living, on average.

<comment><USER33> European standard of living is higher on average than American: afordable healthcare, education, housing, good public transportation, social safety net for unemployed, retired... US has some rich elite but other than that it's basically a third-world country.

<comment><USER34> Averages aren't the point. In EU wealth is distributed more equally (see Gini coefficient).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I will be convinced VW are serious about this only if they intend to conceal a NOx generator somewhere in the chassis.

</comment><comment><USER36> I'll believe it when I see it for sale, and not with a waiting list. Something I can actually write a check for and drive it home.

</comment><comment><USER11> I really don't think Tesla is going to make it out of this one. It's facing it's worst nightmare which is luxury car makers as well as mainstream manufacturers jumping both feet.

They have been building vehicles far far longer and have the experience.

Without Musk, I just don't see how Tesla is going to make it out of this one.

<comment><USER12> Make it out of what? A competitor several years down the road?

What are you talking about, and why do you think Musk isn't apart of Tesla? Seriously stop spreading this nonsense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> All I seen from VW so far is hybrids and empty promises.

Tesla is already selling fully electric cars and may be we'll get another model until VW actually ship something.

</comment><comment><USER38> A commuter box is not a rival to a Tesla performance vehicle. That's a linkbait title.

And even as other ecar source come online and fill out the ecosystem, Tesla can still win by 'selling ammunition' e.g. batteries.

</comment><comment><USER39> I'm no Tesla fanboy (more a fan of GM electrics) but I'm skeptical for many of the reasons others have listed but especially battery supply, and the history of VW/Audi group's handling of EVs.

I'm sure they can make a Tesla rival that sells for $23k. But I fully expect you won't actually be able to buy one unless you live in California or some other place that legislates it. That's their history with the eGolf, which is not a bad car -- but they sold less than 500 of them last year in Canada and it wasn't because of demand.

<comment><USER40> Battery supply is going to explode in the next years. But either way, this is not like the eGolf situation of old. It's not an isolated experimental vehicle sold in small numbers. They built an entire platform for building many different models of electric cars.

People mistake VW trying to squeeze as much as they can out of combustion engines for VW ignoring the future. Tesla forced their hand and has a real headstart. But consider this. While Tesla was figuring out how to build a single car at scale, VW has spent the last ten years figuring out how to build dozens of models from SUV to city car from a joint technological platform [1]. And they have spent the last three years developing a version of that platform for electric vehicles [2].

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

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

<comment><USER41> > VW has spent the last ten years figuring out how to build dozens of models

..whilst also managing to squeeze in figuring out how to cheat emissions tests! What a company.

<comment><USER40> True but irrelevant to the point at hand.

Consider this. Total R&D investment of companies world wide, Top 5:

1) Amazon 20B 2) Alphabet 15B 3) Samsung 13B 4) Intel 12B 5) VW 11.5B

No other industrial company is in the top 10. Tesla is at a tenth of VW in total R&D.

[https://www.ey.com/ch/en/newsroom/news-releases/news- release...](https://www.ey.com/ch/en/newsroom/news-releases/news-release-ey- worldwide-swiss-companies-invest-most-in-research-and-development)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How can i automate password resets/updates for all my 700+ account logins? - <AUTHOR>

I want to be able to change all my passwords to individually configurable values with just one click.
Is there any software available, or sample code to show how to achieve this? Ever since I started using password manager tools I always was wondering what happens when this data some day needs to be replaced.
I thought a tool for automated password updates would really make sense, maybe with an open plugin api for adding new services. It should be a transparent, open source solution that should definitlely not be web-based (unlike LastPass). <comment><USER2> Right now I'm building something called Automata - for easily building customized, modular workflows to automate life's repetitive tasks ([https://github.com/theideasmith/Automata](https://github.com/theideasmith/Automata)).

People will be able to publish and download modules containing blocks which can easily be rearranged and configured both graphically and with code. It is shell scripting for the 21st century.

It will make finding all these super specific solutions, like the one you describe above, really easy to find and use.

Is this something you'd be interested in using? This solution could be one of the first modules.

Let me know what you think.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I'll definitely watch this.</comment></comment>


LivingSocial passes Groupon in global traffic - <AUTHOR> http://siteanalytics.compete.com/livingsocial.com+groupon.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> This is not (yet) a blog post anywhere, but I think it should be.

For a startup to catch a larger competitor with a 12-month and +$100M head start is, I think, a milestone worth noting.</comment>


Ask HN: Flagging Guidelines - <AUTHOR> Are the guidelines for flagging posts published anywhere?
I ask because on many occasions I've tried to respond as politely and adequately as possible and yet some of my replies get flagged without any explanation. It seems rather arbitrary to me without seeing the guidelines.
Here is an example:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20678048 <comment><USER2> To me, from the perspective of submissions and comments, it appears that the ability to down-vote is relegated to those that the existing community who approves. If one's world-view, sentiment, and such does not agree with the existing team - reflected in their posts/comments, that individual will unlikely to make it into the approved group. One has to be echoing the chamber's sentiments to reach the karma level required. It is a self reinforcing mechanism. But, HN is a private entity that can decide whatever they want to; so there is that. This is not unusual, and have been shown to work out even back in the BBS era.

<comment><AUTHOR> Same sentiment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> See the "Guidelines" link at the footer of every page.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That destroys intellectual curiosity, which is what the site exists for."

Yet at least half of all comments on HN are ideological and political from how they read and what arguments they invoke. There is no incentive unless you are playing a game to respond to a political or ideological view from a purely curious place and half of the views posted on HN are ideological and/or political.

<comment><USER3> The key word is "battle". Political or ideological debate and inquiry are welcome. But if you're repeating the same talking points over and over, that's battle.

You're right that there are no incentives for playing a game here. This site exists to gratify intellectual curiosity. Other discussion boards do give points for repeating popular slogans.

Here, before commenting on well-worn topics like racism, ask yourself, "Is this an idea that most readers won't have considered? Do I have a unique insight that adds something new to the discussion?" If not, move on. Lots of things are discussed here, so you can surely find some where you have a unique perspective.

<comment><AUTHOR> I understand that the facade of rationality you've wrapped your argument in is really about controlling the course of debate. No one wants to play dictator unless they're deeply broken and insecure. Good luck.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Does it seem to you as though the guidelines such as they are (unhelpful comment) tend to be honored more in the breach as the number of emotional comments increases and people's feelings become inflamed? It seems that way to me.

Also you're still showing as a green user with a thin history. Expect little deference until you work that out.</comment>


Life Off the Grid, Part 2: Playing Ultima Underworld - <AUTHOR> https://www.filfre.net/2019/02/life-off-the-grid-part-2-playing-ultima-underworld/ <comment><USER3> I'm the Dan Schmidt mentioned in the article. A few years back I wrote a few anecdotes about the technical side of working on Ultima Underworld:

[https://dfan.org/blog/2011/02/20/the-dangers-of-self- modifyi...](https://dfan.org/blog/2011/02/20/the-dangers-of-self-modifying- code/)

[https://dfan.org/blog/2011/02/21/ultima-underworld- bugs/](https://dfan.org/blog/2011/02/21/ultima-underworld-bugs/)

[https://dfan.org/blog/2011/03/17/one-more-ultima- underworld-...](https://dfan.org/blog/2011/03/17/one-more-ultima-underworld- story/)

<comment><USER4> > _Speaking of graphics… well, probably most of you are far too young to > remember the Apple ][, but it had a seriously weird graphics mode, which had > not only a crazy palette (black, white, green, blue, orange, and purple) but > also placed additional restrictions on how you could use the colors near > each other (see here if you really need to know the gory details). Paul > Neurath, our CEO, never tired of telling stories of what a pain it was to > work with that system when he had written his earlier game Space Rogue. So > naturally we added code that would specifically look for a certain file we > had planted on Paul's computer, and if it found it, would switch to a green- > blue-orange-purple palette for one frame every half hour or so. > Unfortunately I honestly can't remember whether Paul ever actually noticed > it._

Please tell me this code shipped and that it is possible to trigger this mode by creating the right mock file on an emulated system!

<comment><USER3> I am 95% sure we removed it long before ship, unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I believe UW is the reason I'm in IT today. It was the first computer game I was obsessed with enough that I had to learn how to upgrade, maintain and optimize a PC. It was our family PC so, naturally, it got messed up a lot.

I remember that I was playing UW when I found out my Grandma had passed, the first family death I was old enough to remember. I was also playing it when my first GF had her friend call me to announce she was breaking up with me.

<comment><USER6> I owe my lifelong career in IT/Computers to Ultima as well - Ultima II on an Apple ][e... found in a drive in a computer lab at school in 7th grade.

I played every ultima since - and was in Beta for UO and we played MANY accounts simultaneously when we worked in Intels DRG game lab in 1997 - <USER2> the Intel campus had a T3 - and our lab had a dedicated T1 - we used to play ~6 accounts simultaneously logged in across our gaming test desks - playing on Intels latest gaming machines (This is where we first tested out APG cards and the Unreal engine against Celeron machines - to prove that a <$1,000 computer was a marketable and game-capable machine)

That was the golden days of my gaming - but I truly do owe my career to Ultima.

(I was there when Lord British was Assassinated)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> When discussing UU one has to mention that it had simply insane system requirements at the time. If I remember correctly it required a 386DX with at least 2MB RAM, which at the time of release meant a PC worth several thousand bucks. To boot, it was also a pretty expensive game. Wolfenstein OTOH ran fine on a 286 in fullscreen, AND it was shareware. That's why everyone and his dog played it, although its engine was less advanced than UU's. It was a very deliberate decision made by id/Carmack, and it payed off big time.

<comment><USER8> Wolfenstein was far inferior, technologically. A flat, square blocky map, without any way to look up or down, or any height variation at all. The maps were actually defined as ASCII grids with different characters defining where it was a wall or open space, secret door, etc.

UU had irregularly shaped rooms and hallways, inclines and declines, the ability to be at two highets depending on where you are on the map (bridges over water you can swim under) which even DOOM, the _successor_ in engine technology to Wolfenstein 3D didn't support, etc.

<comment><USER3> I don't like calling it "inferior" (and we didn't, at the time). We solved a much more general problem in a slow and only approximately correct way. They found a much more limited problem that they were able to solve perfectly and blazingly fast. That's a feature! There was definitely room for both approaches.

The multi-height thing was a real annoyance, by the way. For example, my path- finding code really wanted to be 2D (and of course it was mostly expressed in 2D) but had to understand that you could do things like take a bridge over (or even jump over) a gully and then walk around and cross under your original path.

<comment><USER8> Far enough. I guess what I was going was inferior _feature-wise_ , but I wasn't clear and inferior is a loaded word, so it would have been better to phrase it as "Wolfensteign 3D supported far fewer cutting edge features" or "UU supported far more cutting edge features."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _Yet it is a trait which Ultima Underworld shares with the two great earlier pioneers in the art of the dungeon crawl, Wizardry and Dungeon Master. Those games too emerged so immaculately conceived that the imitators which followed them could find little to improve upon beyond their audiovisuals._

While not quite as early as Wizardry (or even a few of its sequels), I always found Might & Magic 1 and Might & Magic 2 to be far superior to Wizardry in a few areas, such as exploration and world building.

Edit: Clarified that I found M&M superior to _Wizardry_ in a few areas. UU and M&M2 are some of my all-time favorites, and I would be hard pressed to state which one I like more, since they scratch different itches. I've gone back to play both multiple times before.

</comment><comment><USER9> UU was great. I especially loved how your skills evolved with time. In the beginning, you could barely jump over the smallest rift, but by mid-game you could almost fly from one end of a big cave to another. Trick is that it was made so subtle that it grew on you naturally. I vividly remember that on restart I casually approached a chasm and was bummed when I couldn't jump over it - like, whaaat?

Great game. UU2 was ok too.

</comment><comment><USER10> I LOVED UU. I had a little web page about it back in the day. UU2 was OK, but didn't get to play it as much as my computer couldn't really handle the larger screen space. This of course was a 386.

The best moment and most memorable to me was getting the taper, and having never ending light.

<comment><USER11> Didn't you have to trade a hermit for the taper? I loved UU, but I was so young I could barely read. It is one of the most defining games of my life, for sure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Some of the people who made UU are working on a new game: [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/othersidegames/underwor...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/othersidegames/underworld- ascendant)

<comment><USER13> Sadly, the reviews are miserable: [https://www.pcgamer.com/underworld- ascendant-review/](https://www.pcgamer.com/underworld-ascendant-review/)

(I backed it)

<comment><USER6> That sucks -- Thief being one of my other most favorites... and they made that as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wasn't familiar with this site. Some great stories about some great games here:

[https://www.filfre.net/hall-of-fame/](https://www.filfre.net/hall-of-fame/)

<comment><USER6> Some notable missing games in that list:

Ultima V

ANY Bards Tale

Masters of Orion

<comment><USER15> Ultima V here[1]

Bard's Tale here[2]

Master of Orion has not been reached yet I think (It was released after UU).

1: [https://www.filfre.net/2016/02/ultima-v/](https://www.filfre.net/2016/02/ultima-v/)

2: [https://www.filfre.net/2014/06/of-wizards-and- bards/](https://www.filfre.net/2014/06/of-wizards-and-bards/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Looking back, it's amazing how much progress was made in this type of computer games between Alternate Reality (1984), Dungeon Master (1987) and Ultima Underworld. In the same timeframe (8 years) there hasn't been any noticeable progress lately, just sequels and reiterations with slightly better textures.

</comment><comment><USER4> I think the mouse-based gameplay of Ultima Underworld could work surprisingly well on mobile or tablet, given that it has a much slower pace than 3D shooters.

OTOH, the thumb would obscure part of the screen. One could fix that by using a scheme similar to how the DS port of Mario 64 worked: wherever you tap-and- hold is the center of a simulated analog joystick, and the strength of the movement depends on how far away you move from the center of this point.

The rest of the UI would also need some modifications obviously (given the lack of a right click mouse button).

Still, I wonder if a slightly updated port would be successful.

</comment><comment><USER17> I saw recently there is a new Ultima Underworld but the reviews aren't good...

[https://www.humblebundle.com/store/underworld- ascendant](https://www.humblebundle.com/store/underworld-ascendant)

<comment><USER18> Sample "it's not good" review: [https://www.pcgamer.com/underworld-ascendant- review/](https://www.pcgamer.com/underworld-ascendant-review/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> There's a rough Unity engine port: [https://github.com/hankmorgan/UnderworldExporter](https://github.com/hankmorgan/UnderworldExporter)

<comment><USER20> Huh, I never knew The Stygian Abyss had a PSX port. Fascinating.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I really wish we could get a System Shock: Enhanced Edition version of The Stygian Abyss and Labyrinth of Worlds.

</comment><comment><USER21> Dang that guy has some real interesting posts. Fell down a bit of a rabbit hole there

</comment><comment><USER22> We went from 2D to 3D and instead of playing VR games in 2019 we discuss blog posts of people writing about playing 30-year-old games.

<comment><USER10> HN is a little interesting, all these blogs always exist all the time. It's just which ones are getting placed on HN doesn't represent all things going on.

Also, it is interesting that people are playing old games and blogging about them. At the time these games were released, we didn't really have the same venues to discuss said games. So why not now?

<comment><USER22> I just think it's funny how we imagined us using technology in the future (VR and flying cars) and how we ended up using it (posting on social media platforms and discussing these posts in the comment sections).

<comment><USER23> There's millions of people gaming with VR headsets these days, a lot more than there are reading articles about Ultima Underworld.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gitlab 11.9 released with secrets detection and multiple MR approval rules - <AUTHOR> https://about.gitlab.com/2019/03/22/gitlab-11-9-released/ <comment><USER2> Overview of the three main improvements in this release: 1\. Detect secrets and credentials in the repository

A recurring problem when developing applications is that developers may unintentionally commit secrets and credentials to their remote repositories. If other people have access to the source, or if the project is public, the sensitive information is then exposed and can be leveraged by malicious users to gain access to resources like deployment environments. GitLab 11.9 includes a new check called Secret Detection. It scans the content of the repository to find API keys and other information that should not be there. GitLab displays results in the SAST report in the merge request widget, pipelines reports, and the security dashboards.

2\. Merge request approval rules

Code review is an essential practice of every successful project, but who should review the changes is not always clear. It is often desirable to have a variety of reviewers from different teams like Engineering, UX, and Product. Approval Rules allow you to better communicate who should participate in code reviews by specifying the eligible approvers and the minimum number of approvals for each. Approval rules are shown in the merge request widget so the next reviewer can quickly be assigned.

3\. Move ChatOps to Core

Initially introduced in GitLab Ultimate 10.6, ChatOps has now moved to GitLab Core. GitLab ChatOps provides the ability to trigger GitLab CI jobs from Slack by using the slash commands feature. We are open sourcing this feature in alignment with our buyer-driven tier designation to encourage its use and contribution by the community.</comment>


Ask HN: How to break out the loop of being an employee to your own business? - <AUTHOR> I've been thinking a lot and also searching around in a way of breaking out of the loop of being an employee to my own business. I can describe my situation as I'm working as a full-time software engineer where I'm getting paid very well compared to software engineers and of course compared to most jobs in my city but I'm stuck in a loop where I can't save really big amount of money to start my own business or even time to work on my own ideas<p>Did anyone found a way out that of this loop? <comment><USER2> I'm doing exactly that right now. Hired for a decent salary - but quiting.

I don't know what ill be doing in 6 months. I don't have a financial buffer. This is scary but it fits my hippie-like personality. Not to say you should not have anything lined up. You also should not mind 60-80 hour work-weeks or dealing with stressful situations. These are personality traits that provide a good foundation that allow you to be independent.

If the need is there, I am certain I can trust on my network (of friends & ex- colleagues) and my own skills to help me get a job.

Without a family to provide for, radical decisions like these are easier. Live a little. Jump into to unknown. And for future replies on this comment pointing out that my suggestion is a downright dangerous; I concur.</comment>


Google Glass Explorer Open to US - <AUTHOR> https://glass.google.com/getglass/shop/glass <comment><USER2> Tech Specs:

Display: High resolution display is the equivalent of a 25 inch high definition screen from eight feet away.

Battery: One day of typical use. Some features, like video calls and video recording, are more battery intensive.

I don't think Google's Marketing department realizes what "tech specs" really means. When I talk about displays and batteries at _bare minimum_ I want resolution and mAh.

<comment><USER3> > When I talk about displays and batteries at bare minimum I want resolution > and mAh.

If they had just put "570 mAh", someone would have posted "We have no clue what that translates to in terms of daily usage!"

They had reasonable numbers where it made sense.

<comment><USER2> I understand the need for translating it into something the average consumer could parse, but that doesn't belong under the heading "tech specs". This is a prototype device being marketed to the earliest of early adopters, and _actual_ technical specifications are important to that crowd.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've been a Glass Explorer since July. If you're debating getting one but have questions, feel free to ping me or reply here and I'll try to answer to the best of my ability. I've also volunteered to do Hangouts if you'd rather do face-to-face and I've chatted with some folks already. [0]

(I'm not a Google employee or otherwise affiliated.)

[0]: [https://twitter.com/superninjarobot/status/45610115249786060...](https://twitter.com/superninjarobot/status/456101152497860608)

<comment><USER5> What's the experience like? My understanding is that its not AR-like, but instead you kind of look down a tiny pixelized screen.

What do you like about it? Is there a killer app yet? Do you think there will ever be one? Would you prefer this built into more fashionable frames?

<comment><USER6> I'm also an explorer so I'll chip in.

> you kind of look down a tiny pixelized screen

It's tiny, but it's not pixelated. It's rather high-res for its size; you can't see the pixels.

> killer app?

For me at least, the killer functionality comes in the form of wink-to-take-a- picture. Especially when travelling, it's amazing to be able to take many pictures from your POV instantly without even having to really do anything. This leaves you with a huge amount of both significant and insignificant pictures that together tell a story.

<comment><USER7> How has the voice recognition in public spaces suited you over time? Based off my brief demo, it wasn't too great. I placed it at or just _barely_ below the voice recognition on the Google Now & Siri app on my iPhone (neither of which are too impressive atm).

<comment><USER6> I don't even try to use voice when it's windy outside; it'll hardly get it right. I fault the hardware for that.

In terms of the commands, it's decent, could be better. I wish it had open- ended commands like Siri/Google Voice Search instead of being restricted to a list. Well, it sort-of does have open-ended commands by performing a "google" search. For example, in the past I've been able to say "OK Glass... Google... In five hour remind me to call Bill" and it would set a Google Now reminder. That specific feature has appeared and disappeared over time, I think they're still working on it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think it is safe to assume, with I/O around the corner, they're selling off the rest of v1 stock. I'm looking forward to v2 and a price drop in v1.

<comment><USER9> Exactly what's holding me back. I'd love to try them out, but this is the same thing that was sold to some people last spring. There's no way it won't be replaced soon.

<comment><USER10> That's incorrect. They did a refresh late last year and offered to send upgrades to everyone who had previously purchased it.

<comment><USER9> [http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/5/5177584/google-glass- swap-...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/5/5177584/google-glass-swap-free- updated-version)

Seems you're right. It doesn't look like there was many changes so it just flew under my radar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> So, what kind of software was developed during the original explorer program? Outside of a head mounted camera, what other use-cases has Glass shown itself useful for?

<comment><USER12> There is a pilot program to use it at Beth Israel hospital: [https://www.google.com/search?q=beth+israel+google+glass](https://www.google.com/search?q=beth+israel+google+glass)

This sort of use, having a lot of context-specific information to do a job, is the best category of use that I can think of. It seems to me that others who need to move around, see specific information, and need their hands free, like mechanics, would also benefit.

I haven't found it useful with any software to the point that I can justify buying it as a practical device, but it has been a lot of fun to experiment with. I wore it on a 100K run a month ago, and while I didn't have enough time to write software to do what I originally wanted to do (put what I was looking at on a website every minute or so, and enable friends to hassle me during the run), it made taking pictures a lot easier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Open To All.

* US only.

</comment><comment><USER14> Does anyone else feel like they could have done a much better job integrating the "glass" portion into the frames?

I understand wanting to be able to replace change the frames and lenses, which is cool. And perhaps it needs to be able to be adjusted depending on the users eye position.

But I still feel like it looks like an MVP, despite being worked on now for at least a few years and with the massive resources of Google. It also doesn't seem like the design of the outside portion of the device would necessarily conflict with development of the internal api and software.

I can't help but feel like if Apple, for example, had put out this technology it would look _a lot_ better, even if it took longer to get to market. And I am not an Apple fanboy by any stretch of the imagination.

I also feel like they are underestimating the importance of the "look" of the device. I get that it is targeted to techies, and that as people get used to new technologies styles / opinions change. But I am pretty confident that if these devices do succeed and become mainstream, the end result will not look like a pair of glasses with a USB drive stuck on the side.

<comment><USER15> It's possible they are keeping the form factor the same so it is obvious what they are to outsiders. There has been some backlash against the things, which would likely be higher if it was even more covert. I'm sure once these are more mainstream they will become much more stylish and discrete.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think one of the more interesting things about the Glass product is the full customer support that Google provides. Now, I admit to having just one data point: a friend who is older and slightly handicapped, who found Glass to be somewhat practical. She said the the support from Google was very good, to the point where they would initiate communication.

Isn't this level of support something new for Google? It is true that developer support via usenet (Google Groups), etc. is pretty good, but the customer support for Glass seems like a new thing.

</comment><comment> Dorian-Marie I love the "Purchase Glass" button that just redirects back to the same page.

<comment><USER17> Same here, on Chrome. Ironically it works just fine in Firefox.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> And you can choose from a few different frames, which is a good start.

</comment><comment><USER19> Will the KitKat update include BTLE support? I'm guessing no.

</comment><comment><USER20> Thank god it's only in the U.S.

</comment><comment><USER21> ...just in time for tax day?</comment>


Chinese Internet Traffic Redirected to Small Wyoming House - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/blogs/bits/2014/01/22/chinese-internet-traffic-redirected-to-small-wyoming-house/

<comment><USER2> This link works:

[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/22/chinese-internet- tr...](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/22/chinese-internet-traffic- redirected-to-small-wyoming-house/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. Resubmitted it as there was no way for me to correct the link.</comment></comment>


The Cincinnati Privy Disaster of 1904 (2014) - <AUTHOR> https://beltmag.com/cincinnati-privy-disaster-1904/ <comment><USER2> I live just down the street from this school. We plan to send our future children there. The school and Presbyterian Church are still there, as is Gilright's Barbershop (now just Gil's)....

Never expected to see my own little neighborhood on HN.

</comment><comment> 404-universe Not the first time it has happened:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_latrine_disaster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_latrine_disaster) (1184)

<comment><USER3> And it seems 1184 is not a typo. _surprised_

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Completely gripping. Well worth reading.</comment>


Show HN: Url Pretty Print - <AUTHOR> http://urlprettyprint.com

<comment><USER2> Nice idea, and a clean and simple implementation. Could it be enhanced (made more pretty?) by using a nice monospaced font (e.g. [https://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Droid+Sans+Mono](https://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Droid+Sans+Mono)) and giving the option of aligning query string parameters vertically by equals sign?</comment>


Win 10: You'll get updates, like it or not, unless you have Enterprise Edition - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/windows_10_will_update_whether_you_like_it_or_not_unless_you_have_enterprise_edition/

<comment><USER2> Windows 10 Pro users will be able to deter updates.</comment>


Monster.com Reports Theft of User Data - <AUTHOR> http://help.monster.com/besafe/jobseeker/index.asp

<comment><USER2> This sounds familiar... oh right, because it happened in 2007 too.

</comment><comment><USER3> "In order to help assure the security of your information, you may soon be required to change your password upon logging onto the site."

I wonder how Monster is going to verify that the person logging in and changing the password is actually the user who owned the account and not the thief.

I guess they could hope that the user's email hasn't been compromised and go through an email verification to change the password.

</comment><comment><USER4> Ouch. It's actually not surprising how many companies store plaintext passwords. It's a dirty little secret.

Crucial details missing: how many (all?) users affected? When did the breach occur and how long did it take them to notice? How did they notice? What is this crap about "continually monitoring" the internet when they can't even secure their own servers?

<comment><USER5> I guess I am easily surprised; each case of "omg our plaintext passwords were stolen" completely baffles me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, they stole my resume, I guess I'm now at risk of more work?

</comment><comment><USER7> So they stored passwords. Kind of surprising.

</comment><comment><USER8> We got the company-wide email this morning. More or less the same content as the linked site. There's more to the story but I can't say because I work there.</comment>


Vivid: Sound Synthesis in Haskell [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo3zUvPsizo

<comment><USER2> How does this compare to Euterpea [1] another Haskell-based music development DSL that can do real-time? It is Haskore and HasSound based, not Supercollider. I couldn't make the comparison after watching most of the video for Vivid.

[1] [http://haskell.cs.yale.edu/euterpea/](http://haskell.cs.yale.edu/euterpea/)

<comment> vivid-synth (I'm the author of Vivid) Euterpea has a high-level music language and FRP framework that Vivid doesn't (yet). On the other hand, from conversations with a developer of Euterpea, Vivid is probably far more performant for real-time. Because of its performance and design goals, Vivid is also much more suited to live performance (in my opinion).

You could say Euterpea is like writing a classical score to Vivid's rock band.

They aren't at all incompatible though, and I'd be excited to see Euterpea <-> Vivid interop.

<comment><USER2> Cool, I will give Vivid a shot since my goal is more livecoding than composing. Any chance of integrating graphics like Overtone has with Shadertone or Quil, or like Exetempore's builtin fuctions? Good work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is awesome work -- Tidal also has a bleeding edge interface to supercollider, worth checking out. [https://github.com/tidalcycles/Tidal/blob/master/examples/su...](https://github.com/tidalcycles/Tidal/blob/master/examples/supercollider.tidal)

</comment><comment><USER4> It's a pity that there is so much background noise on the audio, it really makes this hard to watch, especially on headphones.

Vivid is an interface SuperCollider, apparently built with livecoding in mind. The talk itself is mostly examples and provides little detail on how the system works behind the scenes.

</comment><comment><USER5> fwiw, Clojure's Overtone is also an interface to SuperCollider.

pretty awesome, because I recall vaguely when SuperCollider first began, and I don't think anybody said "this will be the common platform for live-coding libraries in functional languages in the future" at the time.

<comment><USER6> There's also a Scala client: [http://www.sciss.de/scalaCollider/](http://www.sciss.de/scalaCollider/)

And if you go back to McCartney's original paper ([http://www.audiosynth.com/icmc96paper.html](http://www.audiosynth.com/icmc96paper.html)), you can see that functional ideas have been in there from the beginning:

"The idea behind SuperCollider was to provide audio synthesis in a high level language with dynamic typing, lists, garbage collection and closures. Normally a language of this type is too slow to do signal processing. By creating a signal data type which represents a buffer of samples over a short time frame, and defining operators for that data type, it is possible to amortize the cost of the interpreter over many samples."

<comment><USER7> _" Normally a language of this type is too slow to do signal processing."_

That is one of the founding principles of many current sound synthesis programming tools. In light of the recent developments in JIT-enhanced languages (I'm thinking of LuaJIT), it should now be possibles to work with less layers and more freedom, directly with the samples, in a high level language.

And now comes the plug: This is exactly what protoplug allows you to do, and as a VST plugin it works inside modern music-making software:

[http://www.osar.fr/protoplug/](http://www.osar.fr/protoplug/)

Obviously the design goals are very different from something like Vivid, and it doesn't have the SuperCollider features to back it up.</comment></comment></comment>


Crypto 1 to Crypto 2 via Crypto 3 (Max Arbitrage) - <AUTHOR> https://coinscanner.co <comment><USER2> are transaction fees on the exchange taken into consideration when converting back to fiat currencies?</comment>


LinkedIn not using its own developed feature - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/linkedin-using-its-own-developed-feature-balachandar-muruganantham/?published=t <comment><USER2> I always wonder about that feature.

It makes it so easy to apply... but then again I'm probabbly not the guy who they want to apply so do they really want to use that feature? The sheer volume of irrelevant applications would seem to potentially skyrocket.

<comment><USER3> I don't think anyone is really meant to apply to something with such a friction-less application process. Seems like a vacuum to suck in resumes and pad pipeline. I'm either jaded or more experienced than I was before but I almost avoid those 'ez-apply' buttons now with as much fervor as I do the applications that ask for a resume _and then_ make you fill out a bunch of text fields duplicating the data that's already on a nicely formatted PDF document you uploaded two steps ago.

Inb4 a recruiter comes in and tells me how their job is "hard" and the inherent necessity of treating job applicants like annoying buzzing little flies and how it's everyone _elses_ fault that tech hiring is more broken than a dirigible that hit the ground at warp 10.

<comment><USER2> I hear ya, I'm job hunting these days and it is just demoralizing and draining.... more so than work ever has been.

I do hit those ez apply buttons but I'm so tired I'm skeptical of them too, and skeptical every job being just someone leveling up their recruiter score with X resumes!

I could really go for a lot less of "I was looking at your resume" and then we talk and it is clear they did not ... ever do so. Even after I tell them about something on and and they still didn't comprehend it. _sigh_.

I did fill out an application form recently that was way more free form, and the application form asked me at the end what I thought of their form with just one text box and a "I liked it" or "I didn't like it" option. I never heard from them (I didn't expect to) but I still think better of their company because of it. It's the small things.</comment></comment></comment>


Scoble: "I wish I had never heard of Google+'s brand pages" - <AUTHOR> http://scobleizer.com/2011/11/08/i-wish-i-had-never-heard-of-googles-brand-pages/ <comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr Scoble created his company's G+ account and now he can't give it to anyone else at his co or let anyone else post to it because it's tied to his account.

Worse, he's afraid of accidentally posting personal stuff to his company account.</comment>


4-year-old with IQ of 145 becomes Mensa's newest member - <AUTHOR> http://news.yahoo.com/4-year-old-with-iq-of-145-becomes-mensa-s-newest-member-141316099.html

<comment><USER2> The article states that the 4-year-old is "smarter than you." How ridiculous, anyone who knows how IQ tests knows that they are based on your results compared to similar age groups. I'm pretty new to Hacker News, but how this could make it so high is beyond me.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd ignore the hyperbole in the article--and really, what does that have to do with the little girl? It's still very impressive for her to score in the 99th percentile--no matter what her age.

<comment><USER2> The article's take on why this is newsworthy is completely incorrect. It's newsworthy because they're letting 4 year old's into MENSA, not because the girl is somehow has the intelligence anywhere close to the adult members (which is what the article implies.)</comment></comment></comment>


Node.js homepage - <AUTHOR> https://nodejs.org/en/ <comment><USER2> It's sad to see such unwarranted self-loathing. You have nothing to apologize about for other people's non-contribution.

</comment><comment><USER3> This feels really weird. I don't think it's a good idea for open source organizations to be political like this. I think getting more diversity of contributors to Node is a laudable goal but I don't see why those efforts can't be handled externally to the offical Node org.

</comment><comment><USER4> Quote:

 _we fully recognize that white supremacy and police brutality is a global problem.

...

It would be wrong for us to ignore the unearned privilege that exists in Node.js: much of the project leadership is white, and a majority are men. We are and have been systematically complicit in perpetuating the issues that led to where we are now. _

<comment><USER4> Just a white problem? In China there's a TV ad for washing powder that turns a Black man into a Chinese man.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> i'll save you all some time: [https://nodejs.org/en/docs/](https://nodejs.org/en/docs/)

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't need to hear about BlackLivesMatter from the Node.js team. I really don't like this modern world of people and organizations bringing their "whole selves" to every interaction.

<comment><USER4> If they truly believed their schtick they'd quit en massse as being white they're the problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm confused by some comments here. Speaking out about one evil isn't warranted if there is another that could also be addressed? This flavor of whataboutism is not helping anyone is it? I am not sure who is harmed in them talking about inclusion and recognition of people who have suffered systemic disadvantage or loss. They are not rallying people up to riot. And even if you don't like the violence which happens at some protests (which I wouldn't like either) there is much more to the idea than the riots which everyone is so focused on. Discrediting the movement because of violence caused by few is a shallow perspective which doesn't address the problem that the movement wanted to solve in the first place.

edit: I see comments vanishing in case anyone is wondering who I was referring to

<comment><USER8> I totally agree. Choosing to focus on a subset of the problem first does not discredit the whole problem. I would have thought tech workers would understand this better than the rest.</comment></comment>


New Managed NAT Gateway for AWS - <AUTHOR> https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-managed-nat-network-address-translation-gateway-for-aws/ <comment><USER2> Isn't that completely crazy? IPv6 has been ready for production use for ... about ten years? And yet, people still build (and ostensibly are willing to buy) products that only exist in order to work around the shortcomings of IPv4?

<comment><USER3> Of course you are right.

But if you want to build a comparable architecture with IPv6, where a private Network is fully isolated from the public Internet except for a very controlled gateway, you would still need a Firewall/Router capable of handling all the traffic.

Isolated (to a certain degree), private networks will not go away with IPv6, as they are a convenient security mechanism.

So the name for the box will change, but not it's fundamental duty of allowing controlled traversal over network boundaries.

<comment><USER4> And you are right, too.

But isolation doesn't mean translation. It is crazy that we have to use translation to overcome problems with IP space scarcity, but I guess we all got used already.

<comment><USER5> I don't know. I _LIKE_ NAT. It's easy for me to reason about, easy to read and understand. I know it has a litany of shortcomings, and I'm not in a huge corporate network, but I'm going to miss it when it's gone.

<comment><USER6> I also strongly like NAT. In roughly descending order:

1) It fails safe. Virtually all device misconfigurations result in failure to pass traffic, rather than being passed accidentally.

2) You get full control of your external signature (at that protocol level). When Comcast and AT&T realize that they can charge for more than a single /128 on their consumer networks we'll see a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on /r/technology, and it will be completely inane to those of us that saw the same companies attempt the same BS with NAT detection in the late 90s.

3) I would like to be able to implement dual stack in networks that I'm responsible for with as much similarity as possible. Having to reason independently more than needed about how IPv4 and IPv6 behave is needless difficulty.

4) IPv6 allocations today are asininely large. We're going to have 30-45 years of overallocation and then be out again, and in the interim we'll have a whole host of new braindead protocols in the manner of FTP and VOIP. The collective lessons we've learned about NAT will have (for all intents and purposes) been lost and we'll get a bunch of new shoddy hacks for dealing with them (passive FTP and NAT-T).

5) If it's a useful tool, by the user's estimation, why can't I have it? The internet grew up on what amounted to "be a good peer and we can all get along", but on this specific topic it quickly dissolves into STOP LIKING THINGS I DONT LIKE, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT, I'M TELLING THE IETF.

<comment><USER2> > 1) It fails safe. Virtually all device misconfigurations result in failure > to pass traffic, rather than being passed accidentally.

I don't see that, nor that it would even be an advantage.

> 2) You get full control of your external signature (at that protocol level). > When Comcast and AT&T realize that they can charge for more than a single > /128 on their consumer networks we'll see a lot of wailing and gnashing of > teeth on /r/technology, and it will be completely inane to those of us that > saw the same companies attempt the same BS with NAT detection in the late > 90s.

How do you prevent people from coming up with stupid ideas by implementing some stupid ideas yourself? Is that a general rule you follow? Wherever companies could conceivably some day screw up some product, you do it for them now?

> 3) I would like to be able to implement dual stack in networks that I'm > responsible for with as much similarity as possible. Having to reason > independently more than needed about how IPv4 and IPv6 behave is needless > difficulty.

So, you prefer to keep things broken forever if that means that things don't change?

> 4) IPv6 allocations today are asininely large. We're going to have 30-45 > years of overallocation and then be out again,

What's your evidence for that? Seems like a completely baseless claim to me.

> and in the interim we'll have a whole host of new braindead protocols in the > manner of FTP and VOIP.

So, NAT is good because protocols that don't work well with NAT are braindead because they don't work well with NAT?

I mean, I see your point if there is any risk that we might run out of addresses, but if we don't, what exactly is braindead about those protocols?

> 5) If it's a useful tool, by the user's estimation, why can't I have it?

You obviously _can_ have it. Just as you _can_ cut your head off if you think that's useful to you.

But all things considered, do the advantages actually outweigh the disadvantages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Anyone else find it somewhat baffling that it's taken until now for a NAT service to arrive on AWS?

I'm happy to have it available of course, definitely not going to complain. I've just long wondered why it wasn't a thing since the early days of VPC.

<comment><USER8> I wonder the same, though the engineering under the hood is more interesting than I thought:

[http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2015/12/vpc-nat-gateways- tr...](http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2015/12/vpc-nat-gateways- transactional-uniqueness-at-scale/)

> The connections are managed by a fault-tolerant co-operation of devices in > the VPC network fabric. Each new connection is assigned a port in a robust > and transactional way, while also being replicated across an extensible set > of multiple devices. In other words: the NAT gateway is internally > horizontally scalable and resilient.

Maybe it just wasn't a priority.

<comment><USER9> So it's very similar to VPC Internet Gateway, only with upcharge of $0.045/Gb on traffic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> At first I was really excited. Then I realized that, of course, CloudFormation support is not ready because AWS is terrible at cross-service strategy. I opened the comments at the bottom and was pleased to see people shouting for CloudFormation support :)

<comment><USER11> CloudFormation Custom Resources can help with this.

You can make a Lambda Function that can call the raw API, and have a CloudFormation resource call that for create, update and delete.

It's a really powerful strategy for extending what CloudFormation can do.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, certainly _could_ but.. Treating AWS resources as "custom" resources to hack around their long complained about CloudFormation turnaround? Ugh.. Then I have to reason about how to extract that custom resource out and replace it with the RightWay™ once it's added, which may just not even be possible... If it came to that I would rather throw in my efforts with the Terraform community(which I want to do anyway) who have already added this functionality it seems [https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/pull/4381](https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/pull/4381) .

<comment><USER11> Terraform is an awesome user space tool.

I've been using the CF custom resource to manage a ton of stuff (hundreds of clusters and thousands of apps) and it's excellent.

It's amazing that the service supports custom anything, and the create, update delete pattern is perfect.

Replacing a custom resource with the right resource can be challenging. My strategy is to not do it.

Create all new stacks the new way and have good tools to migrate parameters and data from an old stack to a new stack.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This seemed to be something that was missing from their VPC offering -- I'll probably use it, but you still need an instance with a public ip for administration into the other instances on the private subnets if you're not using an ipsec VPN AFAICT.

</comment><comment> Pirate-of-SV Would be nice with a low end alternative as well. At the moment I'm running the NAT instance on a t2.micro at $0.013/hour (On demand). The price of this service starts at $0.045

<comment><USER13> Annoyingly expensive. I wonder if they have a goal of restricting the number of VPCs, as you basically can't run a VPC without NAT to access other AWS services like S3.

But the t2.nano instances will make a DIY solution cheaper.

<comment><USER9> What makes it expensive for any significant traffic is "data processing" fee. But for S3 alone you can get away without NAT by using VPC endpoint.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'll now just wait for a terraform resource for this! :D

<comment><USER14> [https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/pull/4381](https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/pull/4381)

<comment><USER15> Aaaand it's merged!</comment></comment></comment>


Billionaire investor Peter Thiel predicts bleak future for innovation - <AUTHOR> http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2013/04/16/billionaire-investor-predicts-bleak-future-for-innovation/

<comment><USER2> I doubt regulation plays more than a marginal role here.

The truth is that capitalism is not good at creating new technologies, only at increasing adoption of technologies that have already been developed.

Innovation on big problems is hard by definition. It takes decades and there is a very high risk of failure. The original ideas may not work out, an alternative technology may be developed which ends up dominating the market or increasingly the way may be blocked by patents.

Why would an investor support such an undertaking, especially when very good returns can be obtained in well established areas like social networking (at least if you spread around your investments) and finance ?

The only exceptions to this general picture are those very rare companies with practical monopoly power which have been able to fund developments of this nature. Examples are Google and pre-deregulation AT&T. But such behemoths represent only a small fraction of the total economy and though some monopolies might be good for technology development it seems unlikely that increasing their role in the economy would be of general benefit. The result is that the vast majority of new technologies over the past 60 years have been spearheaded by government research (semiconductors, the internet, etc.). Even self-driving cars were made possible by government driven efforts.

Overall I think society vastly underfunds research and development compared to what would be optimal for mid to long-term enhancement of human well-being and this is primarily due to a broken socio-economic system.

<comment><USER3> Do you have any recommendation about essays on this subject? innovation vs capitalism.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So we get the same spiel about how regulatory pressure is killing innovation, which is basically what all these types of guys have been saying for a while.

I'll try to ask this question without being inflammatory, but has there been a lot of case study or research about the effect of regulation on startups? I can think of the Uber thing, but apart from that I can't really think of things where regulation was the only thing that stood between a startup and success (survivor bias I know).

His example is , of course, alternative energy. He says that regulation prevents investment, but isn't it more the fact that connecting something to the grid is complicated, building something that could create any amount of power is expensive, and that the problem is more or less fundamentally hard the issue? I mean doesn't Tesla show that when you throw enough money at the problem, you're still able to tackle the infrastructure problem?</comment>


Historians Reassess Battle of Agincourt - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25agincourt.html?em

<comment><USER2> History is written by the victors, and they will always exaggerate. More, Shakespeare was writing for the Hollywood of his day, and who would trust Hollywood for historical accuracy? Consider "Pearl Harbor", "Enigma", "A Beautiful Mind", or the worst, "U-571". Each of these is an absolute travesty, defended as "It's only entertainment!"

How can you trust Shakespeare to tell the truth about odds of 5 to 1? Why is it a surprise that it was closer to even?</comment>


Megavideo could be profitable for the copyright owners - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/109330994315471456295/posts/j9RdSJGT1w6 <comment><USER2> I was also pretty surprised they asked for _only_ $500 million. They usually calculate the damage into tens of billions or even _trillions_ of dollars:

[http://www.pcworld.com/article/223431/riaa_thinks_limewire_o...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/223431/riaa_thinks_limewire_owes_75_trillion_in_damages.html)

Maybe they finally realized how ridiculous they sounded when asking for that much. Still, this only makes me think that the damage is _much_ lower still than the $500 million number.</comment>


Robot Kills Man at Volkswagen Plant - <AUTHOR> http://time.com/3944181/robot-kills-man-volkswagen-plant/

<comment><USER2> This is Hacker News. We know the difference between robotics and automation.

Industrial automation such as this has been killing absent minded technicians for years, as early as 1979:

[https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7KMyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Bu8F...](https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7KMyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Bu8FAAAAIBAJ&pg=3301,87702&dq=flat- rock+williams+robot&hl=en)

</comment><comment><USER3> It should say "A programmer's mistake kills a person"

<comment><USER4> Why?

<comment><USER5> Because the automation/robot that killed the worker is not capable of intention or even agency. "Baseball kills sportsgoer." "Golf ball kills jogger." "Mailbox kills commuter." These are sensationalist headlines that don't really mean anything. The story is in the "why".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Singularity, the beginning.

<comment><USER3> Just got the name of the worker: John Connor</comment></comment>