Rocket, Rust Web Framework, v0.2: Managed State and More - <AUTHOR> https://rocket.rs/news/2017-02-06-version-0.2/ <comment><USER2> Just curious, I really want to like Rust but take a look at the State API documentation for managed state feature: [https://api.rocket.rs/rocket/struct.State.html](https://api.rocket.rs/rocket/struct.State.html) (screenshot: [http://c.ekin.io/3c2q112x1p0y](http://c.ekin.io/3c2q112x1p0y))

Is this readable to Rust people? I mean, can you look at this and say, "ah ok, I'm gonna call this and that then I'll have the state" directly?

I'm lost but I have zero Rust knowledge so this is a sincere question, does this mess make sense when you get into it?

<comment><USER3> It _is_ readable, but you are right it is terribly formatted with a lot of not-very-important information in huge fonts.

I think rustdoc needs quite a lot of work in general. For example it doesn't even give a list of methods at the start of each type's page. Want to know which methods you can call on a `String`? Enjoy scrolling...

[https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/string/struct.String.html](https://doc.rust- lang.org/std/string/struct.String.html)

<comment><USER4> The +/\- button will do that for you. It's one of the first things I do once I read the top example.

<comment><USER5> We've discussed flipping the defaults; it was decided before I started writing so many docs and examples. Very different today!

<comment><USER6> Maybe you could add a responsive right bar with the list of methods, visible when the screen is large enough. My 24'' monitor has 30% wasted space right now.

<comment><USER5> Yes, something like this would be very useful too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been using the framework to practice rust and it's really pleasant. I would compare this to "flask" from Python. I've got an experimental static site cms (for my clients eventually) where the administration back end is a dynamic library so I can update the back-end without stopping the serving of the website to the public. Really fun learning experiment and crazy fast server overall. For now, I still use Go, but Rust's meta features are so much more advanced that I'm working on switching.

</comment><comment><USER8> I have to say, the end user API for Rocket is pretty nice.

But _damn_ , there's a _lot_ of compiler magic in order to simplify the request and response signatures.

It would be great to see more documentation on how to deal with naked Request/Response objects that can be constructed by hand. I'd love to use Rocket to develop some API on top of it, but that means I want more access to the underlying objects below.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm very excited about this. I've been looking for a good open-source statically-typed web stack for a long time, and the Rust community delivered.

Now, when this works on stable, it'll be awesome!

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm curious what's the difference between Managed State and good old Dependency Injection. Is it just a naming difference? In that case, why? People already know what DI is.

<comment><USER11> While I could see that this implementation of Managed State is an example of DI, the opposite is not true.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I tried to build a simple Rust "hello world" \+ database web app the other day ( _edit:_ not with Rocket) and after four hours I had nothing to show for it. I had a simple static app in just a few minutes, but I could not for the life of me figure out how to maintain state like a database connection pool and make it available to request handlers in any sane and maintainable way. (There are ways to do it insanely and unmaintainably for sure.) Has anyone else had this experience?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for trying out Rocket! There are a couple of examples in Rocket's repository that illustrate how to use Rocket with a database. The more complete of the two is the todo example [0]. This uses Diesel as its ORM alongside managed state to maintain a pool of database connections. The second example of the two uses raw SQLite without a connection pool [1]. It's meant to be a bare bones illustration of using a database with Rocket.

Managed state is a feature specifically designed to help with this kind of thing. That being said, I still think Rocket can do more to abstract away database connections. I'm tracking improvements on this front in GitHub issue #167 [2].

[0]: [https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/tree/master/examples...](https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/tree/master/examples/todo)

[1]: [https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/blob/master/examples...](https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/blob/master/examples/raw_sqlite)

[2]: [https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/167](https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/167)

<comment><USER12> Thanks so much for the helpful reply! I should've noted that I haven't actually tried Rocket. :) It was a couple other frameworks that I'd played with, all of which seemed to go _shrug, not our concern_ when the question of managed state came up. I'll give Rocket a try and see if I have better luck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If there's anyone here with experience using both Rocket and Iron, would you be willing to share your thoughts on the differences between them?

I've got an API server started in Iron, but I have to say the claims of productivity and less code overhead that Rocket is proclaiming seem pretty nice right about now.

</comment><comment><USER14> Does Rocket have subdomain support? I didn't see it in the documentation.

</comment><comment><USER15> Seems good. I'll taste it

</comment><comment><USER16> Still without ssl. Nice to see lots of stars and forks.

<comment><USER17> SSL is really not the responsibility of the web framework.

<comment><USER18> Are reverse proxies always the way to go?

<comment><USER19> No. Usually web application would be exposed through FastCGI or similar protocol.

Insisting that either your tiny web application that can do next to nothing is the thing that owns 80/tcp (and/or 443/tcp) or runs behind a HTTP proxy is stupid. Proxying HTTP requests _properly_ is harder than it sounds, which is surprising every now and then and thus is easy to screw up (what happens to _Host:_ header? who is the TCP client? is it HTTP or HTTPs?), and your tiny web application, as I've called it, is not the only thing I want to host on the machine.

<comment><USER20> Practically every company I've worked with uses an HTTP reverse proxy. When you use something like nginx, it's really not hard at all to get right. Support for HTTP is more widespread than support for FastCGI these days, especially with more obscure tech stacks.

Edit: You can run multiple apps on separate ports, so that shouldn't be an issue.

<comment><USER19> > Practically every company I've worked with uses an HTTP reverse proxy.

Well, there are people who can say the same about Node.js or RoR. Not that it makes a majority.

> When you use something like nginx, it's really not hard at all to get right.

It's not a matter of nginx. It's a matter of what assumptions are hardcoded in the application.

> Edit: You can run multiple apps on separate ports, so that shouldn't be an > issue.

Of course it is an issue. Such a deployment looks terrible at best.

<comment><USER20> > It's not a matter of nginx. It's a matter of what assumptions are hardcoded > in the application.

You haven't actually given any good examples for what makes HTTP reverse proxying bad. Things like dealing with the Host header are two-minute fixes that you only have to deal with once, but they really shouldn't even be issues in the first place. HTTP is well supported, well understood, easy to implement, and easy to scale. On the flip side, you might waste a lot of time trying to get your tech stack working with FastCGI if there isn't already existing support, and you don't benefit from any HTTP support you already have.

> Such a deployment looks terrible at best.

Again, "looks terrible" is not a valid argument against it.

<comment><USER19> > You haven't actually given any good examples for what makes HTTP reverse > proxying bad.

Try running anything that generates absolute URLs in its HTML. And then try to make it running under two different domains, for example. A clear cookie/URL disaster, and it's all for web protocols from 2002, without talking about HSTS or CORS yet.

> Things like dealing with the Host header are two-minute fixes that you only > have to deal with once,

For _every f &ckin' application_.

> but they really shouldn't even be issues in the first place.

They shouldn't be, I agree, in that sense that it should be impossible to get it wrong. With HTTP you don't have this and you need to deploy workarounds.

> On the flip side, you might waste a lot of time trying to get your tech > stack working with FastCGI if there isn't already existing support,

Node.js _may_ be the only offender here (I didn't bother to check). Virtually everything else that is used for web applications supports FastCGI.

> and you don't benefit from any HTTP support you already have.

Like what? What exactly is the benefit of running HTTP between frontend HTTP server and application's backend? Because the trouble with passing information about the request is a clear downside.

>> Such a deployment looks terrible at best.

> Again, "looks terrible" is not a valid argument against it.

Oh, quite the contrary. Inelegant systems or deployments usually give a death by a thousand cuts. Too many exceptions and rules and guesses to work with them.

Just as we can judge the elegance of source code, we can judge the elegance of deployments.

<comment><USER21> > What exactly is the benefit of running HTTP between frontend HTTP server and > application's backend?

For some applications (those that fit within the constraints of REST - and, no, that's not all Web "apps") - you can sometimes get easy caching by dropping something like varnish somewhere between the user and the app.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Keep it up sergio!</comment>


New York Times closes R&D Ventures - <AUTHOR> http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2013/10/8534895/new-york-times-closes-rd-ventures

<comment><USER2> That's interesting...they just recently launched their "Timespace" startup incubator...which I assume was part of R&D ventures? A year seems pretty short for a venture into venture funding.

Background here: [http://pandodaily.com/2013/07/26/inside-timespace-the-new- yo...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/07/26/inside-timespace-the-new-york-times- new-startup-accelerator/)

edit:

Another link here, to their Early Stage Investments:

[http://www.nytco.com/early-stage-investments/](http://www.nytco.com/early- stage-investments/)

Not sure if it's the same thing as the R&D Ventures group though...in fact, it probably isn't, as the R&D Ventures (from what I can tell) began last summer, and NYT's investments listed above pre-date that.

Also, nearly all of the early-stage-investments are media/information companies, whereas R&D ventures seemed to have a different focus?

<comment><USER3> The article was not very clear.

R&D ventures was an offshoot of R&D labs which is a seperate vehical entirely from TimeSpace and their early stage investments.

The ventures team was created to monetize the work from R&D. However the group was not able to perform as well as they were expected to. In the end the team cost more than the revenue they produced.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> And just a few days back Arthur Sulzberger was saying if there was one thing he could do differently in the past, it would be to "hire more engineers".

[http://www.niemanlab.org/2013/10/the-newsonomics-of- little-d...](http://www.niemanlab.org/2013/10/the-newsonomics-of-little-data- data-scientists-and-conversion-specialists/)</comment>


Ask HN: Why would one use MongoDB over PostgreSQL? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> well...it all starts at what _you_ want to do. Since they're different type of databases and are used in different contests... You're actually asking "Why would one use a Screwdriver over an Hammer?"

Different tools for different projects...I guess..</comment>


Microsoft offers web browser choice to IE users - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8524019.stm

<comment><USER2> I'm not a fan of MS typically, but this really should be a value-added requirement in the EU of OEMs. Microsoft did use its monopoly to force IE on the public, but it did so with OEMs complying. Dell should be able to build a machine that'll be shipped to Germany that comes pre-installed with Opera. Forcing Microsoft to do this is silly.</comment>


Fortune: Ron Conway is wrong - <AUTHOR> http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2010/09/24/super-angels-must-be-making-a-buck/

<comment><USER2> CNN: Linkbait attempt #x</comment>


Nuclear Fusion Has Broken Even For the First Time Ever - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/nuclear-fusion-has-broken-even-for-the-first-time-ever-1442376955?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow <comment><USER2> "the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel" isn't breakeven. The fuel doesn't absorb anywhere near 100% of the energy put in. They're nowhere near breakeven.

From the actual announcement[1]: "The NIF laser focuses 1.7 megajoules of UV light onto the cylinder, or hohlraum, that contains the fuel. Only a few kilojoules of that energy actually winds up in the plasma. "Most of the energy that the laser transfers is wasted on heating up the gold hohlraum, then heating up the plastic, and only a very small fraction of the energy actually heats up the thermonuclear fuel," says Betti."

[1] [http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/politics_and_polic...](http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/politics_and_policy/lab_reports_big_advance_in_laser_fusion_quest?type=PTFAVE)</comment>


A bug I wish I hadn't caught - <AUTHOR> https://roganmurley.com/2019/06/08/the-bug.html <comment><USER2> See also: A bug so cool that the development team was reluctant to fix it ([https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20190603-00/?p=10...](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20190603-00/?p=102534))

<comment><USER3> Reminds me of the old Dota2 Fountain hook glitch. A Valve employee commented that they deemed it "Too hilarious to fix"[1]

They eventually patched it after a pro player abused it to turn a game around at the International 3[2]

It's a shame because 6 years later it's still one of the best moments I ever witnessed in the game.

[1]: [https://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=2989&p=11512&viewfull...](https://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=2989&p=11512&viewfull=1#post11512)

[2][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB0tUrfDz6A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB0tUrfDz6A)

<comment><USER4> I was really quite disappointed about fountain hooks being removed - they were an extremely high skill, high risk high reward maneuver. It was also ridiculously fun to watch NaVi pull it off game after game in TI3 - part of what made that my favorite year for the spectator aspect of the tournament.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I am a DM. For this campaign, your character choices are limited to:

[CPU, Guest, Anonymous, Player 1, Player 2, User, Random, "", undefined]

<comment><USER6> Relevant xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1963/](https://xkcd.com/1963/)

<comment><USER7> Whatever could he mean by the mouseover text ...

<comment><USER8> Maybe "xkcd"? Not sure.

<comment><USER9> Parent was making a joke about their own name.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So... the backend of this game queries the database even if the user name is NULL? And the CPU user uses a magic name 'cpu', which is not a reserved name? And apparently the backend is totally okay with a user name that doesn't exist in the database?

Either this story is just an ad, or this game has been really badly build and some h4x0r is going to have a field day with this.

<comment><USER11> >And apparently the backend is totally okay with a user name that doesn't exist in the database?

What do you think happens when a previously unregistered user creates an account

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is literally that NULL license plate problem! I wonder how many other systems this bug may exist in.

([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20676904](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20676904))

</comment><comment><USER13> Please don't use the username as your primary key for a user!

Usernames change. If your username can't change, you designed your system wrong.

Systems that are heavily persisted-comment-based at least have the excuse where changing a username would invalidate old comments referencing that user, but even GitHub still lets you change your username (if you link @-references to users, please store the user's ID in the backend text and only convert it back to a username when displaying; GitHub doesn't take this step but it should).

P.S. Hacker News, I'm looking at you.

<comment><USER14> Come on, user names don't change. Whether it's Hacker News (as you mention), a reddit username, a skype ID, or your gmail address, nobody expects the "username" to change, it is unique and can't be used if already taken, and everybody uses it as a unique ID on millions of websites without any issue.

In fact, I can't name a single service I've ever used (ever!) that lets me change my username.

<comment><USER15> > _In fact, I can 't name a single service I've ever used (ever!) that lets me > change my username._

Facebook? Twitter? Instagram? Any of the phone-number-based social apps (which have a poorer UX because of it, but still all allow changing usernames seeing as phone numbers change)? Also I believe Skype does allow changing usernames.

<comment><USER16> Hotmail Gmail Seriously why can't people change their email and keep the mailbox. It's not uncommon to pick a cute or funny email when you are a teen and want To change when you've all grown up

<comment><USER17> With an imap client you should be able to download emails from the old accounts and upload them on the new one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This bug is a design smell.

They have a "Player" module that can likely be controlled by a human or by an "AI" module. This is good design.

The problem here is likely that IO is tightly integrated with Player and every other module as a dependency. This is what can cause the bug to occur.

Proper design is for the "Player" module to never depend on IO as a dependency...

1\. the player module should be able to output the next gamestate of a game given the action and previous gamestate.

2\. The AI should calculate the action when given a gamestate.

3\. IO should be a function that when given gamestate, it displays it on the screen, or saves it to the DB.

4\. All modules should be unaware of the other modules.

No dependencies.

Likely the fix that the poster is doing doesn't involve separating the "Player" module from all knowledge of IO, but the fix he is doing is making AI a special case in the "Player" module. This speaks to all kinds of wrong.

Following these design patterns over a long period of time leads to code that is "tech debt" heavy and messy. It's an inevitable consequence for programmers who don't know how to design things. Also note that this is normal. I would say 99% of programmers don't know this and are likely doing some garbage like using dependency injection to make every module in the system depend on IO.

</comment><comment><USER19> Apparently there's still a few more bugs left to catch - the game's sign up screen briefly flashes a form then simply goes blank for me.

<comment><USER20> That's the bug he wished he had caught. All those people from hacker news clicking through to the site but no new signups!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Calling this a "bug" is a stretch. Similar to saying `1 == 2` is a bug. Could've been prevented by using distinct ID's in your tables and query criteria. When assigning experience, authenticating, selecting user data, etc., use the user ID.

Usernames are just localized, vanity UUID's for client-side pleasure.

</comment><comment><USER22> [http://lalo.li/lsd/](http://lalo.li/lsd/) is full of bugs. i made a version without glitches. it was only half as fun.

</comment><comment><USER8> But... if you really regret taking this out, why not leave it? I don't see how it can do harm. I can imagine players linking the account's profiles to friends going "hah, look at this" and creating more publicity, and people being for either Guest or CPU and talking about it... fun for the players, and good for publicity. Why take this out?

And then the post ends there and suggests I should go play the game. But a lot of people already commented that it sounds like an ad.

</comment><comment><USER23> There have been bugs I wish I hadn't caught for entirely different reasons. Mostly if you find them on Friday before a Monday release and have to crunch to fix it lol

</comment><comment><USER24> I find it odd there's no user ID instead of the username. But what I find even more concerning is it's not sanitizing the username to protect against SQL injection.

<comment><USER19> How can you know that there's no sanitization just from this blog post?

<comment><USER25> I think OP is getting the wrong idea from the screen shot in the article. There's a pic of an SQL query being run from a terminal. They might be thinking that it's a screen shot from the actual code.

<comment><USER24> It's open source. [https://github.com/RoganMurley/Ring-of- Worlds/blob/master/se...](https://github.com/RoganMurley/Ring-of- Worlds/blob/master/server/src/User.hs)

<comment><USER26> This looks perfectly fine? Are you referring to the fact that they don't escape special characters like ' in the string? With the proper interfaces, like using prepared statements (which this likely uses in the backend, if this is an actual SQL db), instead of putting queries together just by concatenating strings, escaping strings is not only unnecessary but actively harmful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> this is just an ad?

<comment><USER28> It was a nice anekdote, all development will be linked to a project anyway, linking to it just makes sense. Doesn't seem this was targeting a wider audience than devs, and I don't think the main market of the game is devs anyway.

<comment><USER29> The post is lacking any interesting technical information. It is a bland fantasy about how a poorly implemented scoreboard could be exploited. Based on the dramatic title I expected a deep dive into a large corporation's code that resulted in dark secrets of the highest order. Instead I got an API that doesn't have validation...

<comment><USER30> Cut the guy some slack. You can get your fill of conspiracy theories elsewhere. I for one enjoy random bouts of small, shallow experiences like these.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> ugh, vapourbug

</comment><comment><USER32> The point of the story being...?</comment>


Sight v0.6 on Chrome Gallery - <AUTHOR> http://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/epmaefhielclhlnmjofcdapbeepkmggh

<comment><USER2> Great. This gives you syntax-highlightning when viewing a plaintext source files using chrom{e,ium}.</comment>


Edward Snowden 'pictured out shopping in Russia' - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/10360866/Edward-Snowden-pictured-out-shopping-in-Russia.html

<comment><USER2> I am sure Russian intel is following him and American intel is also following him. They know each other's existence like no shit Sherlock. The interesting thing is when will American capture him in front of the Russians lol</comment>


RDropBox: Easy-to-use Ruby library for the official Dropbox API - <AUTHOR> http://rubygems.org/gems/rdropbox

<comment><USER2> I love seeing the rubygems.org pages linked as a project's home page, or at least starter page. All the information you need to get up to speed. Such a world of difference from a year ago when publishing a gem.

I still want to get readmes shown, but I'm worried about handling formatting when GitHub already handles it flawlessly.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, it's definitely missing some sort of.. "what to do next" immediacy. README support could help with that (though some READMEs are crazy long and go far off track). Typical gem descriptions aren't long enough or well formatted enough to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Github repository and additional information: <http://github.com/RISCfuture/dropbox#readme>

</comment><comment><USER5> For those interested in the API there are also official bindings for ruby, python, java, and objective-c.

<comment><USER6> Do you know where I can find them?

Google doesn't seem to give me much and the 'Developers' page seems to require applying for access with a particular use in mind. Not sure why they require application, a rate limit for non-approved apps would let people experiment more.

<comment><USER5> Apply saying you're just curious and you'll be approved within a day. We're looking at getting rid of the approval step for sandboxed API access but for now it's faster to just apply.

<comment><USER7> I applied 2 or was it 3 days ago and still haven't heard anything.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Apple Watch sales down 90% since the opening week - <AUTHOR> http://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-watch-may-not-be-ticking-with-customers-2015-07-07

<comment><USER2> "Once everyone has a smartphone, they are supposed to go out and get a smart watch, followed by smart eyeglasses, and so on. Or, at least, so goes the theory."

That sounds like a very ill gotten theory. Do companies really expect people to go out and by accessories that cost in the hundreds and add more stuff for people to hull around that do roughly the same things?

No, If I'm buying a smart device it's because either the cost is so cheap it's like buying extra USB cables or it's something to replace my other smart device.

<comment><USER3> History repeats itself and people start rattling off the basic litany of complaints.

It's a first generation device for Apple. The first iPhone had to be plugged into a computer. This watch is for early adopters, you know the 10-50 million people who'd shell out the money.

The watch's abilities will greatly improve over time, thus becoming more useful to another 500 million people.

<comment><USER4> 500 million people who also won't want to pay $400-$600 for another smart gadget when they have already paid $600 for their iPhone.

At that price point, smart watches will remain a very niche market. Just as niche as $600 watches are today for consumers globally.

Android will end up dominating smart watches. They'll be made in China, and they'll cost $50-$99. That will drive adoption in the hundreds of millions globally.

<comment><USER3> Yes, we _already know_ that Android will dominate wearables, as they do smartphones. Android simply sells cheaper options. It's a bit irrelevant though because Apple simply needs to cater to its current "small" market and remain highly profitable.

As for the size of the market, I'd expect almost everyone on the planet to want a wearable when you can use one to better monitor your health (heart, blood pressure, sleep, etc), use it as a credit card, remote for lights and garage door opener, key for house, etc.

7 billion people, 7 billion wearables.

<comment><USER5> Count me out. 7 billion minus 1. First I do not like watches, I have not used one for more than 15 years. Second I do not like single companies to try to steal more and more of our private information. So I do not like single company to monitor my health, my credit card nor my garage door. Pop.

<comment><USER3> You're a rounding error. A few hundred thousand more people became consumers today.

[http://www.worldometers.info/world- population/](http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/)

8 billion by 2025.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To clarify, I'm not remotely an apple fanboy..but I dont think anybody excepted to continue 20k watches/week. They have sold a lot. The initial sales are done and thats fine.

Apple has a way with new versions of selling a lot all over again.

</comment><comment><USER7> How many people wear watches regularly now? After getting an iPhone I tended to stop wearing a watch.

It just seems like there may be very niche uses but most features are already on my phone so why bother? What would be the "killer" app that would generate more sales, assuming they open up the platform?

<comment><USER8> I wear a watch (Pebble) because I have an iPhone. The primary feature is my phone can be always on silent.

<comment><USER7> Just curious what use case this is? Is it that you want to see really important email/texts when you are involved in a setting where having your phone make noises is not preferred?

<comment><USER9> I have a pebble. It's a lot less disruptive to glance at my watch when something happens than it is to get out the phone. With my phone in my pocket, I'm less likely to fidget with it. And yeah- with my watch vibrating, I can leave the phone on silent all the time. If I want to disconnect, I just take off the watch. It works really well for that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I really wish Apple would have focused on some type of e-Strap. One that would coordinate with my $1000 mechanical Robert Weil watch. If the e-strap came from Montblanc, Google, Apple, or pebble I would not mind. As long as it matched my R. Weil style and gave me usable functionality. Also, when I sent it in to Robert Weil for service, they respected the e-Strap, even if it was from Montblanc.

[http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/03/heres-a-closer-look-at- the-...](http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/03/heres-a-closer-look-at-the- montblanc-smart-band-for-fancy-watches/)

<comment><USER11> I really really like the idea of a smart watch band for a handful of reasons, but a smart watch is going to move more units.

A fitness tracker with a watchband form factor and can vibrate for phone notifications would satisfy most of my smart watch desires (I wouldn't even need a screen on it). I'd buy one of those in addition to the smartwatch I have now, as I still wear my nice watch when I need to dress up. My smartwatch is uglier than the apple watch, but don't think a black LED screen on a wrist is ever a good look.

But smartphones have made many people stop wearing watches in general, and fitness trackers aren't the most popular products either. And a secondary screen (like in your link) for someone who doesn't want a timepiece in the first place doesn't make sense, just give prime placement to one really nice display.

Plus branding. People don't just want smart functionality in a good looking watch, they want to be seen wearing an Apple Watch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Not surprised. Tried an Apple Watch (Sport) for a week or so before returning it for a refund. I just couldn't really work out what it was good for, apart from delivering notifications to my wrist. I also wasn't particularly impressed by the battery life, I think I'd need 2 days (for days where I didn't have the chance to charge it overnight) to feel confident using it.

</comment><comment><USER13> This isn't surprising. Development for the watch is still heavily locked down. Once the Apple watch is opened up more and has a "system seller" I feel like sales will rebound.

</comment><comment><USER14> I found the Apple Watch to be too expensive and it's the only reason I haven't bought one.

If it was around 299 for the non sport edition, I think I'd be sold.

<comment><USER15> If it was $299 for the non-sport edition, the watch market would implode.

Apple's doing a lot of companies a favour by keeping prices high enough for there to be room for competition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Good. Apple isn't as original as it used to be, but it remains just as restrictive. They can now demonstrate to the world that their previous successes were in spite of their impulse to be controlling, and companies such as Microsoft can stop aping every single Apple restriction and money grubbing $99 fee in cargo-cultish attempts to gain Apple profitability.

</comment><comment><USER17> this doesn't come as a surprise to me. they are over priced, have to be charged too often and do too little to improve the users life.</comment>


CSScaffold – Using PHP to Extend the Abilities of CSS - <AUTHOR> http://github.com/anthonyshort/csscaffold

<comment><USER2> (Disclaimer - I am the owner of Mechanical CSS)

Thought I would open the discussion here - who actually likes the syntax used in these libraries? Personaly I'm not a fan of extending the language syntax for new features. Adding new features I like but at least try and stick to CSS's style.

(Comparison - <http://github.com/stuartloxton/Mechanical-CSS/>)

</comment><comment><USER3> i tried csscaffold, but ran into nothing special yet. despite a minor bug it just worked. the biggest nuisance is that my ide (currently netbeans) reports lots of errors in the scaffolded css file because of course it's not valid css anymore.

</comment><comment><USER4> <?php header('Content-type: text/css'); ?>

Knock yourself out!</comment>


Note Taking with Obsidian - <AUTHOR> https://rolisz.ro/2020/07/28/obsidian/ <comment><USER2> I've been taking some classes online through quarantine, and have really enjoyed taking notes with Obsidian.

As I review old notes, I often put parts of class notes into dedicated notes of their own, and the end result is a list of links to the topics covered, example problems worked out, and a bit of extra descriptive color relevant to that specific lecture.</comment>


Startup School 2018 - <AUTHOR> When should we expect to be notified as to whether we've been accepted into the Startup School program? The course begins in a week, but applications were due last week. <comment><USER2> In a couple of hours [https://mobile.twitter.com/startupschool/status/103128998490...](https://mobile.twitter.com/startupschool/status/1031289984903331840)</comment>


People Coping With Rare Disease Are Internet Power Users - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/03/04/134140813/people-coping-with-rare-disease-are-internet-power-users?ft=1&f=1019 <comment><USER2> I used to work for a boss who had Lyme disease (I didn't know until he told me). He was amazed at how much traffic he got to his free page that he had just setup to discuss and cope with the condition.

Misinformation is a problem but the rarity of the disease would likely increase the people-bond and make a tight-knit group.

The size would, in effect, prevent spam/scam/disinformation issue in other larger groups as it would be too difficult to be worth the effort (unless your name is Tyler Durden, I suppose).

</comment><comment><USER3> I wrote a blog post about the passing of a schoolmate with sino-nasal undifferentiated carcinoma (very rare), who had cultured his own cell line and his advisor then rescued those cells from the Katrina floodwaters. Every six months or so I would get another comment from someone looking for someone else with the disease. Unfortunately, I deleted the blog. I hadn't even thought about that until now.

</comment><comment><USER4> As someone who is extremely cautious about _any_ medical information found on the Internet, I would wonder whether that cautiousness is heightened or lessened when talking about rare diseases. How do these power users know who to trust?

<comment><USER5> As someone with a less rare disease, I can say a bigger danger is getting a very negative picture about your condition. The people that are very active in these communities are often the ones that are dealing with the disease more often due to severity (i.e. those that are dealing with the disease fine are often not seeking out these communities). This creates a selection bias that can give you a very negative picture of your prospects that doesn't correlate well with reality.

I'm not saying that these communities are bad. You just have to take everything into consideration when dealing with them.

<comment><USER6> I completely agree with you. Having a positive outlook is essential to coping with any disease. I find myself felling more depressed when I really focus on my disease. I understand the need to relate with other people with a similar condition. However, it is important not to let other people's experiences directly affect your state of mind.</comment></comment></comment>


Courts Must Allow Online Platforms to Defend Their Users' Free Speech Rights - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/courts-must-permit-online-platforms-raise-their-users-free-speech-rights-eff <comment><USER2> If the laws only protect the profits of the company, where will all the people go for justice?</comment>


After Siri, Apple is now comfortable releasing half-baked products - <AUTHOR> http://spudnet.blogspot.com/2012/09/ios-6-maps.html

<comment><USER2> There is nothing note worthy about the iphone5. I tend to agree, it's a subpar product. If you compare it to 4s then it a little better, but if you compare it with any new android phone then it's mundane.

</comment><comment><USER3> Stupid, baseless article, with a sensationalized headline to match.

</comment><comment><USER4> Yes, I tend to agree. Both Mountain Lion and OS 6 are pretty buggy and overall less useful than their predecessors.

<comment><USER3> Other than maps what are the bugs you have noted in OS 6? How is it less useful?

<comment><USER4> TabBarController is now highly buggy. I had to put multiple workarounds into our app to get around them (figured out mostly myself and from forums).

There's no info on Apple's dev site about how to actually support iphone 5's new resolution. You have to figure it out from the forums.

It's less useful because they have removed google maps, youtube, podcasts from itunes (you now have to download a separate app), etc.

<comment><USER3> So you're having a problem with TabBarController. (I have had no instance of bugs in any of my existing apps using TabBarController.) Still a developer issue as far as I can tell, not a user issue yet.

Lack of support describing how developers use new hardware isn't a bug nor does it make the iOS less useful. Again, a developer issue not a user issue.

So the iOS is now deemed less useful by you because you have to tap "App Store" tap "Charts" and click "Install" on youtube, and podcast? Sounds like you are ranting for the sake of ranting.

A lot of people feel the need to complain for some reason but I don't quite understand why. I don't see a smoking gun. There are no broken antennas, and MobileMe didn't crash. Sounds like a company just released a brand new product and there are some small bugs to work out. Which it what I would expect, from any company. We all know Samsung has bugs, MS Windows 8 has bugs, Nokia 920 has bugs. When I got a Galaxy S, 2 years ago, I received an OTA update v2.2.2, it bricked my phone. It bricked a lot of peoples phones. They stopped doing OTAs after that. Then the GPS didn't work. That was sort of accepted as a flaw in the GS v2.2.2. I had to root my phone and run a third party hack to get it to work. The mp3 player had a button to view music by album but tapping it would crash the player. That wasn't fixed until much later, v2.3.4, 9months after google released it. Had to use my brothers PC, install software on PC to install sw update on phone. Ridiculous. Virtually no updates to touchwiz UI. Garbage! Calls were always dropped constantly. Then I got a GS2. It would crash... all the time. I had to reboot nearly everyday. That is sort of expected with the GS2, calls were dropped all the time. Text messages wound't come through on Google Voice. The control buttons on the headphones worked erratically but mostly not at all. TouchWiz is a disaster. Battery life was maybe 8 hours of standby. I had to charge to phone two times a day. The phone IS TOO FUCKING BIG! Trying to use the phone one handed, the thumb muscle would touch the screen before the tip of the thumb causing unintentional taps. These aren't developer issues, these are 'real' user issues. What droidfans aren't saying is that Android is rough, and they like to fiddle with it, they like to mod it and install patches, and break it and reinstall it, and fuck with it some more. This is why there is no waiting lines for Samsung products. The 'sheeple' don't like expensive shit that is broken. They like expensive shit that works. I mean works as in 'doesn't crash everyday, not 'boo hoo, the bridge in my maps looks funny [frown-face], this is awful I think I will go shoot myself!1!!'

I understand you are having a problem with maps but most of the blogs are complete hyperbole right now, and the maps are working great for me in NYC. Public transit was never very helpful by google maps because "public transit is underground!" Welcome to the big city. Thus no network connectivity. No one is having "real" problems with the new iPhone. This is all BS for the purpose of getting visitors to a shitty blog.

There were 8 stories about the iphone on the frontpage last night. What are complainers going to do when shit really does break? Just fill it up with complaint after whiny complaint? Until all of Hacker News is just 300 "this sucks" articles? THAT'S NOT NEWS!!!!

<comment><USER4> I tend to agree with most of what you are saying. I have a Galaxy Note phone now, and it's a pretty amazing device (much better than the Galaxy and earlier Samsung devices). However it still has it's annoyances, and you can't really use it properly unless you're a geek.

Yes, I'm mostly just bitching about iOS 6, it's not really too big a deal. Apple tends to shit on developers with their new releases, giving them a week to work around iOS bugs and get their apps approved. Users generally don't notice any issues because the developers like me bust their asses each time there is a new iOS release (we don't have a fucking choice, because users love their iphones/ipads :)

I agree that the ipad/iphone is a much slicker product in general than anything else out there. The Galaxy Note comes close, but is too difficult to set up and use for the average user (by default you can't even copy files to it from your mac, which is a major fuckup).

My main gripe is with OSX 10.8. Even after a couple of updates, it still completely hangs about once a week due to a bug - only solution is to hold the power button and force reset. I'm hoping the last update a few days ago will fix it, but we'll see.

As for tabbars, there are 3 bugs you need to workaround:

\- can't click on some tabs on iphone 5 unless you set self.window.frame (<https://devforums.apple.com/thread/166444?tstart=0>)

\- orientation changes screw everything up unless you set window.rootViewController to the tab bar controller.

\- your app will crash if it's a landscape only app and you use a portrait- only view controller such as UIImagePickerController.

<comment><USER3> Sorry about unloading on you. You seem like nice guy. I have to work on controlling my troll.

<comment><USER4> No worries, you seem like a decent guy too. Nice site btw.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Walt Mossberg's Apple iPad Review - <AUTHOR> http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20100331/apple-ipad-review/

<comment><USER2> In Walt's review he says Safari has no tabs, but the iPad guide videos shows an Exposé style tab feature. Obviously he missed that bit.

<comment><USER3> Isn't that just windows?

<comment><USER4> I believe the canonical term for them is "pages" (when you tap and hold a link in Safari, one of the options is "Open in New Page").

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The functionality of the touch-keyboard has been my #1 concern in ordering an iPad - his comments:

"I found email easy and productive to use, and had no trouble typing accurately and quickly on the iPad's wide on-screen keyboard. In fact, I found the iPad virtual keyboard more comfortable and accurate to use than the cramped keyboards and touchpads on many netbooks. . ."

<comment><USER6> I hope Walt's right, but I just find that so hard to believe. Did you see Steve typing an email at the iPad keynote? It was so awkward that it was kind of painful to watch. And, as I recall, Steve even had an uncorrected typo slip by in the one-line email that he composed.

That said, watching Walt's video got me super excited about getting one of these puppies. :)

<comment><USER7> _I hope Walt's right, but I just find that so hard to believe._

I agree. The benefit of being able to rest one's fingers on a physical keyboard and feel each key seems rather obvious to me. Moreover, I doubt the iPad virtual keyboard is any less cramped than a netbook keyboard.

<comment><USER8> I'm not expecting it to be anywhere near a real physical keyboard in terms of speed but one of the interesting things about adapting to the iPhone keyboard is accepting accuracy isn't all that important. It decodes my crazy gibberish into the correct words most of the time. The trick of auto-correction is it punishes you for stopping to correct typos. It rewards you for completing your gibberish word. I would guess the process of tapping out the rest of the word is where all the computational multi-touch magic is happening to make a good auto-correct judgement. For speed the auto-suggest feature is also very effective. If I only have to type "qu" to make the word "question" that's 3 screen taps versus the potential for at least 8 key presses on a physical keyboard. Another side effect of mastering multi-touch typing is learning the value of brevity. Obviously this post is not typed on an iPhone. You learn to compose text in a straight forward way and do more of the compositional process in your head before you start typing. In this way it reminds me of writing short notes. So multi-touch keyboards won't replace physical keyboards but I really believe they are good enough and perhaps even better than a real keyboard sometimes. For example, if you are spelling challenged you're probably familiar with the _type, type, type, mouse - click - click - correct, type type type_ proces. On a multi-touch keyboard it either fixes your spelling as you go or you tap once to auto-correct as you type. That's actually a more intuitive process.

<comment><USER7> Good points. The predictive text on the iPhone is excellent. It definitely requires a lot of trust from the user, and I think it takes a while to build up that trust. Even after a couple years, I find that I still need to make a conscious effort to let the iPhone handle my mistakes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Walt's iPad review video is in Flash. Slightly ironic but the bigger question is what is Apple doing about so much video content being in Flash? It's an issue for many.

<comment><USER10> If you go there with an iPhone or iPad (on simulator), then it plays in quicktime.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: When do you think smartphones will become obsolete? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Never. A better question is how will smartphones evolve.

Phones are humanity's magic crystals which enables everyone to send instant communication channel to anyone else and tap in the greatest common knowledge base ever. I don't think there is a reasonable future without everyone having his own personal device for this function. Maybe it won't called a "smartphone" but it will provide these functions.

</comment><comment><USER3> It'll get unbundled into AirPods + Watch + Glasses and maybe further down the line Brain Implants will come into the mix.

It won't be going away for a long time though. It's here to stay a while.

<comment><USER4> Yes, I stopped carrying my iPhone with me when I bought Watch 3 cellular 2 years ago. The only thing I miss is a camera.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> A smart phone is just a programmable computer welded to a cell phone, that's here to stay. So I'm going to answer what I think your real question is: "When will smartphones change form factor?"

The current form factor is a best-we-have compromise between ease of use, and utility. I think the next big thing will be the decoupling of utility and ease of use. AR/3D gesture tech in a discrete google glass-like thing maybe.

</comment><comment><USER6> Books never became obsolete. It s just the physicality of it. Having something in your hands allows you to focus. Or else, if the screen was your glasses, what would you do with your hands?

</comment><comment><USER7> When AR (already happening) and human brain/AI symbiosis happens!

</comment><comment><USER8> Possibly before the neural implants if IT becomes so ubiquitous that there's no need to carry around a phone.

</comment><comment><USER9> When any surface you look at or touch will interact with you. There will be no need to put anything in pockets.

</comment><comment><USER10> When UI is so slow and so full of useless notifications that you can't use it to answer quick questions.

</comment><comment><USER11> When a better(greater functionality, easier to use, etc.) convergence device becomes available.

</comment><comment><USER12> When glasses with display become usable.</comment>


Nexo - Free and Easy Online Groups - <AUTHOR> http://www.nexo.com/ <comment><USER2> Looks like this site has an edge over meetup.com, considering that meetup charges $19 per month and this one is free.</comment>


Ask HN: What do you think about the Secalot hardware token? - <AUTHOR> Comparing open source security tokens/OTP generators/UFA tokens/PGP Smartcards, it seems the product from secalot has the most features for a similar price as the alternatives. It also has open source software and hardware.
https://www.secalot.com/
Has anybody tried it and can compare it to more popular alternatives like the yubikey or the nitrokey?
How would you rate this from a security aspect? <comment><USER2> From the security point of view the most obvious difference to me is that Nitrokey contains a secure element while Secalot doesn't. (Secalot contains a microprocessor with cryptographic acceleration but don't confuse this with a secure element.) Secure elements are secure key stores which protect against extraction of cryptographic keys by malware and by physical attackers.

Also Secalot seems to be a small project while Nitrokey is a (small) company, which might influence quality of security and maintenance too.

Disclaimer: I'm with Nitrokey UG.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting. That is a definitive plus for Nitrokey indeed. I wonder if they plan on creating a version that supports PGP _and_ U2F.

I really like the Nitrokey pro version, it is pretty much everything I need except for the U2F.

<comment><USER2> Yes, a Nitrokey with OpenPGP Card and FIDO is planned. You can get notified directly by subscribing its newsletter at [https://www.nitrokey.com/newsletter](https://www.nitrokey.com/newsletter)

<comment><AUTHOR> Any planned realease date? I'm considering waiting for the release of it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


JavaScript predictions for 2019 by npm - <AUTHOR> https://blog.graphqleditor.com/javascript-predictions-for-2019-by-npm <comment><AUTHOR> I think Web Components will overtake React!</comment>


Write because you are a nobody - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@ryanfarley/write-because-you-are-a-nobody-2dc8279331ea

<comment><USER2> Medium, Quora, and Wikipedia are great places where "nobodies" share knowledge in an organized way.

Here's also a fantastic collection of startup stories: [https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/startup-failure-post- mortem/](https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/startup-failure-post-mortem/)</comment>


Google Sets 10-user Limit for Free Access to Apps - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/google-tweaks-apps-pricing-for-smbs-sets-10-user-limit-for-free-access/47818

<comment><USER2> If you are a current customer your limits wont be affected.</comment>


Project Tuva: Richard Feynman's Messenger Lecture Series - <AUTHOR> https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/tuva-richard-feynman/ <comment><AUTHOR> Legal download links are available at - [http://www.cornell.edu/video/people/richard- feynman](http://www.cornell.edu/video/people/richard-feynman)</comment>


NSA Deletes "Honesty" and "Openness" from Core Values - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/24/nsa-core-values-honesty-deleted/ <comment><USER2> Ironically taking a step towards 'honesty'.

<comment><USER3> Man I was thinking the exact same thing. By nature these folks at the NSA CAN'T be open nor honest.

<comment><USER4> "We put a splitter on the internet so that we can keep our own copy in locations A, B, C, and coming soon, D. We use an automated selector-based filter to find nodes of interest in realtime, as well as tools for querying the enormous amount of data we keep in the storage facilities at said locations."

That would count as both open and honest. What could the implications possibly be? Congress isn't going to investigate them based on those statements, and if you try to enter those locations you'd get denied entry just like you would today.

So what exactly is this "nature" that prevents the NSA from publishing the paragraph I wrote above?

<comment><USER5> For a few (IMHO realistic) examples:

* the "splitter" as you call it (an useful simplification for this discussion) might be on devices of public companies without their consent against their wishes - IIRC that was part of Snowden's revelations.

* the "splitter" might have been secretly placed on an undersea cable in foreign waters, and there's a clear national security interest not to reveal that fact - the key job of NSA is to listen in to other nations and ensure that they don't know if/how it's succeeding.

* the "splitter" might include cooperation from friendly governments that's not public knowledge to their populations. Again, there's a clear foreign policy interest not to disclose that.

* the "splitter" might have been made possible by a vulnerability in something that everyone believes is secure (e.g. RSA cryptosystem), and revealing what kind of data is captured will reveal that it's _possible_ to capture that kind of data, which (if it's a surprise) by itself might lead to it becoming useless as people worldwide deduce what component needs to be replaced.

There's obviously more. NSA can reveal that their job includes spying on everyone outside USA; but any more details would generally be harmful to that mission.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I, as a taxpayer, pay the NSA to be effective in defending national interests, to act with integrity, and to submit themselves to the oversight of my representatives in Congress.

I have no expectation that they will be honest or open with me. Being closed is integral to their work.

However they damn well better submit to oversight and respect my constitutional rights as a citizen.

<comment><USER7> Sort of a catch 22 there, right? You expect integrity, but without honesty/openness, how do you hold them to it?

<comment><USER8> You elect representatives and executives who are given security clearances and the right to great transparency and openness. When or if those elected officials are found to have abused the public trust, you punish them, their associates and their successors at the ballot box and in the court of public opinion.

It's not a great process but I don't see a better way for a democracy to have an internationally competitive intelligence apparatus. And without such an apparatus we are exposed to attacks on our democratic integrity, military effectiveness, deliberative privacy and much more.

<comment><USER9> We are currently paying the costs (both monetary and otherwise) for the apparatus you describe, but looking at the last decade, the benefits appear to be absent. Perhaps we need to consider the possibility that an organization like the NSA just isn't worth having?

<comment><USER10> In fact organizations like the CIA and NSA are more of a threat to the American people than the people they are supposedly protecting us from.

<comment><USER11> I suspect it's like inoculation: some people die from inoculations, but on the whole the herd gains valuable protection.

The TLA may be terrible for particular individuals, or small groups with a shared characteristic, but politicians should nonetheless advocate for them to protect the "way of life of citizens".

It's a "do you keep a guard dog that you know might maul a child" type of question.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> _> In response to questions from The Intercept on Tuesday, the NSA played down the alterations. Thomas Groves, a spokesperson for the agency, said: "It's nothing more than a website update, that's all it is." _

^^ Updating the wordage on the website was a task placed on the queue of a website administrator which was requested by the manager as a takeaway from an internal meeting reviewing core values.

This explanation is nowhere near acceptable to me as a taxpayer. I'd love to see the reporter push for a more lucid explanation than this.

<comment><USER13> How interesting would you find an article detailing all the ways a reporter was told "No comment."? What kind of more lucid explanation would you consider acceptable?

The NSA is, in many ways, a bureaucracy like many others. Odds are very good that the more lucid explanation is that some internal bureaucrat decided to convene a committee to review the Core Values, and after a multi-year review process the primary result was a minor website update.

Honestly, I'm bored just typing that. Do you think it would be interesting reading?

<comment><USER12> transparent government is boring but highly desirable. you could dismiss sytem logs or open source kernels are boring but youre greatful for them when unexpected things start happening

<comment><USER13> Indeed! You're absolutely right. And documents on this whole boring process could almost certainly be FOIA'd by anyone with a desire to be bored to death.

But a spokesperson isn't likely to know the details of a minor verbiage update.

<comment><USER14> I think the point was we're not talking about a "minor verbiage update." This isn't a wording correction on some TPS report fifty links deep within the Accessibility section. This is the public-facing expression of a major government agency's core values statement.

<comment><USER13> You're right! This is a change to a major government agency's core values statement.

I don't think I've ever been a place where public-facing statements about core values are considered important or major. They're generally treated as on par with mission statements or mottos - something nice to have but not particularly significant. I've even done government contracting, including for the NSA. Core values don't generally get checked on a regular basis much of anywhere.

You're absolutely right. This is a change to the small public face of a major intelligence agency. Yet, I believe this is a minor verbiage update of no particular import.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> While ironic, if you pay any attention to mission and vision statements in general for government/military organizations it's quite commonplace for such statements to change in opaque and confusing ways, especially so after any change in leadership.

Most of the time it isn't some dark conspiracy but rather someone with enough stars on their shoulder said "Why is this even in the mission statement? Every organization should do that so it's implied, what the mission statement really needs is..."

</comment><comment><USER16> As if "core values" meant anything for colossal organisations.

<comment><USER17> > Enron intends to conduct itself in accord with four [capital-V ]Values: > _Respect_ , _Integrity_ , _Communication_ and _Excellence_.

<comment><USER18> Amazingly they went against all 4 at the same time

<comment><USER19> They are excellent in integrating respect in communication. Fortune named Enron "America's Most Innovative Company" for six consecutive years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The NSA is being honest about not being honest and open about not being open. Deception is the core value.

<comment><USER21> :) but now someone who is really honest cannot even raise a finger.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Those words are associated to non-costly virtue signalling anyway, so who cares. The NSA can't win. If they let them stay, they're accused of lying, if the remove it, they get this response. I'm kind of neutral on the issue, but I do get bothered with societal dynamics where no matter what an actor does, they lose.

<comment><USER23> That's what happens when an actor is, by definition, in opposition of the very fiber of an organization (the US).

Read Amendment IV, and tell me how they fit in.

<comment><USER24> Seriously? They do a lot more than collecting information on private individuals. If you spent just 15 minutes researching those things honestly, you would find they have a VERY important job to do.

<comment><USER25> Problem is one part of their mission (protecting US infrastructure) often conflicts with another (foreign intelligence gathering). If you patch a Cisco edge router, both friends and enemies benefit.

Honestly the NSA should be broken up into two organisations, one geared towards defense and another offense. Or just merge the foreign intelligence gathering parts into the CIA.

<comment><USER26> > two organisations, one geared towards defense and another offense

Oftentimes, the best defense is a good offense. Or vice versa. You can't realistically separate one from the other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Notably they also added this line, to join in on the 'inclusive' and 'diversity' corporatespeak trend:

> Respect for People - We are committed to ensuring that all NSA personnel are > respected, included and valued for their diverse backgrounds, experiences, > skills and contributions to our mission and culture.

<comment><USER28> Sure, we don't value honesty, but look at all these ni--bla-frican Americans we have on our team!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> They added 'Transparency'.

2010 Values: [https://cryptome.org/2013/08/nsa-strategy- values.htm](https://cryptome.org/2013/08/nsa-strategy-values.htm)

2018 Values: [https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission- values/](https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission-values/)

</comment><comment><USER30> A lot of complaints against three letter agencies, who have elected officials with oversight and only hire from American citizens. Few complaints against Microgoogfacebook to whom we give all our most private electronic correspondence, have no oversight, and hire many foreign nationals who have little stake in whether the companies abuse the info they've been given. This strikes me as a bit odd.

<comment><USER31> You choose to give your data to Microsoft/Google/Facebook/whatever other private company you're complaining about. There is no agreement to give things to the NSA.

<comment><USER30> Just because it is voluntary does not mean the possibility of abuse is lower. It is higher since people consider the implications less.

<comment><USER31> I'm not saying it's lower, but you know the risks when you use the software.

<comment><USER30> I'm sure most people give nary a thought to the risk of using Google.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> ...how well do we use our freedom to choose the illusions we create? -Timbuk 3

Oscar Wilde says: Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.

Does the soul change?

It is a vast organization with vast bureaucratic momentum and organizational inertia. Can leadership change those? Not even a little. Intel can't change. Emerson can't change. And they have huger and more existential force pushing for change against a smaller mass.

Is the soul any different today than yesterday? Nope.

In ten years you can ask again, and the answer might be maybe.

So the question behind the question is "what is the real soul of the NSA?". Look at their deeds. Words and actions over time tell truth. Look at the trend of their deeds over time.

</comment><comment><USER33> Well, they weren't using them anyway.

<comment><USER34> Who knows, maybe they were. But they could interpret them differently. A kind of "alternative honesty" and "alternative openness".

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I see this as just another way the administration wants to demoralize public service employees, and increase distrust by the public in those institutions.

Far more troubling than some values changes, is the administration wants to have a spy slush fund of its own that is not at all subject to Congressional oversight. [https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/shutdown/card/1516648991](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/shutdown/card/1516648991)

</comment><comment><USER36> Why should they be honest and open? Sometimes complete honesty and openness is counterproductive to a purpose or a mission. Are you always honest? With your friends and family? With your colleagues? With your employer?

If you aren't, is it because you want to do harm, or because complete honesty would actually be harmful and unnecessary for both parties?

As this is the case for individuals, it is also the case for groups of people and institutions.

</comment><comment><USER37> >Respect for People - We are committed to ensuring that all NSA personnel are respected, included and valued for their diverse backgrounds, experiences, skills and contributions to our mission and culture.

All NSA personnel are respected, anyone else having a weird feeling reading that that it does not say all persons or something that says they respect everyone?

</comment><comment><USER38> Integrity and Transparency are listed.

Non-story, move along.

</comment><comment><USER39> Surprisingly, they are being honest and open about not being honest and open.

</comment><comment><USER40> Ironically, the new document is now more honest, if not more open.

</comment><comment><USER41> Well, at least they're honest and open about _that_

</comment><comment><USER42> Aren't they just being honest by doing that?

</comment><comment><USER43> At least they are being honest about it... ;)

</comment><comment><USER44> What an amazing story. A web page was updated and The Intercept is on it!

<comment><USER45> If only the Intercept would be honest and open about the Russia investigation we're facing in this country.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Mitigating hippcracy I see.

</comment><comment><USER47> Fortunately these government agencies are mostly corrupt, dysfunctional, and unable to recruit talent, so we probably don't have much to worry about.

<comment><USER48> Any objective source for your claims? If your basis is the attitude for such agencies here on hacker news, it's understandable why you might believe those to be true, but they aren't.

<comment><USER47> I've worked directly with people in the IC, and I have friends who've worked (or currently work) at various government agencies.

<comment><USER48> Did they convey those summaries to you? If so, is it accurate to say that shtf post-Snowden, and hasn't recovered?

You could be right, so I take it back, but I've heard there is some degree of strife and paranoia, but not general chaos as may be perceived.

<comment><USER47> It's mostly anecdotes and personal experience. I think that data on salaries, etc, is mostly public too, so you can probably see for yourself that they aren't competitive with SV or Wall St.

<comment><USER48> Discussed here recently, there's a path from public to private sector that does serve the need to retain talent, to some degree.

Also, to say they are mostly corrupt or incompetent seems possibly too much of a broad stroke that is based on anecdotes. I don't believe Snowden, for instance, ever suggested either of those are true — did he?

Finally, if this is your assessment, your standard may be unusually high. Maybe your peers, many not quite as good as you, are actually quite skilled? Just a hunch, could be wrong.

<comment><USER47> Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any person or organization which contributes, aids, or abets in spying on individuals for political reasons is entirely corrupt in my opinion.

Aside from some research that the NSA has contributed to humanity, they have done little good based on the evidence I've seen.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


General Public Obviousness License - <AUTHOR> https://raw.github.com/isaacs/inherits/master/LICENSE the new OSS licence that all the hip kids are using. <comment><AUTHOR> the question is: is a licence that only requires attribution more or less restrictive?

<comment><USER2> It's a strange loop, actually. The requiring attribution would be more restrictive, since the current license does not require attribution. If you re-license it with a license that does not require a less restrictive license, and then license it again with a license that is more restrictive, then you've violated the original one.

Logically, it implies "You can only release it under this license".

That is, the license says, "This is obvious, and doesn't need a license", and is a joke.</comment></comment>


High School Students and Alumni Are Using Social Media to Expose Racism - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/style/blm-accounts-social-media-high-school.html <comment><AUTHOR> For those who have trouble with the link:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200617142119/https://www.nytim...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200617142119/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/style/blm- accounts-social-media-high-school.html)</comment>


'Be Yourself' is terrible advice - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/05/opinion/sunday/unless-youre-oprah-be-yourself-is-terrible-advice.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region <comment><USER2> >> "I certainly had no idea that being your authentic self could get you as rich as I have become," Oprah Winfrey said jokingly a few years ago. "If I'd known that, I'd have tried it a lot earlier."

Look for interviews where she gets angry. Her voice drops an octave and her careful accent disappears. I wouldn't call her a phony, but she does have a public face.

I'm terrified by the people who do not have a public face, the people that don't hide. They seem to never falter. That can look like strength but they are unable to adapt to different audiences and that is a weakness. When you see that they hide nothing it is very difficult to forgive the gaffes because ... well, they aren't really gaffes. It's just crazy all the way down.

<comment><USER3> Heh. Some empathy would go a long way, bud.

When I see people with a "public face" all the time, I can't help but think the same way you you think about those without one. It's scary, it's creepy, it's manipulative, it's far too adaptive, and it's incredibly transparent if you know to look for it.

I have social anxiety that makes having a "public face" impossible to hold for any extended period of time, so I don't even try anymore. I feel happier than ever and have significantly less anxiety without the need to fake it. Though, when I actually need to put on that face (job interview and walking down the street, apparently), it makes me feel dirty to the point of actual physical discomfort under the skin. It's disgusting, but it fucking works, and I refuse to do it unless forced to.

Sorry for the "crazy". A lot of us are just doing the best we can. We'll try to be less terrifying once you actually open up to us.

<comment><USER2> Empathy requires a public face, the ability to acknowledge and react differently than your base instincts tell you to. Otherwise you only come off as empathetic to people you agree with. Your supporters are enthralled because they see you as an honest mirror, but everyone else thinks you're loony tunes. That ability to keep a public face is perhaps the difference between the universally-loved hollywood celebs, and that polarizing politician.

<comment><USER3> I see little difference between the two. They're just different forms of the same abstraction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Saying "be yourself" is a way to say "I'm suave enough to not have to think consciously about the persona I project". Likewise, "never settle" is a way to brag "I was good enough to not have to settle".

[http://www.overcomingbias.com/2011/10/never-settle-is-a- brag...](http://www.overcomingbias.com/2011/10/never-settle-is-a-brag.html)

</comment><comment><USER5> Be yourself should just be properly understood as a contraction for "be the best version of yourself" which is basically the thesis statement of this entire article.

<comment><USER6> "Be the best version of yourself" is my main takeaway from reading Neil Strauss' The Game - not the gimmicky cold calls.

I read this book about 8 years ago and it genuinely changed my life for the better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> if i may...

[http://www.humoar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/greatest- we...](http://www.humoar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/greatest-weakness- honesty.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER8> "Be yourself" is actually really good and really bad advice. It's bad because it's uninformative, but good because it's true. The challenge lies in knowing who you are. The way there is long and hard. It's reconciling what you want with what you like, for example.

<comment><USER9> Except you're making the assumption the article highlights: you're operating under the belief that there is a concrete thing that "you are" that you should know.

As a person I'm constantly changing (or so I hope). Who I am now is not who I was ten years ago and probably won't be who I am ten years from now.

I prefer to try and simply understand myself; understand why I think, feel, or believe what I do, understand why I make the choices I make, etc. That then (hopefully) gives me the insight to change and improve.

As an aside, I've always found the human penchant for pigeonholing everything fascinating, especially when people do it to themselves. Many folks have a very concrete idea of who they are and aren't, and what they can and can't do... I see that as a real shame, as I often see people limit their own potential by harboring preconceived notions about themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I see two issues in the article. I don't think that "being yourself" is the same thing as speaking without a filter, and I don't think that it requires someone to think of themselves as an unchanging entity.

> It worked. Next time people say, "just be yourself," stop them in their > tracks. No one wants to hear everything that's in your head.

That last line is the core of the issue that I see. To me, an important aspect of "being myself" is living my life in my head, rather than through my actions. Acting out on everything I'm thinking would be distinctly un-self- like for me. I suspect that I'm just missing the point that the author's trying to make.

</comment><comment><USER6> How much you can "Be Yourself" of course varies greatly between cultures.

\- Russians will see through unauthentic smiles with disdain.

\- Brazilians don't do well with blank expressions or disagreement.

\- The dutch on the other hand expect you to express your disagreements with no sugar coating - and might be disappointed if you hide your opinion.

I'm not very compatible with my own culture, and I expect to reap greater professional benefits by immigrating.

<comment><USER3> Been thinking about doing the same for the same reasons and moving out to Switzerland or Germany. Have you already started the process? I'm curious how others have done it and what their thoughts are during/before/after the expat plunge.

<comment><USER6> Job market in my country is terrible, so I have little to lose. Going to Canada for a Masters, after which I have a substantial salary expectation in the CA/US market, but not back home.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> this article seems terribly concerned with some jargon about "high self monitoring". it seems to me like an insufficiently critical acceptance of the theory of personality and consciousness presented by that one particular psychology article.

this entire article and the underlying assumptions need to be taken with many grains of salt.

<comment><USER12> The way I see it, if one believes they should always be authentic, then they probably never take in to consideration how their thoughts/actions might affect others or the goals of a group. Hey, they're just being honest.

But, if one decides to potentially self sensor by taking the time to consider how their current thoughts or desired actions might affect others and they conclude they will have a negative outcome resulting in them not expressing or acting on them... Well, they may have just made a decision to be inauthentic. But they did so out of consideration and empathy for others. And if their authentic self does care for others, well maybe they are still being authentic.

If one doesn't care about others, and doesn't have empathy, well then they sound like an asshole to me. To them I say continue on spewing filterless thoughts... asshole. :)

edited for clarity.

<comment><USER11> I'm confused by your comment. Who are you calling an asshole?

<comment><USER12> Not you, just some general person who believes "self monitoring" is inherently a wrong thing to do.

I probably should have used "one" instead of "you" in my above comment. My apologies. Will modify it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> FYI: The linked article about Radical Honesty by A.J. Jacobs is hilarious.

[http://www.esquire.com/news- politics/a26792/honesty0707/](http://www.esquire.com/news- politics/a26792/honesty0707/)

</comment><comment><USER14> In other words, zero BS tolerance is not an excuse to just talk all the time.</comment>


Herd Immunity Seems to Be Developing in Mumbai's Poorest Areas - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-28/u-s-cases-rise-1-trump-defends-malaria-drug-virus-update <comment><USER2> [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/herd- immu...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/herd-immunity- seems-to-be-developing-in-mumbai-s-poorest-areas)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I had correctly predicted that India would reach the highest number of growing cases someday because of the slums and density of Mumbai and Delhi. However, I did not see this coming where they would be the ones reaching herd immunity the quickest.</comment>


BitTorrent Has More Users Than Netflix and Hulu Combined--and Doubled - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/1714001/bittorrent-swells-to-100-million-users

<comment><USER2> Forget about paid vs ads vs free for a moment. One is a technology that lets people all over the world share many types of files, legal and illegal, versus two US-only services with a limited selection of TV and movies.

I fail to see how this is a meaningful statistic in any way. How many "users" does FTP have versus Netflix?

<comment><USER3> I pay for video games and I pay for music (my entire library for both is all paid for) but I pirate movies because it's impossible for me to watch them with ease, I'm in England and don't know of any service that lets me pay to stream movies on my PC :(

<comment><USER4> I don't get it. Since when is "They don't provide it in the format I want it" a valid excuse for piracy. (Ethical discussions of piracy aside)

If you want to download it because that is the format/medium you prefer then download it (from bit torrent or whatever) and then afterwards _go and pay for it_ by buying the DVD even if you never watch it.

(If you are going to pirate and claim it's ethical, you need a more reasoned argument for it's validity)

(Perhaps technically a grey area yes, but you are saying you are willing to pay, so why not pay?)

Perhaps even better would be to download it, and then send a letter + payment to the studio and explain that you wanted to pay for their excellent film but also wanted to download it for convenience. If enough people did this it might encourage them to provide the service you want.

<comment><USER3> oh it's not a valid excuse for piracy, piracy is always wrong but it's an explanation of why I pirate. I do buy films and TV shows when I can (I paid $80 for a boxset of The Wire last week (excellent show btw)) but often I can't find the films I want in store so my choice is to either go without or pirate. I have no problem paying, but the availability is a problem. If there were a service that I could pay for and stream movies when I wanted to and they were available I'd have no problem paying for and using.

For example, last week I wanted to watch the latest Season of Dexter which had just finished, I'd have had no problem paying for it but I couldn't, it's not available, so I pirated it.

<comment><USER4> So you think piracy is wrong, but you still do it anyway.

As you seem to be willing to pay, why not pay? Just post a cheque to the publisher, or by the DVD later when it comes out.

I'm guessing the answer is convenience. I suppose that makes sense.

<comment><USER5> Because the price of the DVD reflects a whole different set of cost than digital distribution, and doesn't provide any incentive to the movie industry to do get with the programme and license their movies to digital media distribution hubs like netflix. I;m tired of seeing the same old movies touted on netflix streaming as 'new' simply because the movie industry cannot figure out a licensing arrangement...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Users are deciding between all of these services? I think it's more like the smart savy (and not so ethical/less well off, if you will) users use all of these services while the better off don't care to shell out the money and not deal with the hassle or just don't even know about the alternative.

This is a silly comparison in the first place, BitTorrent isn't just used for television shows/mainstream movies. Of course it's going to have more users...

<comment><USER7> > and not so ethical

Sharing content hardly involves ethics. It's more about economy.

EDIT:

What I meant is, it's not ethically wrong per se; it's only considered bad because it's bad for the economy in the long run.

I wanted to make a point. Defending that point would take essays, which I'm not in the mood to write right now.

Refer to RMS's essays:

<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html>

<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/reevaluating-copyright.html>

The only 'questionable' act involved in sharing is violating copyright. I don't think of that as a crime or even as an ethically questionable act.

<comment><USER3> > _What I meant is, it's not ethically wrong per se; it's only considered bad > because it's bad for the economy in the long run._

Not really. It's ethically wrong because the creators and distributors of the content want to charge money for it and by pirating you're refusing to pay for it. If they wanted you to dance for it, or send a photo of you wearing a hat, it would still be ethically wrong to pirate it and there'd be no effect on the economy.

<comment><USER7> You read my post and replied to it without my permission. I want you to send me a photo of you wearing a hat, with a sign saying "I'm really sorry".

/sarcasm

<comment><USER3> I don't see your point, sarcasm or otherwise.

<comment><USER8> The creators / owners of copyright have only artificial, legal ways of making you pay for the content. There is no moral or ethical reason to pay for the content. It's equivalent to saying _You read my post and replied to it without my permission. I want you to send me a photo of you wearing a hat, with a sign saying "I'm really sorry"._ They have no real claim to that.

<comment><USER9> This depends on how much you believe in moral-relativity. There is a concept of ownership and rights (sometimes legally defined) associated with IP. Disregarding those rights can be seen as unethical. There is no precedence in our culture saying that you have the right to disallow comments on your IP, which is why your example is not considered unethical.

To take your example to an extreme, is it unethical to trespass on someone's property? Is it unethical to look at someone's property from the street? Our concept of ownership would suggest that the former is unethical, the latter is not, but is that just because we have artificial ideas of ownership?

My ethical system includes IP ownership. I think it is unethical to use GPL code without releasing the source, for example.

<comment><USER8> I have heard that it's different in other countries, but the system in the USA is pretty clear that IP is a legal construct, and is only used as an incentive, not an inherent right. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8: [http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_trans...](http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html)

James Madison, who wrote most of the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson, who wrote most of the Declaration of Independence (and who were both later elected to the office of President), thought that IP had no basis in reality. <http://classicliberal.tripod.com/madison/detached4.html> and [http://press- pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12....](http://press- pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12.html)

<comment><USER9> Just because US law defines IP as an incentive not an inherent right doesn't mean that culturally it's only a incentive.

You have poorly defined what "ethical" means. So far the only clarification you have made is that legal and ethical are too different things. Some people disagree and define "ethical" as "law-abiding" which means that copyright infringement is unethical.

To be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that there is a degree of relativism to your statement. Just because you don't think that copyright infringement is unethical doesn't mean that people who do are wrong.

I'm not really a proponent of moral-relativism but ultimately I have to accepted that ethics are a human construct and as such disagreement will arise over its precise definition. For example, I think eating meat is unethical but most people don't. Does that make me wrong?

<comment><USER8> I'm just using "ethical" to contrast things that would be wrong no matter what the law says. Breaking the law is unethical - that's why we don't need a "Rule 1: Don't break the rules." Stealing would be unethical even if there were no law. But copying something without the author's permission isn't unethical except when the law says so.

<comment><USER9> Ah, I see what you mean but I disagree with your premise - I think that IP is an ethical gray area and that copyright infringement can be unethical absent the law/economics. I think it would be unethical for a programmer in a country that doesn't recognize the GPL to use GPL'd code in a proprietary product, for example, because they would be going against the expressed [reasonable] wishes of the content creator.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Global market vs. north american centric services. Also, there's obviously a lot more going on in the entire bittorrent ecosystem than just video. Considering the respective market sizes, i'm surprised bittorent's total reach isn't 50x.

Bittorrent Inc. wasn't trying to make any of those points though, they were just trying to say hey look at how huge our reach is! Except that reach will be considerably diminished as soon as you're taking money (or charging it) to promote some content to your users.

Personally, I think P2P is a non-issue in the future of content delivery. Bandwidth is cheap and getting cheaper and torrents provide a significantly lower performance and less reliable channel than hosted servers. I am loathe to use torrents even to pirate content, I'll be damned if I want to pay for it and let you abuse my outbound too.

</comment><comment><USER11> And yet in the U.S. Netflix consumes over twice the bandwidth that Bittorrent does. So either Netflix users use the service a lot more or they download bigger files.

[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/the-internet-belongs- to...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/the-internet-belongs-to- netflix/265)

Is Bittorrent perhaps including in its statistics all the programs that use their protocol to distribute software updates? IIRC, both Steam and World of Warcraft use Bittorrent behind the scenes.

<comment><USER12> You're comparing Netflix US users against global Bittorrent users.

Netflix likely has a large chunk of _US_ users. And likely streams a larger portion of the content in HD.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> "BitTorrent is available in 52 languages with 'clients checking in from over 220 countries every day.'"

Wow, a service available world wide, is twice the size of two that are US- only, one of which is not free.

Big surprise.

</comment><comment><USER13> Speaking as a person not living in the US, I'd _gladly_ pay to get to this content legally.

Unfortunately that's not possible. Most of the content isn't available and if it is, it's usually only available in a crappy german translation.

These artificial barriers should probably be factored in before doing such calculations.

<comment><USER14> In countries like Germany or France, films are simply doubled. Elsewhere, they are subtitled. However, very few cinemas outside English-speaking countries (none that I know of) actually show the film with no doubles or subtitles (as it's meant to be watched if you speak the language).

<comment><USER15> It's 'dubbed' not 'doubled'.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> That's a completely useless statistic. What's the _trend_ here? Intuitively, the fact that Netflix and Hulu have around half the users of BT seems like _good_ news for streaming providers, since BT's been around for a lot longer.

<comment><USER17> I was kind of thinking the same thing. I would have figured the number would have been more like 10:1 or 20:1 (in favor of bittorrent).

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Are we talking about BitTorrent.com or the protocol here ? I'm confused.

</comment><comment><USER14> What is amazing is a service that has comparable numbers of users and bandwidth to the bittorrent network. A river half the size of the Amazon is still a mighty river.

</comment><comment><USER19> Filesharing: It Just Works.

Someday, the content providers will understand this and focus on providing a better, cheaper service to their customers.

<comment><USER20> What specifically can Hulu do better? The only thing I can think of is dropping ads for paid users.

<comment><USER21> One specific thing off the top of my head is I can't copy videos from Hulu to my mp3 player to watch offline at a later date.</comment></comment></comment>


Just in Time for the Election: An Asteroid? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/23/science/asteroid-election-meteor.html <comment><USER2> This title looks very hungry for your clicks. Here is a better and more honest title that summarizes the actual content:

 _Very tiny Asteroid unlikely to hit Earth in November._

Saved you a click without using irrelevant baited words such as 'Election', removed the sensationalism and fearmongering introduced by the author.

Have a nice day :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you, but Hacker News policy is to use the original, actual title. If the mods choose to, they change it.

Thanks. I hope you have a nice day, too!</comment></comment>


Your CV as an Infographic (using LaTeX) - <AUTHOR> https://www.overleaf.com/articles/infographics-cv/hdgkztmhztph <comment><USER2> As a designer/hiring manager, I will be the first to say please do not use this infographic.

It lacks really basic information hierarchy and the type choices are really hard to read. Another thing is a lot of companies use software to pull out information from resumes and create a database, this makes it really hard to pull the info.

Resumes should be clear and concise. They should highlight your accomplishments and peak the interest of the recruiter or manager. This teeters on the line of, pass or instant fail.

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice graphic and template. I don't think this is a CV, but maybe there is a European/American difference in what that means.

<comment><USER4> As an American who reviews resumes to hire others, it looks pretty much standard with regards to content. How does the typical European CV differ?

<comment><USER5> I'm Canadian but I can tell you it's common here to use CV and resume as synonyms when in fact a CV is not the same thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I love to see creative uses for (La)TeX. The infographic looks really quite slick. Kudos.

<comment><USER6> Anti-typographic: it confuses the reader and slows the search of crucial information.

CV is literally the flow of your life, so it is better presented as a flow of experiences as the majority of the data.

When I read latex I expect typographic clarity. Because typography is hard and still the best way to improve reading speed and clarity.

<comment><USER5> Not sure what you mean by anti-typographic. Do you disagree with the choice of fonts?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to focus and find information quickly. It's quite a distracting template.</comment>