Hn-Gopher: Hacker News Over the Gopher Protocol - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/michael-lazar/hn-gopher <comment><USER2> This is fabulous, of course, but it's a quasidupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310291](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310291), and we definitely don't want more than one meta submission on the front page at the same time.

I suggest reposting it in a month or so. Gopher is immortal, after all.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmmm, I didn't really see this one as "meta", since is a singular GH project. It wasn't listed in the other story, either. Seems kind of harsh to kill it but okay...

<comment><USER2> It isn't only the meta aspect but also that it's a piggyback submission, i.e. a spinoff of another. Those tend to get upvotes and diminish variety on the front page. Since front page slots are HN's scarcest resource and the hivemind thrives on variety, we usually moderate follow-up submissions pretty firmly. A better place for correlated links is within the primary thread, where indeed this one is happily situated.

Once everyone's mental caches have turned over a few times, this will make a nice submission in its own right.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I miss gopher, probably somewhat like folks a little older than me might say they miss dial-in BBS's. All sorts of interesting and arcane content you could find, from a myriad of sources.

Nowadays the most varied content seems to come from only a handful of sources.

<comment><USER4> Looking at how simple the protocol actually is, I find it hard to believe this protocol actually died because of copyright claims. The structured menu system is certainly something the modern web could use, especially now more and more people are relying on mobile devices. But I could do without the 3270 support :)

Also funny to note we can find discussions dating back to pre-2000 where people rant over how "bloated" the web has become and how we should go back to gopher.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Finally something that has "gopher" in the name and is actually about the gopher protocol.

I've seen a dozen or so submission here in the last year that had "gopher" in the name but where actually about golang.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is actually a really nice way to read HN. I just tried it in Emacs with [https://github.com/ardekantur/gopher.el](https://github.com/ardekantur/gopher.el) and it seems to work well!

</comment><comment><USER7> Something happened to me recently when I was attempting to browse a Gopher site via Firefox...I opened the site, and that site opened another tab to the same site, and so on recursively every ~200mS or so until my computer's RAM was saturated. I had to force terminate Firefox. It was funny because it reminded me of the type of malicious WaReZ that you would see in the 90s.

<comment><USER8> I also had this happen trying to open a PDF in Firefox recently.

<comment><USER9> It will happen if:

      about:preferences#applications ->
        Portable Document Format (PDF) ->
          Use firefox

is set. A fix is to set

      about:preferences#applications ->
        Portable Document Format (PDF) ->
          Preview in firefox

The problem can be caused (in Ubuntu 16.04) by selecting Firefox as the system default for PDF viewing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> source: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15313113](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15313113)

> NuSkooler: _Don 't forget HN over Gopher: gopher://hngopher.com:70/_

on "Different ways to read Hacker News" | [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310291](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310291)

</comment><comment><USER11> works like a charm, though the last update was too old for me to get to read this discussion via Gopher.

<comment><USER12> Don't see the reason why it's not a live proxy

<comment><USER11> Could be something with how Gopher is effective a file transfer protocol.

Meaning that each entry shown is either a file or a directory.

Thus i am guessing the scarper takes each discussion and convert that into individual text files to be delivered over Gopher, rather than have a custom Gopher server that generates the files on access.

<comment><USER13> There's no reason why it coudn't be a live site. A live version would require a custom gopher server though, and it looks like they're using Gophernicus. So what they're doing would be analogous to serving static files with NGINX but having the files updated periodically.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Ski U Mah!</comment>


Mage: a make/rake-like build tool using Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/magefile/mage <comment><AUTHOR> Mage was born of my frustration with people using Makefiles to build Go projects. Makefiles are not cross platform compatible (good luck running them on Windows without jumping through some hoops), they have significant whitespace, they are generally written in bash, with added idiosyncratic syntax on top of an already idiosyncratic syntax...

So I made Mage. Mage tries to take the best parts of Makefiles (dependency trees, ease of execution, partially self-documenting code) and rework it to run with a better programming language (go).

It's still a work in progress, but I think it's in a very good initial state. It lets you declare targets and dependencies and it'll resolve the dependnecies into a tree that'll run them from leaf to root in parallel, all executing exactly once.

It doesn't have file targets yet, but that is on the docket, along with helpers to make writing code that executes commands in go less ugly.

Let me know what you think.</comment>


A World Made of Rotor Blades - <AUTHOR> http://www.notechmagazine.com/2015/02/a-world-made-of-rotor-blades.html

<comment><USER2> I was initially sceptical, but these ideas seem like genuinely sensible uses for old turbine blades. The bus shelter in particular seems rather appealing.

I'm reminded of the use of crumb rubber from recycled tyres as a paving material. Rubberised asphalt is an excellent material for many applications, but would be largely uneconomic without the supply of very inexpensive rubber from discarded tyres. These structures made from repurposed turbine blades may not be ideal, but they may make a great deal of sense if the raw material is basically free.

<comment><USER3> Isn't there some concern over the chemicals which can leach out into the environ from recycled tires (crumb rubber) Concerns over impact on human health. Or is that concern misplaced?

<comment><USER4> You're not eating the rubber and by the time the tires have made their way to recycling I would expect basically all the volatiles would have offgased. The MSDS [1] would suggest the biggest risk is breathing the fumes caused by burning or rubbing the crumbs in your eyes and scratching your cornea. While there are trace amounts of naphthalene, I imagine its more an issue for those involved in the manufacture than those people playing on a playground padded with it.

[1] [http://edge.rit.edu/edge/P11413/public/Crumb%20Rubber%20MSDS](http://edge.rit.edu/edge/P11413/public/Crumb%20Rubber%20MSDS)

<comment><USER3> I thinks it's too early to tell if there is or isn't a danger. Preliminary studies in controlled environs have not found cause for much concern, but others are calling for more rigorous examination. Personally I dont think there has been enough research taking into account people playing multiple hours a day on these surfaces, so id rather see more studies into exposure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It all seems rather desperate to me and unimaginative (children will love climbing over it!). This is not a structural way of disposing of these blades, it's a public relations effort.

For me, at least, it's not working.

<comment><USER6> I agree. This seems like a "solution" completely out of proportion with the scale of the problem

<comment><USER7> The solution of using old rotor blades as structural material seems not badly suited to the scale of the problem. The global market for cheap lightweight and strong structural elements is far larger than the amount of rotor blades needing recycled. Just working out a nice design for an agricultural barn would probably cover it.

Also, modification for re-use is generally far less energy intensive than full recycling, even if it were currently available.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Reminds me of this 747-200 'Wing House' in malibu

[http://www.ilikearchitecture.net/2014/01/wing-house-david- he...](http://www.ilikearchitecture.net/2014/01/wing-house-david-hertz- architects-and-the-studio-of-environmental-architecture/)

<comment><USER9> Interesting article. I liked this part:

> Although, David Hertz Architects did find out that the studio has to > register the roof of the house with the FAA (Federal Aviation > Administration) so pilots flying overhead do not mistake it as a downed > aircraft.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Materials are not good or bad in itself, they have just different properties that are weighted by the 'architect' when choosing a material:

\- some more objective (resistance, durability, toxicity, etc)

\- some more subjective (costs, fashionability, desirability, commissions.., etc)

In this specific case, the material was imposed, changing the 'game': material comes first than the function and reaching an optimal solution is normally more difficult. Optimal solutions are almost never obvious and while there isn't one, 'architects' use some temporary/obvious solutions like this one.

 _What constitutes true creativity is the openness and adaptability of our spirit - Robert Green_

</comment><comment><USER11> Can these blades not be shredded and chopped up, and the resulting fibers used in less-critical parts, like aftermarket auto hoods, swimming pools, etc? Using a process like the fiberglass spray lay-up, with a chopper gun.

<comment><USER12> Not a materials person, but wouldn't shredding and chopping leave you with small fragments of fibers encased in resin. Fiber length is important to the strength, and I'm not sure how well new resin would bond with cured resin. I'd think the result would be much, much weaker.

Chopped mat fibers would also defeat the purpose of carbon fiber in aftermarket auto parts, which is to be pretty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Carbon fiber dust is nasty stuff, something like asbestos. It can not even go to landfill, so lets make children playgrounds out of that. Lovely.

<comment><USER14> From what I understand, carbon fiber is not directly exposed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> So much for renewables not creating pollution.

</comment><comment><USER16> sounds to me we need to find a better material to make them from if their lifespan is as short as it is let alone their disposal is such an issue.

so why is their service life so much shorter than some planes have had? Seems the idea behind their structure should not be too far off.

<comment><USER17> I'm confused. Why do you think that planes have a longer lifespan?

I mean, I assume we're talking about plane propellers here, right? Not airframes or something? Are you sure that a plane would fly with the same blades for more than the cited 10-25 years?

<comment><USER18> It's been a while, but I used to work with some folks who performed maintenance on helicopters that had composite rotor blades - and they were constantly being inspected and sent back to the manufacturer.

Perhaps it's different in the civilian aerospace world, but I don't think it's sensible to expect those blades to last as long as the airframe.

<comment><USER19> The lifetime of _composite rotor blades_ is shorter than metal based rotor blades that were used in older generations of helicopters.

Example:

The B0 105 helicopter is cleared for up to 3.5 positive G force and one negative. Its agility and responsiveness can be partly attributed to its rigid rotor blade design, a feature uncommon on competing helicopters.

The rotor system is entirely hingeless, the rotor head consisting of a solid titanium block to which the four blades are bolted; the flexibility of the rotor blades works to absorb movements typically necessitating hinges in most helicopter rotor designs. The reliability of the advanced rotor system is that, in over six million operating hours across the fleet, there had been a total of zero failures. One benefit of the Bo 105's handling and control style is superior takeoff performance, including significant resistance to catastrophic dynamic rollover; a combination of weight and the twin-engined configuration enables a rapid ascent in a performance takeoff.

The MBB Bo 105 is the only heli cleared for acrobatic stunt flight and is the work horse of "Flying Bulls" (Red Bull).

Source: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBB_Bo_105](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBB_Bo_105)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> We could just bury the blades under Yucca Mountain. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_r...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_repository)

</comment><comment><USER21> That's like a new kind of LEGO for grownups. Someone should try to make a game where you can reuse such pieces, carve them, and then place them on top of existing google/bing/other maps.

Social Blades...</comment>


Twitter's new own analytics dashboard - <AUTHOR> https://analytics.twitter.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> I wonder why they disabled it after enabling for a very short time.</comment>


Amazon, Kickstarter, Reddit, Mozilla are staging a net neutrality online protest - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/06/06/amazon-kickstarter-reddit-and-mozilla-are-staging-a-net-neutrality-online-protest/ <comment><USER2> It's a nice gesture, but will it accomplish anything?

It's only a matter of time before people get priced out of the web. It will either need to be re-hauled and classified as basic utility - or a new alternative will have to be introduced.

The internet is no longer a luxury. It is mandatory and should be treated as such.</comment>


Ask HN: Angular 2 or React? - <AUTHOR> I know angular 1.x, is it worth to study angular 2 or should I go with react? <comment><USER2> Why not both? And some Vue.js too maybe.

</comment><comment><USER3> They're both good. Learn whichever is more appropriate for your projects.

</comment><comment><USER4> React was easier to learn,for me.</comment>


Ask YC: Filter out RSS noise by keyword - <AUTHOR>

Our world changes so quickly that RSS is almost a necessary evil.
However, even with a quality news vertical news aggregator (like YC news), there are many articles that are simply not interesting to me.
EG: If I ever see a post about twitter or facebook again, it'll be too soon.
Is there an RSS filter that I could use in front of say, my google reader feed, to filter out articles tha that contain certain keywords like "twitter" or "facebook" in the title / content?
Secondly, I get a lot of dupes (maybe from direct subscriptions and aggregators, like news.yc).
Wouldn't it be great if I could also filter dupes?
Does anyone know of such a service, or would anyone be interested in making one?
I'd love this RSS filter, but don't have time to write it myself... <comment><USER2> Checkout Feedity (shameless plug ;) - <http://feedity.com> with Yahoo Pipes or FilterMyRss.com

<comment> mark-t Yahoo! pipes does seem to offer the desired functionality. My first impression, though, is that the interface is too mouse heavy (admittedly my main complaint about everything that requires the mouse). I should be able to create a filter without drawing a circuit diagram. And I worry that I won't be able to keep using it without having to tell Yahoo! my password every other week.

<http://www.filtermyrss.com> looks much more to my liking, although it's a bit low on features. My feeling is that it's about a 10 line perl script: fetch xml with LWP, apply regex, print.

I've actually been looking for something like feedity, but I need control over the code, since I'd want to use it for sites that require authentication. However, my feeling's that this one's about a 20 line perl script with LWP and Algorithm::Diff, so it's not a big deal.

Maybe I'll combine them into a 30 line perl script and get rich!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I use Yahoo Pipes and created a pipe with 20 sources to show only posts with Australia and .com.au. pic here: <http://webfuel.info/p.png>

</comment><comment><USER4> I'll release a solution to this problem (among others) in a month or so. If you are interested, drop me a line on my username at gmail.

</comment><comment><USER5> the thing about Yahoo Pipes [from my experience] is that it only refreshes a couple times a day, so a feed could sit for hours before it's fetched through your pipe. Urg.

</comment><comment><USER6> Yahoo Pipes</comment>


Show HN: Hoodie App is Men's Clothing in Two Taps - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/hoodie-mens-clothing-in-two/id822613531?mt=8 <comment><USER2> I have a hard time believing there is a large group of people that are this lazy as well as careless with money that they would use this for their clothing.

> All purchases are final, absolutely no returns will be accepted. We're both > too lazy to deal with that.

To me, that just sounds like you don't even care about the customer. But that could just be me as I actually do care about being happy with something I've bought with my own money.

I just don't see this as something that will take off. Especially as men are becoming more fashion aware.

<comment><USER3> > Especially as men are becoming more fashion aware.

That's a fairly broad generalisation about men. Different people care about different things. Some are happy to wear anything comfortable, some care about the choice.

There may be a big enough niche for people who really don't care about clothes as long as they aren't bad. I would happily do that for food for example... I know many people care deeply about food and like to cook, but if someone let me just exclude food I hate and shipped a randomised meal every day at a reasonable price, I'd be a happy customer.

<comment><USER4> > I know many people care deeply about food and like to cook, but if someone > let me just exclude food I hate and shipped a randomised meal every day at a > reasonable price, I'd be a happy customer.

[https://campaign.soylent.me/soylent-free-your- body](https://campaign.soylent.me/soylent-free-your-body)

Yes, I know, not exactly randomized meals. Baby steps.

<comment><USER5> Do you mean cooked or just the ingredients and what would be a fair price to you? I'm building a product in this space and am interested in your thoughts.

<comment><USER3> Cooked, ready. I see the whole preparing/eating process as a waste of time every day. Fair price? I guess slightly above the "ready meal" boxes from supermarkets, but also a bit higher quality.

I never heard of gobble before and quite like the idea. The only thing I'd ask for (can't see it on their overview) is define the ingredient likes/dislikes rather than cuisine style. So something like "shellfish: not at all; beans: great; ...".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Hi from [https://www.twotap.com](https://www.twotap.com) :) You can enable this for 100+ retailers -- [https://twotap.com/supported- stores](https://twotap.com/supported-stores) \-- with full return support too.

<comment><USER7> Will you be enforcing your trademark?

<comment><USER6> Minimally (i.e. small logo).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This seems like something that will only work for someone who views clothing as 100% utilitarian and does not care about how they look. The sizing, fit, and style aspects are really hard to do right for clothing where people care about their style and other players seem to have shipping basics on-demand nailed down. (e.g. MeUndies, ManPacks - although none seem to have a mobile app so maybe you can just compete on user acq. in that channel)

1\. I don't know of any brand of jeans that sells for $40-80 that fits well and looks good. (I'd say Flint & Tinder is the closest and they come in at $105)

2\. How do you size tees, tee sizing varies widely across brands? How does jean sizing work, are the jeans bootcut, straight leg, slim straight? (you also have 35's as a waist size which basically nobody but Bonobos produces)

3\. Are you matching the shoes to my style somehow (or the other clothes you are sending) or are they just some random pair of shoes?

4\. How are undershirts and t-shirts different?

5\. Are you shipping me sneakers or shoes? If shoes are they oxfords? desert boots? something else? If anything but sneakers are you shipping dress socks to go with them or are you still shipping athletic socks?

<comment><USER9>
      I don't know of any brand of jeans that sells for $40-80 that fits well and looks good. (I'd say Flint & Tinder is the closest and they come in at $105)

I know HN's not the place for fashion advice but shop at Uniqlo. High quality affordable Japanese denim with free hemming on-site.

<comment><USER10> 20Jeans is also good and has fairly high quality clothes. Most of the Jeans are in the $20-30 range.

<comment><USER8> Interesting! Those actually look really nice (the $65 ones).

Looks like another brand that only enables this pricing by going direct-to- consumer though. Unfortunately that makes them impossible to buy from as a 3rd party reseller (their model doesn't support markups wholesalers would need so these kind of companies generally do not sell to wholesalers)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Those prices are about 3x what I would normally pay for basic, casual clothing. I'm from Cincinnati though, so perhaps everything is a lot more expensive elsewhere, or maybe I'm just really cheap.

I don't like shopping much, but if I'm not being picky, it doesn't take very long to get in and out of a store, so even disregarding the price, this isn't that appealing to me. It might be more appealing if the app promised to make me look good without the effort of shopping. Just because I'm feeling lazy doesn't mean I want the person picking out my clothing to be lazy too. Keep the simplicity of the app, but go the extra mile for me. Take my sizes, but also get my age, a few snapshots, my general taste in clothing, and then really tailor your picks to me. That's something I might pay a premium for.

<comment><USER12> Maybe try Bombfell? [http://www.bombfell.com/](http://www.bombfell.com/)

It's too expensive for me, but they do what you describe.

<comment><USER11> That looks almost exactly like what I was describing. Thanks for pointing it out.

I would probably be willing to try it except for the fact that it's subscription based. If I forget to cancel my subscription after the first month (which I will) I will either end up with more clothing than I want or the hassle of having to return the clothing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wait so you can't buy hoodies? Uninstalled.

</comment><comment><USER14> So...

* No way to edit sizes

* No way to go back

* Login doesn't save credentials.

* No hoodie

* No sizes for shirts

So, basically, an app built in a weekend. Grats on that, but you really need to put more work into it. It's still fairly raw, and the lack of quality pretty much doesn't instill much trust in paying for things that are fairly high in price for something I "hate" to shop for.

<comment><AUTHOR> Indeed, it's an early version, and really appreciate your feedback on what you'd like to see. Thanks!

<comment><USER14> I like the idea. I just think it needs work. As such I've left the app installed. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hit the link from this on my phone. It sends me to the App Store but never loads (I'm in NZ - I suspect I can't get the app). Double tap back to the HN app and it loads and instantly redirects back to the non-loading App Store. Had to force quit the HN app to get out of the nasty loop.

</comment><comment><USER16> Pretty interesting idea, good luck! Customer service and returns are pretty important though.

</comment><comment><USER17> can we Show HN the actual web site vs. an app?

[http://gethoodie.com/](http://gethoodie.com/) \- offline

<comment><AUTHOR> woop, fixed thanks.</comment></comment>


Editing with Tor - <AUTHOR> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editing_with_Tor

<comment><USER2> If you're not familiar with the scale of the vandalism problem on Wikipedia: take whatever your intuitive sense of how much vandalism that one of the most popular sites on the Internet would see if every page on the site included an "edit" button, and then raise it to the power of some positive integer greater than 1.

It's an exaggeration, but only slightly, to say that Wikipedia's core mission is to hold back a giant torrent of vandalism.

<comment><USER3> The people that just want to change something in an article to 'poop' aren't going to try to use tor to vandalize and the professional vandals would find it too slow (except for making malicious usernames or sleeper accounts) and generally don't have a problem using other proxies or botnet hosts.

I'm sure there is some group of people that would like to do something nefarious on wikipedia that are stopped by blocking tor, but I personally think it would more often be someone wanting to sockpuppet rather than vandalize. A few checkusers always pop up to mention that they see tor as a sewage pipe, but making their job easier does not mean the encyclopedia is better off and they would see a strongly biased sample.

<comment><USER2> Vandalism, sockpuppetry, two sides of the same 50-sided die.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> How easy is it to get ahold of a list of Tor exit nodes? In a nightmare scenario, would wikimedia's list of blocked IPs be something an oppressive government might covet?

<comment><USER5> The list is already public. There are many mirrors of it, for example, this one: <http://dannenberg.ccc.de/tor/server/all>

Knowing that open proxies have been a source of problems for e.g. IRC and email services, the designers of Tor intentionally made it technically impossible to hide an exit node to help mitigate the potential for abuse.

<comment><USER6> There are so many things wrong with this comment I do not know where to begin.

"The list is already public" is the understatement of the year. If the list was not public it would be impossible for clients to build a circuit.

"There are many mirrors of it" is the runner up for understatement of the year. Every running instance of tor has the capability to publish the list of exit nodes.

I am not going to pretend to understand anonymous mixes as well as arma, Nick and Paul and I would like to suggest that you do the same. The designers of tor did not make it "technically impossible to hide an exit node to help mitigate the potential for abuse."

It is "technically impossible to hide the exit node list" because without the list clients would not be able to build functioning circuits. But don't take my word for it:

"We can't help but make the information available, since Tor clients need to use it to pick their paths. So if the "blockers" want it, they can get it anyway. Further, even if we didn't tell clients about the list of relays directly, somebody could still make a lot of connections through Tor to a test site and build a list of the addresses they see." [1]

Two of the other sides of tptacek's 50 sided die are censorship resistance and abuse resistance. Anonymity is hard enough as it is. Do everyone a favor and refrain from telling us what arma, nick and paul intended...

[1] [https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TorFAQ#You...](https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TorFAQ#YoushouldhidethelistofTorrelayssopeoplecantblocktheexits).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you are interested in these types of problems the Freenode IRC network had some tricky challenges with tor and user access.

<comment><USER7> I believe they solved this by forcing users to identify if they want to login through tor, isn't it?

The account needs to have been created through non-tor means (ie, normal SSL). So they can still ban the creator if someone abuses the network.

I think it's a pretty good, practical solution to a very hard problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> [http://www.iq.harvard.edu/blog/sss/archives/2011/07/detectin...](http://www.iq.harvard.edu/blog/sss/archives/2011/07/detecting_edit.shtml)

</comment><comment><USER9> This is also why 4chan blocks all access from Tor nodes. The only people who use 4chan from Tor are people posting CP and/or evading their ban.

<comment><USER10> And since they block even visitors from Tor I do not ever visit it. I would not go near that site without protecting my identity/privacy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Odd how it mentions softblocks in the theoretical sense since they have been around for years.

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't get it. Why is this posted?

<comment><USER12> Because it's an interesting discussion of how a large site deals with a difficult problem.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Get an SMS when the Apple Developer Center comes back - <AUTHOR> http://dev-center-notifier.herokuapp.com

<comment><USER2> Awesome. Can't believe the dev center is still down.

</comment><comment><USER3> so someone want to collect phone numbers of apple developers around the world ;)</comment>


New "Shingled" Hard Drives Hold Terabytes for Pennies a Gig - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/10/new-shingled-hard-drives-hold-terabytes-for-pennies-a-gig/ <comment><USER2> I can't seem to see the benefits of this, considering a regular 4TB HDD seems to go for ~$140-150[1].

I could understand if speeds were similar or prices or way lower compared to a traditional HDD, but is it really worth the extra SATA connector you'd gain?

Besides, I'd personally take the risk of loosing 4TB at once instead of 8.

1\. [http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=22-236-604](http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=22-236-604)</comment>


Why aren't there any Open Source laser printers? - <AUTHOR> http://www.arbitraryuser.com/blog/2011/08/05/open-source-printing/ <comment><USER2> Actually, a lot of the PostScript clones use GhostScript internally. (I know Epson does or did, in their lasers.) So a major part of his idea has already been done.

Back when I was involved in the laser printer business (at the beginning, in 1980, where we (Imagen, a Stanford TeX project spin-off) built the first typesetting-quality low-end laser printers), the main bugaboo was avoiding the PostScript licensing cost. (I think Adobe charged $100's of dollars per printer, depending on quantities sold.) We built a clone ourselves, but some of the big hardware manufacturers just licensed GhostScript cheaply from L. Peter Deutch. (Of Berkeley/PARC/ParcPlace fame, one of the great hackers.)

Peter first wrote GhostScript on a lark, just to see how hard it could be (not hard for him ;-), then it became serious when he realized the demand for such a product. (He released slightly older versions as OSS and licensed the bleeding-edge version commercially.)

</comment><comment><USER3> One of RMS's motivations for GNU was frustration at a closed-source printer _driver_ ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Decline_of_MIT...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Decline_of_MIT.27s_hacker_culture)). Given the challenges involved (patents, proprietary protocols, programmer tools), you could view a quest to build the perfect printer as a microcosm of the Free Software movement.

</comment><comment><USER4> Disclaimer: I'm speaking in no way for my employer, who built the laser printer in question.

We've put a generation's worth of engineering into our printers and have a huge supply chain advantage so for any price point you pick it would be very hard to build a competitive laser printer, since printer manufacturers typically take a very large loss on each unit sold.

But that's not really the question here - on my homebrew projects I usually don't try to be cost competitive, it's about the learning, fun and pride in the finished project.

I think the main reason there aren't any open source printers is that the refill/counterfeit ink and toner markets somewhat solve the problem of expensive supplies - you already get better hardware than you can build yourself and you can get cheap non-brand toner/ink.

<comment><USER5> The point of an OSS printer isn't just for cheap supplies. I'd love to hook a printer up to an email server so that I could send it PDFs and it would just print. If I had an OSS all-in-one printer, I'd probably hack the scanner to email me PDFs of documents that I scan from the ADF.

<comment><USER6> There's nothing to stop you trivially scripting either of these. I expect Thunderbird or Mail can run scripts on incoming email, so you could have a printing, archiving, grepping, forwarding email account, if you liked.

<comment><USER5> I want to run a server on the printer; not run the server on a PC that's hooked up to a printer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > If there was an Open Source printer and reference design for the cartridges, > reputable manufacturers could build those printers and cartridges and > reputable retailers could import them without fear of legal battles for a > fraction of the price. Most importantly, an Open Source designed cartridge > would almost certainly be designed from the ground up to be easy to refill > at home.

Which apparently happens by magic.

> Open Source Hardware creates a unique ecosystem. It is naturally > competitive, pushing prices down on consumables and making sure that people > pay for build and print quality rather than brands.

Right. That's the theory anyway, but "for some reason" (I'm sure somebody'll find a nice conspiracy theory) there's pretty much no open-source consumer hardware.

The question is this: what's the incentive? What's the incentive for a designer to create open-source hardware (open-source software requires time and a box worth a few dozens to hundred bucks, but that's pretty much it. Open-source hardware also requires potentially expensive machines and a serious investment in materials), and what's the incentive for a "reputable manufacturer" when he already makes money hand over fist with "proprietary" hardware? Why would that manufacturer (whether he's currently legit or counterfeit) drive his whole business (especially consumables) into the ground?

<comment><USER8> There's no conspiracy, it's all in the incentive.

Existing open source software was all pretty much designed to run on existing hardware. Free and open print specifications and interfaces couldn't run on existing hardware, and hardware R&D sort of requires substantial financial investment. It isn't really in the realm of your average hacker in his dimly lit home office at 3AM.

Hopefully the success of projects like Arduino will make free and open hardware standards a thing of the very near future, someday enabling us to develop complex machines using unencumbered hardware standards, but like you pointed out that just isn't today's reality.

The blog post describes an ambitious undertaking, and I think that's a good thing. It really is something that feels long overdue, given how obviously exploitive the current SOHO printing market is currently.

<comment><USER7> > There's no conspiracy, it's all in the incentive.

That's the subject of my comment, but I'm sure somebody will assert a conspiracy by "Big Printing".

> The blog post describes an ambitious undertaking

The blog post does not describe anything, the blog post asserts that 1. somebody should design and manufacture open-source printing hardware 2. Sprinkle fairy dust, rainbows and unicorns 3. Everything is awesome

And the starting point is mostly that TFAA thinks hardware is too expensive and obtaining counterfeit consumables is a pain.

<comment><USER8> The blog post asserts that these standards should exist, lists some non- obvious things that will need to be developed by someone, and makes a case for their potential profitability, albeit a weak one I'll grant you.

I don't understand why you're taking such a negative attitude with the suggestion. Not every blog post on the world-wide web is written with the intention of outlining the solution to the described problem, unless that's really what you're taking issue with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Actually it would seem a good idea, if someone could do this they could form a company around it, selling the printers. That's a nice aspect of open source hardware: unlike software, you can still make money off of instances.

Unfortunately it wouldn't work, because there's no way it would be able to compete price-wise with the massive economy of scale afforded by the big players in the industry.

<comment><USER10> Not sure, an open source 3D printer is already cheaper than most laser printers.

<comment><USER11> It's also got terrible resolution -- on the order of tens of DPI. It's slow. And it breaks down constantly. (I've heard the makerbot nicknamed the "breakerbot" thanks to it's constant failure).

Open source 3d printers are great hobbies. I love them, but they're certainly nowhere near production ready.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> _Printing is unreasonably expensive._

Huh? One can buy a laser printer for under $100, and print hundreds of pages with the included cartridge.

Also, the logic in this post would equally well apply to computers, cars, houses, pacemakers :-), whatever.

So, the main claim made here is "open source stuff is cheaper". From that, the question "why isn't everything open source?" follows. IMO, that discussion has been beaten to death multiple times.

<comment><USER13> Indeed. I would agree that _inkjet_ printing is unreasonably expensive (for text, can't get picky for photos). Laser printers are cheap as can be.

There's a trick to stretch the starter toner cartridge too, cover the optical window with tape or black it out with a sharpie. You typically get hundreds of more pages out of it (as someone who doesn't print much, it usually lasts years).

<comment><USER14> > _"Laser printers are cheap as can be."_

Not when you own a HP 2605dn.

[http://www.amazon.com/HP-LaserJet-Tri-Pack-Cartridges- CE257A...](http://www.amazon.com/HP-LaserJet-Tri-Pack-Cartridges- CE257A/dp/B001A27T4W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1312549822&sr=8-1)

And despite the fact that that is most of the purchase price of the machine when new, it does not include the black cartridge.

And yes there are alternatives, but this is the price the typical consumer sees.

<comment><USER15> Color lasers are still not at the consumer commodity level.

<comment><USER16> I disagree -- I'm very happy with Dell's 1320c, which I picked up from Amazon for not much more than £100 ($160) and has non-original cartridges available for about £12 ($20).

<comment><USER15> In the US, it seems like you can't get one on Amazon for less than $200. Not bad for a color laser, but B&W lasers are $100.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> hmm let me guess (and there's a hint in the article) ... us patents ? A quick research gives about 3757 patents concerning laser printing : [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sec...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch- bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=laser+printing&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PTXT) . Apart from the fact that there are still efforts to be made to have the same kind of "open source" activity in the hardware world imho.

<comment><USER18> In 1991 I had a lovely little Apple Laserwriter IIg networked laser printer. In the intervening 20 years all of the patents covering that device will have expired.

Surely some of the subsequent patents have been related to making the printer cheaper, so that could lead to a price disadvantage, but it should be possible to make a fine patented free laser printer.

(of the many printers I've had subsequently, none have performed as well in the "paper jam" and "mysteriously hung network printer" category. The IIg was unable to reliably feed 6x8 envelopes, but other than that was perfect.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is more a patent thing than anything to do with open source. Remove the stupid patents, get some competition.

<comment><USER20> Do you need a patent to build something privately?

Surely part of the point of patenting is that the solution is published?

<comment><USER21> It's the other way around, you'll probably need a license for _something_ to build a printer in private. Though since there are too many patents to read, you'll likely only know if you've infringed one once you release to the public and someone sues you.

<comment><USER22> > _you'll probably need a license for something to build a printer in private_

Absolutely not. That's half the point of patents, research and personal use are absolutely allowed. Commercial use is disallowed without a license and [sensible] licensing can be forced by recourse to the courts in most jurisdictions.

You can build the printer in private, you can't use it commercially or sell it.

<comment><USER21> Could you point me to a reference which says that? The best I can do straight off is Wikipedia:

US Law: _an infringement may occur where the defendant has made, used, sold, offered to sell, or imported an infringing invention or its equivalent._

UK Law (where I am): infringement occurs ... _by the making, disposing of, offering to dispose of, using, importing or keeping a patented product._

In both cases "making" counts as infringement, but IANAL, so those words may well have special meanings which I don't understand.

<comment><USER22> You've excised the first part of that line of 35 USC that says something to the effect of "not withstanding that set out elsewhere in this statute".

The UK SS60 does the same thing, "Subject to the provisions of this section" (SS60(1)) means that you have to read the whole part, even down to UKPA Section 60(5) which makes it clear that experiment and personal use are allowed (not withstanding bad caselaw to the contrary that someone may raise??).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> "smiling in disbelief that we all seem to happily pay their ridiculous prices and drink their kool-aid."

There seems to be plenty of competition and economies in printer manufacturing. As opposed to cable companies for example.

If I remember correctly the initial Apple Laserwriter or HP Laserjet cost about $8000 in today's dollars.

As others have mentioned I don't think the prices are outrageous at all. Additionally you can get a great used 65 page per minute HP printer that takes the high volume cartridges on ebay for < $350. (With postscript). (HP 4350 a great volume machine). The ink costs much less per page with the high volume machines and the used ones if properly vetted work great.

This is really ridiculous with respect to the cartridges:

"They do this purely to make money. The fact that they do this is clear evidence that they're ripping you off."

<comment><USER24> Why do you think this statement is ridiculous?

> "They do this purely to make money. The fact that they do this is clear > evidence that they're ripping you off."

It sounds pretty ironclad to me. I think it's even been established in court cases that manufacturers put chips in toner cartridges to create planned obsolescence and prevent recycling. Are you trying to invent some hairsplitting distinction between "create planned obsolescence and prevent recycling" and "ripping you off"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Who's printing anything much these days, by the way, unless you run some sort of a business? I'm down to maybe ten pages a year which I could do at the local library at 10 cents each if it weren't for ruthless abuse of my employer's printer. I've sometimes thought about buying one of the cheapo laser printers just to have one, but never got around to that because I just realized I haven't had a real, continued need for printing for maybe a decade.

<comment><USER26> I recently got a laser printer and use it to print circuit board layouts for etching (it needs to be toner).

The only actual paper stuff I've printed in the past year was contracts for signing and rescanning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Can anyone confirm that there are toner cartridges that stop working after a set number of pages? I thought this only applied to inkjets. My (10 year old) laser printer will happily print until the pages become unreadable - and then some more and some more after shaking the toner cartridge.

I think an open source laser printer would be an insanely cool hardware project. Although probably not cost effective due to the complexity, at least you would know exactly why the paper jams occur!

But you never know, the IP0X open source hardware project has had great success with getting chinese manufacturers to produce affordable hardware: <http://www.rowetel.com/blog/?page_id=440> some of which can compete with very expensive "mainstream" offerings.

<comment><USER28> I can confirm that Brother printers stop working even though the toner still prints perfect pages. I couldn't believe that a company would program a functional product to suicide, so I did some searching on the subject. There used to be a hack that was possible to get Brother printers to continue printing by covering an "eye" on the printer (<http://www.fixyourownprinter.com/forums/laser/39806>). However, the new Brothers (like my HL2270DW) no longer have this exploit available.

I feel that a company that would deliberately program its toner to stop functioning, is questionable on moral grounds. It is purposeful destruction of value. It hurts the environment and is wasteful.

<comment><USER29> I was able to get this to work on an HL2140 last year. I just taped a small piece of construction paper over the eye on the cartridge and it happily went about printing for quite some time- I made it through an entire ream before the quality degraded. Since then, I always cover the eye on new cartridges before I insert them and use the quality of the prints, not the printer itself, to let me know when to buy more toner.

<comment><USER28> Ah yes, you're right. The hole was supposed to be on the toner, but the hole no longer existed on the toner required by my printer (judging by toner/hack pictures I found online and threads discussing the hack for my make). Glad it worked out for you. Don't replace your printer!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The proposal is that an Open Source Printer be designed and adopted by a manufacturer. Who will design the printer to be easily and cheaply refilled? So, they will basically destroy any profit they could make by building this sort of printer? And likely anyone who wants the driver will have to use the CLI or compile the driver themselves?

Sorry OSS doesn't really meet people half way on this. And for a company to remove the profit motive and make a printer that could infringe on patents for printing tech is blowing smoke.

OSS has never been very good at the last mile. So I don't see any manufacturer looking at the OSS plans and drivers and thinking that all the work is done. It's probably half done.

As the OP said, the manufactures of printers ALREADY designed their own printer. And they are making money from it. So why would they take some not entirely complete design and use that while it hollows out how they make money?

<comment><USER31> I agree that in general open source hardware does not make sense. In the case of printers, though, there are a few companies like Kodak and Brother already using the "make money on the printer and don't try to make it back on toner" business model.</comment></comment>


Selling a Wordpress Plugin on Flippa - <AUTHOR> http://flippa.com/blog/case-studies/dan-grossman-on-selling-wpreviewsite-a-wordpress-plugin/ <comment><USER2> These sites always leave me with a bad taste in my mouth.

The whole website 'flipping' business seems shady and geared towards maximising referrals or ad clicks through the use of splogs or other grey area techniques.

My main disappointment however, would be that most of the sites listed on flippa (or sitepoint marketplace) add little or no value to the Internet, but instead make it a more cluttered and confusing place for non-technical users.

<comment><USER3> Not sure I agree. The example linked to is for a profitable business selling a WP thingy direct to users. Making $10,200 profit per month.

It was sold for $90k which seems a low price given that profitability.

There's definitely lots of spammy rubbish on flippa, but just set the filters and you'll find the profitable decent businesses for sale.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I am curious to hear about more experiences (positive and negative) using flippa.com

<comment><USER5> I sold a site on auction and it got 2 bids. Most of the sites that get bids are ones which have high page rank or other seo/marketing value.

The site I sold was a legitimate well built twitter marketing tool that had 1.5k users and had sent 700k direct messages. It was well designed and coded as opposed to most of the sites on there.

I sold it because I had another venture that I wanted to focus all my time on so the selling price wasn't as valuable as just getting rid of the site.

Overall the experience with the site was that the site worked well. It probably wasn't the best audience for what I was selling though, hence 2 bids.</comment></comment>


Beautiful Women Eat for Free at Fast Food Restaurant in Brazil [video] - <AUTHOR> http://newslamp.com/post/112418/beautiful-women-eat-for-free-at-fast-food-restaurant-in-brazil

<comment><USER2> At first I thought was going in a bad direction, but it actually ended up pretty cute.

Basically they asked women if they thought they were beautiful, and if they said "Yes!" they got their meal for free -- it was actually rewarding self- confidence rather than perceived physical beauty.

</comment><comment><USER3> Things like this make me happy I'm not a woman (although the free food would be nice).

Rather than acknowledge that society places too much emphasis on looks (especially for women), we continue to focus on appearance but pretend everyone is "beautiful". But its not true. Not everyone is beautiful.

This ad just reinforces the problem, look good = you are special (have some freebies!). And by targeting women, they target the biggest victims of this falsehood.

</comment><comment><USER4> mckilljoy said:

> it was actually rewarding self-confidence

> rather than perceived physical beauty.

ok, i can see that angle of thinking.

but then the problem is that you've confounded self-confidence with beauty, _outside_ beauty.

self-confidence cannot be very real, or lasting, when it is being defined in such a shallow way.

unattractive people can have self-confidence too. i know i do. and really, i'm hardly a pretty face.

but i didn't come here for any philosophical talk.

i came here to say that i absolutely _adore_ the sound-track for this video. can't stop playing it!

seriously, i'm beginning to think i have a problem.

don't go there and play it. and if you _do_, then don't blame me, because i warn you, it's addicting! :+)

-bowerbird</comment>


PG added to VC panel at Google IO, May 19-20 - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/events/io/2010/sessions/tech-innovation-cs-vc-panel.html

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm looking forward to Google IO at Moscone in San Francisco this year. They've just added Paul Graham to the Tech and Innovation Panel along with Albert Wenger, Chris Dixon, Dave McClure, Brad Feld, and Dick Costolo.

Who else among Hacker News readers will be there?

<comment><USER2> That first paragraph really reads like an advertisement.

I'm not saying you got any personal gain from writing that, and I might just be crazy, but it really sounds like some celebrity in a commercial would awkwardly read off of a teleprompter when sponsoring a product he's never actually used.

<comment><AUTHOR> Weird. I just typed that quickly and submitted without thinking much about it, but after reading your comment ... maybe you're right? But, fwiw, I don't work for Goog, Moscone, City of San Fran, etc. and I really am looking forward to the IO conference this year. IO in '08 was nice. I didn't go in '09 (the year they gave out Android phones to everyone.)

Could I interest you in some sort of amazing new paper towel that cleans up spills?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Living in San Francisco, it's getting harder and harder to get excited about conferences. I find myself at 7-10 per year, and the infrastructure events blend in with each other, as do the startup events. Generally the same people saying the same things, often in very self-serving ways .. like Mark Pincus telling everybody they will fail as entrepreneurs if they don't work for Zynga or Facebook first, or Paul Graham trying to make you feel bad if you didn't drop out of a university in exchange for $20k to build a web app.

<comment><USER4> 7-10 is probably just too many.

I haven't been to any event for about 18 months or something, so Google IO should be fun (and scary) for me. Looks like some great topics + talks etc</comment></comment>


Seattle Holy Rollers Killings: The End to an Oregon Love Cult (2003) - <AUTHOR> https://www.historylink.org/File/4263 <comment><USER3> This is a well-written piece, and it seems almost a bit whimsical. And then you read the last paragraph.

One of the most remarkable essays I've ever read.

</comment><comment><USER4> Fascinating read. The recent equivalent is probably [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NXIVM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NXIVM). They had all kinds of strange rituals branding, slavery, sex trafficking. Given the caliber of people involved I think it received relatively little media attention.

I wonder if they still conduct regular meetings even though the company is technically dissolved. Will they pick a new leader? If all the blackmail material was exposed at trial is it still useful to them, or they have to generate new versions of it...

<comment><USER5> NVIXM wasn't as salacious of an organization as it has been portrayed in the media. It was a self-help organization. The leader was a loon, a non- monogamist, and built himself up as a pseudo-spiritual leader/guru. Not that it makes it right but the branding and the 'slavery' only occurred to a handful of women at the top of the organization. I don't think there was any 'sex trafficking'. Very few people saw the sexual stuff because only specific individuals were groomed to make it to that level.

The CBC produced a podcast[1] which talks with one of the women who was branded. What is intriguing is no one wants to talk bad about the teachings of the organization because they felt they got something positive out of it. But the crazy shit at the top is what crashed the organization.

[1] [https://www.cbc.ca/radio/podcasts/current-affairs- informatio...](https://www.cbc.ca/radio/podcasts/current-affairs- information/uncover/)

<comment><USER6> > NVIXM wasn't as salacious of an organization as it has been portrayed in the > media. It was a self-help organization. The leader was a loon, a non- > monogamist, and built himself up as a pseudo-spiritual leader/guru. Not that > it makes it right but the branding and the 'slavery' only occurred to a > handful of women at the top of the organization.

And how exactly do you think a loon can pull off a sex slavery operation _without_ having all of this tiered and staged brainwashing? Just go up to random people on the street and ask 'hey, I'd like to brand you and make you my sex slave, interested?'

<comment><USER5> You completely missed the point. Almost all of the NVIXM followers had no clue this stuff was going on at the very top of the organization. Yes, specific individuals were groomed to move up in the organization, but the leader wasn't grooming them for 'sex slavery'. The high-ups knew that the leader was non- monogamous and slept with women from the organization, but even the woman from the podcast who talks about being branded hadn't ever been approached by the leader.

The media just loved to jump on the 'sex cult' idea and then portrayed it as that's what it was. The branding had nothing to do with anything sexual - <USER2> was done as a 'sorority'-type initiation for the higher-up women. The slavery was also part of the 'sorority' and didn't really have anything to do with the leader.

Listen to the podcast and you'll understand.

<comment><USER7> You're the one who is not understanding here. All of this "nothing to do with anything sexual" grooming had one specific, simple goal: Make these women feel both powerful and powerless: That they had been chosen and been given gifts, and that their life would fall apart without the approval of their benefactors. These grooming behaviors can be leveraged into the salacious story that was NVIXM's downfall.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This guy is a perfect example of someone who 'needed killin'. Which is a valid defense in some states (but not California).

<comment><USER9> Which states and what's the legalese?

<comment><USER8> Here's a discussion:

[https://www.texascrimelaw.com/character-evidence-in- murder-c...](https://www.texascrimelaw.com/character-evidence-in-murder- cases.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is there a site or place where I can find more stories like this? Cults like this fascinate me, especially from like the 60s and 70s. I know about the rainbow family a little bit, but I'd like to learn more about the underbelly of the flower power movement.

<comment><USER11> [1] is a 20-part article about the rise and fall of Rajneeshpuram, a city built in Oregon (why is it always Oregon?) in the 80's to house the followers of an Indian guru-slash-cult-leader. If you've never heard of Rajneespuram, definitely check this out (there are other resources if you don't have time for the long article, I think 99PI did an episode on it): the story meanders into gold Rolls-Royces, international drug and arms smuggling, and bioweapon terrorist attacks.

[1]: [https://longform.org/archive/tags/rajneesh](https://longform.org/archive/tags/rajneesh)

<comment><USER10> Oh this is perfect! I was worried that it was a podcast or a documentary.

<comment><USER12> There _is_ a documentary on Netflix about it called _Wild Wild Country_ that's almost entirely primary-source video (they recorded everything) and modern-day interviews with former members and government officials. It's fascinating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The legacy of this one guy and his cult of personality is pretty amazing. I think this would make a fascinating Paul Thomas Anderson movie.</comment>


Where Marijuana Is Legal, Opioid Prescriptions Fall - <AUTHOR> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/where-marijuana-is-legal-opioid-prescriptions-fall/ <comment><USER2> It's surprising that SA would publish something so lacking in context.

Of _course_ opioid prescription fills are falling in cannabis-legal states; they're falling _everywhere_ due to increased scrutiny.

The article doesn't even compare stats for non-cannabis states with cannabis- legal states, nor does it isolate those who actually _used_ cannabis at any point (to estimate numbers for those _changing_ from opioid use to cannabis use). It's like pointing out that temperatures have increased with the removal of lead from motor fuels.</comment>


A brief visit from a red and extremely elongated interstellar asteroid - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25020 <comment><USER2> It's "Red Dwarf"[0] returning, I tell you. After an unfortunate close pass to a black hole that stretched it a bit.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dwarf](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dwarf)</comment>


Bye-bye Internet bubble 2.0 - <AUTHOR> http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/shinal/2016/02/05/bye-bye-internet-bubble-20/79887644/ <comment><USER2> Thinning of the heard needed to happen. Now the more established companies (Alphabet and Facebook) will have their pick to buy some wounded unicorns at a steep discount.</comment>


PornHub posts Putin's critic anti-government film after russian court bans it - <AUTHOR> http://www.newsweek.com/pornhub-posts-putin-critics-documentary-after-russia-orders-delete-618387 <comment><USER2> Title should read "[...] Putin critic's [...]", as it's the critic's film. He's also Putin's critic, but the film is the object in the sentence.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, I'll take the blame for that. I added it late last night, the original was 100 or so characters and I had to crop out 20 on my phone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Isn't pornhub banned in Russia?

<comment><USER4> It was unblocked earlier this year. No reasons were given afaik. But even earlier this year, Yourporn's layers have won appeal in court and got youporn unblocked.</comment></comment>


File IO in Every Language - <AUTHOR> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3538156/fileio-in-every-language

<comment><USER2> And this question was closed once. That's one of my biggest annoyances of stackoverflow. Some people are too quick to close any question that doesn't meet their strict definition of a question should be.

<comment><USER3> A key part of that problem is that you can't vote against closure. Only after a question has accrued sufficient votes to close it can you start voting to open it again; it's a ratcheting flip-flop.

But it appears Jeff is oddly against this issue:

[http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/915/can-we-have- the-...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/915/can-we-have-the-ability- to-rescind-a-close-vote-before-it-closes/33949#33949)

[http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/125/how-about-a- vote...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/125/how-about-a-vote-not-to- close-option-to-counter-the-vote-to-close/33950#33950)

Heavily outvoted by the community, he persists in obduracy.

<comment><USER4> I'm not sure I like the present system or proposed solution. You'd then have four ways to vote:

        * Vote question up
        * Vote question down
        * Vote to close
        * Vote not to close

Why not simply close based on downvotes? Or remove downvotes and close algorithmically based on "flags", like we have on HN.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It illustrates nicely how clumsy a lot of languages are for such a simple-to- describe task. Mess with libraries, try to guess what's best to use... After all these years I still like the plainness of BASIC.

</comment><comment><USER6> There's a website that has a list of tasks and how to do them in many many programming languages. I can't seem to find it; if someone knows which site I am talking about, can they link it here?

<comment><AUTHOR> <http://rosettacode.org/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> While browsing some of the more esoteric entries in that list (OK I meant LOLCODE) I saw a reference to this gem:

The movie Inception "explained" in C - <http://github.com/karthick18/inception>

</comment><comment><USER8> I see the cool kids here, Erlang, Scala, etc.. but Google Go is missing, can a kind soul add it? :)

</comment><comment><USER9> It seems like a lot of the examples are missing the part where you close the file.

</comment><comment><USER10> MUMPS == ugly.</comment>


Pfmatch, a packet filtering language embedded in Lua - <AUTHOR> https://wingolog.org/archives/2015/07/03/pfmatch-a-packet-filtering-language-embedded-in-lua

<comment></comment>


Amazon and Android forks - <AUTHOR> http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/6/21/amazon-and-forks <comment><USER2> I wish I could actually be more supportive of this initiative. After Snowden, I switched to FLOSS software, a dumbphone, and creative commons culture. I had stopped using Google products primarily a couple years earlier, and last summer really solidified me.

I have big issues with Microsoft, Apple and Google. Obviously, there are concerns with Amazon, too, but they aren't as significant for me. They stem mostly from not being able to read anonymously, and from the concern of DRM and the potential issues with Amazon being able to revoke the Kindle books you purchase.

Amazon's basic business model is not focused on surveillance or putting all your data in the cloud or vendor lock in. This is a big plus these days.

Amazon also is in the interesting position of probably being able to disrupt literally all commercial and retail business in the next couple years, which I am personally hugely excited for. It will be interesting to see who the heck buys this, and how they are able to operate without Google, iOS apps, what have you.

Maybe we will soon have a major tech company promoting Open Street Maps. Amazon will be in a position to offer a lot of products that other companies can't. Right now, though, I wouldn't touch the Google Play stack with a 10-foot-pole.

<comment><USER3> _They stem mostly from not being able to read anonymously, and from the concern of DRM and the potential issues with Amazon being able to revoke the Kindle books you purchase._

Everything else apart, while this is a reasonable concern, it is also an addressable concern.

The Amazon DRM is weak, known and can be decrypted. It take minimal research to set this up, and then circumvention is merely a click away.

This means that while Amazon some time in the future can revoke your access to purchases you've made for whatever reason (even though I doubt they will), they cannot revoke you from using the DRM-free copies you've created once you've stripped the DRM from your original purchases.

<comment><USER4> I used to be concerned about this, and then I realized: if Amazon revokes my access to the e-books/movies I legally purchased, I will just go download pirated copies. Why do that kind of backups myself when the internet is already doing it for me?

<comment><USER2> I'm a huge supporter of piracy but I personally prefer to boycott any non-free ebooks or movies instead.

It's easy to break the technological norms that protect books. It's a lot tougher to break the cultural ones.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is the ugly head of the post-web world. Let's for a moment assume that the web is being phased out in favor of a constellation of apps on a closed OS gated by a monopolistic appstore/playstore. The end game is for a Microsoft of modern days to form, with a far stronger power than MS in the 90s. Since every player in the market knows this, there'll be fighting either for the top spot or, at least, to keep the market fragmented enough to prevent the new monopoly from forming.

In either case, consumers get screwed. Either they get screwed like in the 90s, or they get screwed by systems incompatibility and fragmentation.

All in all, this war is moot. Moore's law applied to bandwith, to device computation speed and to software evolution leads to this: [http://xkcd.com/1367/](http://xkcd.com/1367/)

<comment><USER6> That xkcd comic's idea would work if people would use web apps in preference to 'native' apps. Moore's law isn't fixing that unless it somehow makes the web into a hugely better platform for apps.

As it stands, we are limited to only using these lame DOM-based APIs which have been strained far past their origin in hypertext, and only using Javascript, which has been strained far past its design as a way of merely scripting a browser. These contained some good ideas but they're essentially dead. People want apps. So the original intent is warped to fit that demand, and the result is neither fish nor fowl. It's mystery meat.

If the web weren't so crappy, the monopolist would not really have an opportunity. Mobile platforms bring a lot of value because the web is a bad app platform; where you have the choice, keeping HTTP but using other client technologies is the best compromise available. Mobile platform creators had that choice and went with decent languages and more appropriate environments. Where a graphics API can be just a graphics API, and so on for everything else.

We can count on Firefox OS and anything like it to fail to thrive for as long as it is Mozilla against the world, defending the awkward status quo by throwing more lame hacks on the pile and awkwardly bolting on new device APIs to its browser.

Don't tell me that if I can use a decent language and decent APIs rather than Frankenstein's monster, that I am "screwed by systems incompatibility and fragmentation." The web status quo sucks at a technical level and that is why it is threatened by monopolists. Doubling down on the technical suck isn't going to help. If you want a benevolent monoculture to emerge, you aren't going to get it by doubling down on the status quo and waiting until everyone gives up mobile platforms for ideological reasons, or because a cheap phone uses Javascript.

<comment><USER5> > The web status quo sucks at a technical level (...)

I know you mean that it sucks when viewed from the perspective of an application developer, and I agree with you. However, on a technical merit perspective, the web is much more evolved, and much more a technical feat, than either Android or iOS.

Android and iOS are a reiteration of what has been done cyclically through times, ever since the first OS got written. A set of libraries and associated APIs on top of a constrained set of hardware.

The web is, as an application platform, a set of APIs. That's it. There's no defined hardware, no defined set of libraries. Guess what? Designing the API alone is much more difficult, a lot harder to get right, and much more of a technical feat.

On one side, some libraries got written and then documented. On the other, everything is defined conceptually (well, not really; if done like this it would be really impossible instead of just difficult, but the point stands).

</comment></comment></comment><comment> shawn-butler >> Google's Maps platform is very good and HERE, at least in western markets, is not as good. As with Apple Maps, it works, mostly, but the gap is clear and there is no roadmap that points to that gap closing. >>

Can anyone with some relevant expertise experience comment on this? From a data perspective HERE/Navteq seems as good as if not better than google data in my locale.

I wonder if article is referring to the lack of "add-on" feature parity?

<comment><USER7> I think the author wanted to play up the difficulty of doing this and saying "and then they licensed the excellent HERE mapping solution from Nokia (which they got when they acquired Navteq)" made it all sound too easy.

Similarly: "Without this Google layer you really only have a featurephone". Yes, and without the battery it's basically a shiny brick. Luckily Amazon has been shipping near identical devices, with apps and maps for several years now, so we don't really need to fully explore this fascinating counter- factual.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > There's an interesting quasi-3D UI feature and a big flashing BUY button, in > line with Amazon's role as the Sears Roebuck of the 21st century, but little > that really changes anything or couldn't be done on any other smartphone > anyway.

Car manufacturers don't make new model cars because they "change" something or do something other cars can't. They make new cars because they need something sexier for people to buy so the manufacturer will continue to increase revenue.

The iPhone didn't "change" anything or provide new features. Nokia and Sony Ericsson already had phones with far more advanced functionality years before it came to market. What iPhone provided was a sexier, easier interface. This Amazon phone is just another badly executed new car that puts new technology over the "sexy" factor, which is why you're unimpressed. But it serves a bigger purpose...

> And that leaves people wondering why Amazon bothered.

To hook people on more subscription services like Prime. That's Amazon's entire business model.

The purpose of the Kindle was to incentivize additional book purchases due to the ease [of not having to ship a paper book or carry it around or keep it] and cost [lower than for paper books]. Envious of the green Apple makes on the App store, Amazon wants some of that mobile-market money, and a way to push their own competing "store" (music, books, etc).

Basically, the mobile sector is turning out digital Walmarts where you can get everything you could possibly need, and the retailers are providing mobile devices tailored to their shops. Amazon doesn't want their shop to get ignored, so they provide their own mobile retail interface to beat the incumbent competition.

<comment><USER9> >The iPhone didn't "change" anything or provide new features. ... What iPhone provided was a sexier, easier interface.

You just contradicted yourself. The interfaces of those Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones were terrible for many people. People cheered when Steve Jobs talked about how he used them and he wanted to throw them against the wall because they were so annoying to use. That is a change that people felt was worthwhile and it was more than just "sexy"; it was worth getting rid of your "free" or $99 phone and paying $600 for a smart phone for the first time for millions of people. (They weren't originally subsidized.) That's not "no change."</comment></comment>


Woman uses DNA test, finds sperm donor – and pays a "devastating" price - <AUTHOR> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-finds-sperm-donor-after-using-dna-test-raising-questions-about-donor-anonymity/ <comment><USER2> Since the title doesn't say much...

It was a close relative. One the donor company found out they blocked her from receiving more of the guys sworn she had already purchased for future kids.

I guess she was attached to the idea of the kids being biological siblings.

</comment><comment><USER3> I guess the moral of the story is read contracta before you sign them, and don't agree to terms that you cannot abide by.

<comment><USER4> For me the moral of the story is that sperm banks are not in a position to guarantee donors anonymity. Donating DNA is like donating the most effective way to track you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> How do sperm banks not prevent this (sperm donor being the immediate family of the recipient) from happening in the first place? Seems like this woman might have a case against the sperm bank if she wanted to sue.

<comment><USER4> No, she found a close relative of the anonymous donor by sending her daughter's dna to 23andMe. It's a privacy / deanonymization issue, not a case of the sperm bank not checking if the donor is related to the recipient.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Duh, RTFM. The donor gave his seed anon and you agreed to it. What do you want now...if a person wants to come out publicly a donor #AGF2145, that's their prerogative, not yours.

<comment><USER4> What about the child? She didn't agree to anything.</comment></comment>


From Ember to Rails - <AUTHOR> http://dmathieu.com/articles/development/ember-rails/ <comment><USER2> _What matters in the end is not the technology we use though. It's how we can resolve our customer's problems and evolve as those problems evolve too._

Thank you for saying that and posting this article. I've recently started a company in the past few months that is already enjoying good MRR. I didn't use the latest and greatest Node, GraphQL, Falcor, Reacted, Ember, Anularagar 2.5, ES2045, ES7, Phoenix, Double Scale SPA CLR NOSQL. I used the freaking vanilla Rails stack.

I'm enjoying 100ms or less response times on a $40 a month digital ocean box. I am using Turbolinks 3 partial replacement though. In the end the customer doesn't give a shit. They just want it to get their job done and for the app to not be slow.

What mattered was I was able to get the app done quickly instead of spending 10 years over engineering something that could have failed(and still can) in the first few months.</comment>


The busy trap - <AUTHOR> http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/the-busy-trap <comment><USER2> How much a job pays has a weak correlation with how much it 'matters'. Growing food matters a lot, growing food doesn't pay that well. HFT pays very well, HFT doesn't matter that much. How much something pays is determined by the whims of the markets. Free market capitalism provides a basic framework to roughly match supply with demand and incentivize people to work. But the 'demand' is determined by whoever has the money.

The problem is, the actors with money don't spend it with the intent to maximize the benefit to society as a whole. They spend it 'selfishly', to maximize their personal interests. There's nothing wrong with that, it's how capitalism works. But if everyone spent their money to benefit society as whole, then there would be an extremely strong correlation between how much a job pays and how much it 'matters'.

I feel that in the long run the markets work just fine and does act to benefit society since people are generally ethical. But it doesn't act to 'maximize' the benefit to society. I mean why did it take warfare for us to take space exploration seriously? And why did the internet start as a military network?

I think capitalism is a pretty decent system. But I wish we did a better job of pushing research and innovation for their own sake. Not as a reactive measure to beat the competition or get an upper-hand militarily. I think nearsightedness on what's best 'now' and 'for ourselves', leads to a lot of work that feels like it doesn't matter.

<comment><USER3> You nailed it. The key problem is 'demand' is determined only by whoever has money. Capitalism works because each person gets a say in what is important and creates value for them. The problem is that if you don't have above a certain amount of money, you don't get much of a say. In the age of immense income inequality, this completely distorts the 'demand' generation aspect of capitalism.

What if we divorced 'demand'(what creates value for each person) from money (payment for value created) and gave all actors an equal right to determine demand irrespective of their ability to pay? We are working on building such a world.

<comment><USER4> > What if we divorced 'demand'(what creates value for each person) from money > (payment for value created) and gave all actors an equal right to determine > demand irrespective of their ability to pay?

Demand is already divorced from ability to pay - anyone can "demand" anything. The "problem" is that suppliers don't care about demand. They only care about being paid.

If a million people demand X but are unwilling to pay for it while 10 people demand Y and are willing to pay for it, why am I going to produce X instead of Y?

<comment><USER3> Divorcing ability to pay doesn't necessarily have to mean nobody pays.

We are already beginning to see the early stages of such a system. All freemium services are in essence an example of such a system and therefore by extension most startups.

Gmail satisfies the demand of millions of customers for an email service but doesn't ask them to pay. This doesn't mean gmail doesn't make gains.

Currently, the primary funder of such services are ad and brand agencies.

What if we lived in a world where any individual could basically play the role that ad/brand agencies play in supporting freemium services today?

<comment><USER4> > All freemium services are in essence an example of such a system

No, they aren't. They exist because sufficient people pay.

> and therefore by extension most startups.

Do you really think that a significant number of startups are freemium?

> Currently, the primary funder of such services are ad and brand agencies.

Not at all. They're funded by "heavy users" - see dropbox.

Ad supported is not freemium.

<comment><USER3> You are right. I was describing free - not freemium. Though, technically even freemium is an example of where a large number of people don't pay in the direct exchange. The monetization model divorces payment from the direct beneficiary - that's the key takeaway.

<comment><USER4> > The monetization model divorces payment from the direct beneficiary - that's > the key takeaway.

No. Freemium divorces payment from SOME direct beneficiaries.

However, the total cost, and then some, is paid by other direct beneficiaries. Is your scheme any different?

Note that freemium doesn't always work. For example, a freemium automobile company is unlikely to work. Advertising supported "free to end user" automobiles won't work either.

So, how does your proposed model work? Be sure to explain when it works and when it doesn't. (If you claim that it works for every product/service, you're wrong.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Anyone else think living without goals is the way to go?

For the majority of my life I was very goal oriented and would make sure every hour of the day was filled. Everyday was a todo list. I scheduled the occasional leisure activity but even these were part of some goal such as 'travel to 5 countries in 1 year"

Recently I just decided to give up any goals and any expectations. What I found out was that goals were stressing me out. It made me unhappy. I seeked my identity on some future achievement. It's something I think a lot of entepreneurs experience too... Now I just live life and experience whatever comes my way. I still work towards things but if a friend asks me to skip a workday to catch a movie, I no longer give them the "I'm busy" excuse.

<comment><USER6> > Anyone else think living without goals is the way to go?

Yes, being eternally 'busy' and obsessed with goals is probably the quickest way to turn your life into a vortex of depressing bullshit, well, aside from prison or hard manual labor.

Take it easy, enjoy life and get a few hours of good quality work done most days of the week.

<comment><USER7> Hard manual labor can be very refreshing and enlightening.

One of my most elightening periods ocurred when I was packing a product at a factory. If you keep your body busy with repetitive and tiring work, your mind can do wonders.

Not forever, certainly, but once you are accustomed to chair gymnastics, a day of tiring physical work after another really puts things in perspective.

<comment><USER6> I'm a farm-lad, so no stranger to good old-fashioned work :)

I was being flippant in my above comment, and more referring to the back- breaking, soul-devouring variant of 'manual labor', the kind that drives people to drink and ruins the creative spirit.

Otherwise, I do agree, sometimes it's good to do some manual work, put the body on auto-pilot and let the mind wander. Personally I seem to get most of my best thinking time when I'm either walking, scrubbing floors, loading a van, etc...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Dudes, you are running like crazy and pushing empty wheelbarrows around. Why do you do that?"

"Man, we are so busy there is no time to load the damn things!"

</comment><comment><USER9> "Only in recent history has "working hard" signaled pride rather than shame for lack of talent, finesse, and, mostly, sprezzatura." — Nassim Nicholas Taleb

<comment><USER10> There have been a bunch of studies recently that show praising kids for being smart or talented, rather than working hard, can cripple their development. So, it hardly surprises me.

<comment><USER11> Well, but that's hardly a binary choice, is it? You can encourage kids to develop their talents without putting them on a hamster wheel.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This article, particularly the paragraphs _"Idleness is not just a vacation ..."_ and _"The goal of the future is full unemployment, so we can play ..."_ , express a similar sentiment to my favourite essay:

Bertrand Russell - In Praise Of Idleness

<http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html>

<comment><USER13> I also enjoyed this book on the topic: [http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle- Loafers-Manifesto/dp/00607...](http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle-Loafers- Manifesto/dp/0060779691/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341153759&sr=8-1&keywords=Idle)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> >if your job wasn't performed by a cat or a boa constrictor in a Richard Scarry book I'm not sure I believe it's necessary. I can't help but wonder whether all this histrionic exhaustion isn't a way of covering up the fact that most of what we do doesn't matter.

Then why are you getting paid for it? Clearly someone cares about it, roughly in proportion to the amount you're getting paid.

Consider these three jobs: making nails for local carpenters, operating machinery in a nail factory, designing machinery for nail factories. Designing machinery for nail factories helps carpenters the most, but _feels_ least helpful.

Surprise surprise, reading children's books is not a good way to estimate the value delivered by people working in various occupations.

<comment><USER15> Nails have basic utility as they can be used to build homes, structures, bridges, etc.

Now take working at a teenager magazine, something like Seventeen. Really, you are producing a level of writing and entertainment that 14-19yo girls will read, probably paid for by their parents. Most of it will probably be idle thoughts and advice borderlining on turning girls into sluts who buy too much make-up. Really, your job is to provide a way to hide advertisements.

Not very valuable if you take a step back and look at all of humanity.

<comment><USER16> Economic value is whatever people want.

<comment><USER15> True. My point was that just because something has economic value in today's system, doesn't mean it has value objectively, if there is such a thing.

<comment><USER17> You're being incredibly bias here. You see 17 Magazine and scoff and teenaged girls see whatever it is you like and scoff. We each find value in the things we find value in and it's not our place to judge other people's choices.

<comment><USER18> This is a cop-out. We all "value" trivial things, and in the end, one person's trivial interests aren't any better or worse than another's. But we absolutely can judge interests as being in the class of trivial or not. The usual stuff you find in 17 magazine is easily categorized as trivial. To argue against this based on a "relative" argument is copping out of making the obvious judgement.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Self-imposed busy-ness? Yep.

Great articles like this are the reason I pay up for the NYT.

I was a little embarrassed how the article reflected much of my own life style. I am visiting my parents and I was talking with my Dad earlier this morning about my working more than I need to and my desire to cut back even more from consulting to have extra time for my writing and outdoor activities. I also realized that I brag about being "busy" - in an odd way wearing busy- ness as a badge of honor.

</comment><comment><USER20> Yes, but there is such a thing has ennui. It is better to dispel ennui by taking up projects voluntarily than doing only minimum work and then becoming listless and depressed.

I understand that the article is trying to get us to think about busyness for busyness' sake, but in a way, when water,food and shelter are taken care of, you don't REALLY need to do anything else. But then what do you do for the rest of your life?

I would say keep busy, take a little stress, but when it becomes bad for you health and the people around you, back off. You'll be dead soon, don't waste it.

<comment><USER5> "But then what do you do for the rest of your life?"

I think this is the question you're forced to answer with earnest when you stop trying to be busy for busyness sakes. It might be by being too busy, we don't stop and appreciate the present moment, and everything we already have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've recently noticed the contrary in my life : I'm not busy.

I have way too much time to think (and to think way too much). I don't meet that much people, and when I talk to my friends or new encounters I don't have much to say. And I feel like I'm wasting my time not moving forward with my life (personal and professional).

I even googled "How to get busy".

I know it can be a trap, but being busy is GOOD. Meet people, do things, learn things, gain experience, be active.

Also you'll become someone more like-able. Someone who is busy IS attractive (socially and romantically).

<comment><USER5> But are you going to be busy and fill your life with activities to attract and impress others?

Or do things you actually enjoy doing, without caring much for the end result? I think the latter is healthy, but the former is not. Busyness caused by doing things for egotistical reasons, or because everyone else is doing it wears you out.

<comment><USER21> Does it really matter if I start getting busy just to impress other and end up finding things I like and gaining experience for myself?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've taken the summer off, and I can definitely see what this writer means. I have a number of habits and reflexes left over (e.g.: frequent checking of email, compulsive checking of news sites and social media) that may have had some use, but mainly sustained a feeling of busyness.

No idea how I'm going to prevent getting re-hooked in the fall, but I'm definitely going to prune that back while I'm on vacation.

</comment><comment><USER23> I've always felt that we should brag about efficiency, instead of talking about being busy. A blog post from a few months ago: [http://fayezmoh.tumblr.com/post/21470081227/efficiency- matte...](http://fayezmoh.tumblr.com/post/21470081227/efficiency-matters)

</comment><comment><USER24> Idleness is just as much a tray as busyness. You can spend weeks "not seeing people I know, remembering stink bugs and the stars, and reading"... and then one morning you wake up and realise you have no friends and nothing to live for.

</comment><comment><USER25> This article will make experienced heads nod.

This article will make no sense to inexperienced heads who think they can force their will on anything.

</comment><comment><USER26> Great article. It reminded me of the Mexican Fisherman story: <http://www.protolink.com/MexicanFisherman.html>

</comment><comment><USER27> I value my time above anything else. I always have spare capacity. When an opportunity comes up, I'm free to grab hold.

</comment><comment><USER28> The article reminded me of a brilliant passage from one of Schopenhauer's essays ("On the Vanity of Existence", Section 5):

 _Life presents itself first and foremost as a task: the task of maintaining itself, de gagner sa vie. If this task is accomplished, what has been gained is a burden, and there then appears a second task: that of doing something with it so as to ward off boredom, which hovers over every secure life like a bird of prey. Thus the first task is to gain something and the second to become unconscious of what has been gained, which is otherwise a burden. (..) For if life, in the desire for which our essence and existence consists, possessed in itself a positive value and real content, there would be no such thing as boredom: mere existence would fulfil and satisfy us._

</comment><comment><USER29> This is my new favorite article, or opinion piece ever. I actually wrote something similar recently and submitted discussing my goal of having nothing but free time which falls inline with this very much [http://tortillasinbed.com/post/26229642463/free-time-is- my-g...](http://tortillasinbed.com/post/26229642463/free-time-is-my-goal).

This obsessiveness with appearing as you are always busy is kind of sad. I think it's largely an age related thing. People in their 20's and 30's equate their worth, or value with how much stuff they are doing or making. I'd love to talk to an old friend and ask them what they're and have them say, 'nothing much, just hanging out'. Thats usually my response.

</comment><comment><USER30> I am very busy and I like being busy; life is short and there is way too much cool stuff to do. But, at the same time, I try to not use it as an excuse, and I get a little annoyed when people use it that way.

<comment><USER31> That's not the point. Are you too busy to read the whole post?

<comment><USER30> I gave up about halfway - it was too preachy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> This is the Ted Rall essay he referenced at the end.

<http://www.rall.com/rallblog/tag/basic-income-guarantee>

</comment><comment><USER33> Hmm, I think being busy is great - progress is survival, after all, and there's no progress without a lot of work.

But of course, if you're busy just for the sake of being busy, you'll feel worn out and tired all the time. There are people who enjoy being busy with anything, though, and being busy working on something you're passionate about is probably the best feeling in the world :-).

</comment><comment><USER34> "Don't confuse activity with achievement"

\- John Wooden

</comment><comment><USER13> I believe that work is good for the soul. But being busy is stupid bullshit, as is needing to appear busy to impress others. Other people are too obsessed with themselves to care what you're up to anyway.

<comment><USER35> I would nuance that by saying that productive work is good for the soul. When you can look back on what you did today and see some tangible evidence of it, that's satisfying. To me it's most satisfying if it's a physical thing, but something like a working piece of software does it as well.

Of course all I've done so far today is eat breakfast and surf the web, so it's not looking so good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Most "busyness" is good old-fashioned social ineptitude mixed with an ill- defined and defensive elitism. It comes from a "could-do-better" social- climbing mentality combined with incompetence in execution. It's an end result of (a) wanting only to associate with "high-value" people for some definition of high value, but (b) being unable to assess value on account of not giving anyone a chance. So the resulting behavior is to put this decision off indefinitely.

The "I'm busy" shield is a way of rejecting people without rejecting them. It's the ultimate in indecision. And most of these "oh-so-busy" people spend as much time on stupid shit (or useful work, but done inefficiently) as anyone else.

<comment><USER13> That describes me very well, except I am definitely not a busy person. I just don't like doing social things -- or rather I get a sort of malaise at the thought of going to them, for exactly the reasons you describe here. I've honestly never seen it laid out this well before.

But I don't think of it as social ineptitude, only because when I commit to doing things, I can be "on" and meet people and have a great time and all that. Beforehand, however, the thought of getting into that mentality and doing all that stuff seems like "work" to me, and I just feel like I don't wanna do it.</comment></comment>