Is the iPad for dumb people? - <AUTHOR> http://calebelston.com/is-the-ipad-for-dumb-people

<comment><USER2> it's just the beta version people! Eventually, it'll have a camera and multi- tasking. For crying out loud!

In a forum full of entrepreneurs, it seems no one has any empathy for a company releasing a new product without all the bells and whistles. There's a huge amount of hypocrisy here from a group that espouses "Release early, release often."

<comment><USER3> I hope it doesn't get application multitasking.

We know by now that multitasking is a myth. Yes, your computer can do it very well, but you are not a computer. You are a human being, and you can't really multitask (even if you tell me that you can, I won't believe you).

Now, iPhone OS is actually perfectly capable of multitasking, and it does run many processes in the background, but the one-application-at-a-time choice is a UI experiment. It is the idea that people can only do one thing at a time _applied_. There are certainly cases for leaving running applications in the background, but those are mostly limited to power-users.

As a developer I need to be running a shell and a text editor and a database server all at the same time, but anybody can stop watching a YouTube video to write an email.

<comment><USER4> There a couple of tasks where multitasking makes a lot of sense for even non- power-users. The huge one being to play music in the background, either via my mp3 player or streaming via my webbrowser. The other one being skype and chat programs. Someone sends you a link on skype and you don't want to shut down your chat session to look at the page. Even if Apple won't go full multitasking, perhaps they will allow some sort of selective multitasking based on tasks where it makes sense.

<comment><USER5> The iPhone already lets people listen to music while browsing the web. I don't know what it does during third-party apps.

<comment><USER6> Nope, doesn't keep playing for third-party apps (at least, for games, haven't tried it everywhere).

<comment><USER7> Correct. App Store apps (including Apple's own) are sent a signal when the user presses the Home button. They then have a small number of seconds to persist whatever state they need to. Some nice apps are like Tweetie: it saves (most of) the current state of the UI so that when you come back, they reopen right where they had been. Apparently iWork for iPad does the same.

Makes one wonder whether the Cocoa Touch frameworks could help with that some...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is the first posting I've agreed with on the iPad however my issue is that the title is misleading. A better title would be,"The iPad is for people who know what they want."

It doesn't multitask. It doesn't let you install whatever you want. It doesn't do 1080p. It will potentially deliver a browsing, music and video experience that is good enough at 1.6lbs.

Of course this isn't everything, there is the crucial fact that it doesn't matter if you hate or love it, or if you are some world class tech blogger. People buy stuff they want.

<comment><USER9> The original title is definitely linkbait, but I disagree with your better title. The iPad may be for _geeks_ who know what they want, but it's also for "the rest of us". I can think of so many family and friends who are _still_ scared of computers and have only tepidly started using email and Facebook. The iPad will be an amazing device for all these people who still don't feel comfortable with computers after more than a decade of mainstream exposure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Probably the first post that has legitimately made me interested in what a Mac may have to offer. That said, the ergonomics of the iPad look haphazard to me.

<comment><USER11> I actually just bought a Mac two days ago for the first time (to do iPad development :-). I had always resisted because I thought "Windows and Linux were such an effort to learn, why would I want to learn another OS?"

Suffice to say, I haven't spent a second so far trying to figure something out in OSX that wasn't immediately obvious. Part of this is because I already have a background in other OSes, part of it is because it really is cleanly designed.

Bottom line, if you're a hacker and have been avoiding Macs because of the effort of learning another OS, I can tell you it'll be a piece of cake for you- Take the leap.

<comment><USER12> I switched about four years ago because my employer issued me a MacBook Pro; for the previous six years I'd been using Linux full-time as my desktop OS. It took... well, hardly any time at all to get used to it.

Admittedly, I still spend most of my time in Terminal and a lot of what I knew transferred immediately (minus the quirks of going from GNU tools to BSD), but even in the GUI parts of the OS there wasn't anything that really surprised me. And once I'd learned the standard keyboard shortcuts I was rather pleased with how completely consistent even third-party applications are about implementing them (a situation which didn't, at the time, exist with most of the GNOME apps I'd been using).

<comment><USER13> I had the same experience, switching from Debian to a Mac. The only moments of confusion I had on switching were things that were _too intuitive_. Coming from a Linux background and remembering dependency hell, I couldn't quite get my head around the idea that to install an application you just drag and drop it into the application folder. As soon as I stopped trying to second-guess the system and just did what I thought would be the obvious thing, everything became obvious!

Of course the terminal just feels like home, OSX is a proper *nix and everything works as you'd expect it to. The big difference is that everything else works as you'd expect it too as well. It seems like some sort of dream that I used to spend a whole week setting up a new computer, fiddling with drivers and dependency problems and xorg.conf nonsense.

<comment><USER14> Don't espouse the platform too much. Maybe it's stable now, but there were _plenty_ of issues early on. I got a Mac around the release of MacOS 10.2.

If you mounted an NFS or Samba share the filesystem driver would 'beachball' the _entire_ operating system if the server ever became unresponsive. There were numerous times where the smbfs driver caused kernel panics too. The only improvement to this offered in 10.3 was a dialog that would popup asking if you wanted to disconnect the share whenever it deemed that the server was unresponsive. Though the 'timeout' that it was using to display this dialog was too conservative. Sometimes it would popup just to disappear right away when it finally get a server response. [Note: these shares were mounted over a LAN, not spanning across the internet or something] The issue hurt me the most when I left a share mounted at home when I closed my PowerBook, only to wakeup the PowerBook at school/work and have OSX require a forced restart because the server was no longer there.

{edit} I know that all platforms have issues, I just get annoyed when people act like they don't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> "It was during this time that I stopped worrying about the details of my computer and worried more about what I could accomplish with it: browsing the web, listening to music, doing email, and writing papers."

This is really the division. Not between smart people and dumb people, but between people for whom what they can (or want to) accomplish with a computer boils down to a list like that and the people whose computer-aided ambitions are larger. This is what Tim Bray and others mean when they say "For creative people, this device is nothing".

</comment><comment><USER14> > _Apple didn't set out to create a tablet as other companies had in the past, > the same way they didn't set out to create a phone the same way every other > company had in the past. They set out to fundamentally change the way we > interact with our computers._

Most 'smartphone' prior to the iPhone did much the same thing, they just failed at it. Please don't act like Apple is the lone-wolf when it comes to 'trying new things.' They are just good at creating _successful_ new things.

> _Apple didn't set out to create a tablet as other companies had in the past_

This part irks me most. Apple just created a larger iPhone. That's it. Sure they added features like iWork, but things like iWork just didn't make sense on the smaller form-factor of the iPhone. That's it. Sure they had a different approach to the problem (making a larger iPhone rather than making a smaller touchscreen desktop/laptop), but it's not like they created a new experience with the iPad. The iPad is just the iPhone experience with a larger screen and some extra apps.

<comment><USER16> > This part irks me most. Apple just created a larger iPhone.

Actually, this meme is irking me. Look at the interface on the iPad, it is not just a big iPhone interface. It has its own unique elements that allow it to work. There is real thought going into this.

<comment><USER17> >The iPad is just the iPhone experience with a larger screen and some extra apps.

I think this will be important. It's an enrichment of the iPhone experience instead of a denigration of the laptop experience. A user comes to it familiar with an iPhone and finds it faster, more useful, etc. A user comes to a netbook and feels cramped because it's worse than what it's imitating.

<comment><USER14> On the other hand, what about someone that goes from a laptop/desktop to an iPad without the iPhone step?

<comment><USER17> It's not the step I'm referring to really, so much as the expectations of the form factor. I've never had a smart phone, but I don't think I would sit down and try to do what I do on a laptop with it. However, were I to buy a netbook, that's exactly what I would do.

It's a small point among many, but from the human perspective I think it will significantly impact their reception to the iPad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Agree with the author, but not yet willing to substitute it for my iPod touch (which fits into my pocket) or my laptop (which I believe is better for entering text, which is still my primary means of communication and work on the Web).

Curious to see what kind of apps and interfaces are built for the platform in the years to come. That could make me change my mind for future versions.

<comment><USER19> It's not a substitute - It's another device with different use cases. Reminds me of the part of the Stevenote where he was talking about the iPhone and MacBook and then talked about where the iPad fit in. For me it's for casual couch/bedside computing. I always tinker around with my iPhone, read HN, etc before going to bed, so the iPad would fit in perfectly there for me. (P.S. - hey ian!)

<comment><USER18> Hey Paul! I can see some new use cases, but the fact that Apple has made this compatible with most iPhone/iPod apps tells me there will be a lot of overlap. In my own case, I use my iTouch for couchtop browsing (and sometimes light email and Twitter) so the iPad doesn't hold as much of an attraction right now. If there's some other killer app(s) that come to the platform, I may change my mind.

<comment><USER20> I don't know, I use my iTouch around the house a ton for browsing/twitter because it's easier than whipping out a laptop, but something that was a) much faster and b) had easier text input would get used a lot more for both of those things. Even if all the iPad did was instant on, fast rendering of web pages, and reasonable two-hand typing, it would be a game-changing experience. Sure there's the RDF, but I believe it really will be the best web browsing experience, just like iPhone was the best mobile browsing experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> The iPad is for people who _can't be arsed_ to deal with the cognitive load of a full-blown computer. Which, depending on the circumstances, is just about everybody.

There's a reason why the best programmers are switching en masse from Linux to Mac on their desktops[0]. Mac OS X is a no-compromises Unix: the power and flexibility of Unix when you need it, but when you don't it imposes virtually zero cognitive load. Turn it on, it just works. Even the geekiest hacker ever is going to run into times when they just want to read or surf, and not even have to deal with the interference of a keyboard. For those times, the iPad is perfect.

[0]Actually two reasons, the other being that they stand to make money developing Mac desktop software. Linux? Not a chance...

</comment><comment><USER22> I view technology in a compartmentalized way. I'm always going to want a powerful desktop that has endless flexibility but I also want something simple that always works well. I don't really care if I can't run BitTorrent on my iPad. I can do that on my desktop.

</comment><comment><USER23> Okay but a bunch of these comments are very narrow minded and look like typical windows users comments. If people think that the mac os is for simple minded people because it is easy to use and doing things the long way or more in depth way is for smrter people... Then throw away your calculators and break out your abacus. Stop hating

</comment><comment><USER24> I think it's dumb to have to hold your screen with one or both hands for an extended period of time.

<comment><USER16> buy a dock

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> People aren't dumb just because they aren't passionate about the same things you are. Lots of smart people drive cars without giving a crap about how they work. Most people don't want computers; they want information appliances that work reliably.

</comment><comment><USER25> "The iPad isn't for dumb people, it is for people who don't want to think about their computer anymore."

These devices will eventually just become extensions of our ourselves as with other tools.

The Samurai didn't need to think about the inter-workings of his sword to make mincemeat of his enemies in battle.

Through training, the sword becomes a natural extension of one's self.

Why should our hand held computers be any different?

</comment><comment><USER26> Less is more.

<comment><USER27> Less is less

<comment><USER16> a focused well thought out less is better then an ill thought out more (ultimate example: the marquee and blink tags in Netscape)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> thought experiment: walk around your workplace and see how many non-developers work in windows with all their windows maximized

</comment><comment><USER28> Is the iPad for dumb people? Are automatic transmissions for dumb drivers? No, but you'll wish you had one in city traffic. That said, I'm glad I can drive a stick - even though I no longer own one.

<comment><USER29> I only drive manual transmissions, and I live in San Francisco - plenty of city traffic. The problem for me is that, if you know how to drive a manual well, you can't help noticing all the mistakes most automatics make (shifting at the wrong time, or into the wrong gear).

Most Apple products aren't like this. I ran nothing but Linux for nearly 10 years, but when I bought my first Powerbook, nearly everything was actually significantly _better_.

<comment><USER30> Apple's design philosophy for OS X and iPhone OS is different. OS X is not comparable to automatic transmission, it's a full *nix that lets you shoot yourself in the foot plenty of ways. iPhone OS is a different style.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> well sure. you can always phrase making something more accessible as "for dumb people". I doubt this kind of dim view of your customer base is highly correlated with successful business though.

<comment><USER11> you clearly didn't RTFA.

<comment><USER31> yeah, i read the whole thing. I'm not phrasing the post as if it was a response to the author. i agree with him.</comment></comment></comment>


Oh, You're Freelance? Good Luck Renting an Apartment - <AUTHOR> https://theoutline.com/post/7432/oh-you-re-freelance-good-luck-renting-an-apartment <comment><USER2> Freelancer here, went through something similar in Chicago a couple of times. This line in particular stood out:

> Others make tenants pay the whole year's rent up front

I had resistance from a landlord who didn't want to take a freelancer as a tenant, so I asked, "How many months up front would you want me to pay for you to feel comfortable, and then how can you make me feel comfortable that you'd take care of complaints and not just give me the finger because you already had all my money? I'm fine with whatever compromise you think is fair as long as we're both protected."

Just that conversation alone was enough. She said, "if you're this fair with me, you're probably this fair with your customers, and we'll be fine." The end, no deposit required.

I'm not saying that'll always work - but just remember that negotiation isn't binary. Find out what the person on the other side wants, and let them offer you a compromise they think both sides would accept. And if you're a freelancer, pick up the book Getting To Yes.

</comment><comment><USER3> The first line of the article is utter nonsense. The person with "$25 million" can just pay the rent up front for a year with ~0.1% of their wealth and not even have to reveal their bank balance. 99% of landlords would accept that.

Back in the real world, If you're renting a fancy apartment in downtown Manhattan with a few grand in the bank (e.g. you can't pay up front) you have some serious budgeting problems. The landlords/agents are doing you a favour by not allowing you to spaff away your money, IMO.

I'm currently FT but have contracted in London. I've never lived in a city center apartment, it's thoroughly a luxury good.

You can live half an hour away for less than half the price, or have a house with two gardens half an hour away for the same price.

It would be much easier to take the article seriously if they used realistic numbers for "normal" accommodation.

Personally I'd say that if you're going to go it alone then having a few months to a year saved is just par for the course. You need it in order to maintain a sense of sanity and not feel like you're completely impoverished all of the time.

For most people that will entail reducing outgoings so that the number is manageable.

It is, however, quite odd that I could have employed someone out of the proceeds of my business and they would be able to rent an apartment without issue. I imagine some people must do this with their spouses, for example.

</comment><comment><USER4> I own a small web company. people who work for me are able to get bonds for houses, I had to jump through a crazy amount of hoops, including accountant letters and office landlord letters to just rent an apartment.

<comment><USER5> Modern society is full of those incongruities.

I bought an apartment in Belgium while in between jobs. In order to get a loan I had to get a job as a cashier, essentially taking a cut in my net income (unemployment payments are very generous in Belgium.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> this is true even in the UK, if youre self employed youre going to struggle

<comment><USER7> Especially since the 'Right to Rent' law came into effect, you have to be able to prove your income source among other things.</comment></comment>


Generative Zoology with Neural Networks - <AUTHOR> https://corte.si/posts/code/genzoo/ <comment><USER2> Silhouettes don't have enough information for a neural network to really learn the structural relations. You can do "generative zoology" with full color and get very convincing results-- here's a GAN trained on beetle illustrations: [https://www.cunicode.com/works/confusing- coleopterists](https://www.cunicode.com/works/confusing-coleopterists)

</comment><comment><USER3> If the images are all black and white, why not train in a two tone, or greyscale colour space?

</comment><comment><USER4> What neat results! Did you exclude the plants and shellfish? How many images were in the training set?

By my calculations that training would cost you ~$700 on AWS. Is that right?

4 * 24h * $7.20/h = $691.20

$7.20/h for an 8 GPU instance: [https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance- types/p2/](https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/p2/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Beautiful!</comment>


Hayflick Limit - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayflick_limit <comment><USER2> That's also a good illusion. Which way does the double-helix rotate? For me most often the front sids sweeps left to right. And sometimes the direction of rotation can switch if I focus on a small part of it at the top or middle.</comment>


How To Hire Great Business Development People - <AUTHOR> http://blog.eladgil.com/2013/02/hiring-great-business-people-is-hard.html

<comment><USER2> I interview Business Development people just like I interview developers. I want to see them "code".

I have them open up their CRM tool of choice. Then I have them explain their funnel. They should be able to step me through how they've setup their stages: Qualifications, Needs Analysis, Decision Makers, Value Proposition, Quote, Negotiation, etc.

Then I have them deep dive on a particular deal and have them explain each of these stages for this particular deal.

<comment><USER3> I'd be extremely reluctant to hire somebody who was willing to give me a guided tour of another company's CRM.

Even ignoring the ethics of the request, if somebody is willing to act against their current employer's wishes, they're almost certainly going to act against my wishes as well.

There are plenty of ways to check an applicant's abilities without requesting access to confidential information. This is as true for biz dev as it is for coders.

<comment><USER4> Where did you yet the idea that GP asks for _confidential_ CRM deployment? I think you are jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

<comment><USER3> I got the idea from his post. The vast majority of BD candidates _can't_ open a CRM and provide detailed information about it's structure and the deals it contains without revealing confidential information.

As such, I think it's a poor idea to make that a standard part of the interview process.

You mounted an unwarranted defense. There are edge conditions where somebody could do so without a problem, but they're the exception that proves the rule.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I was slightly disappointed a list that was long enough to have two references to understanding legalese(1) omitted stuff as basic as "incredibly aware of your market" and "customer-need oriented"

On the other hand I love the fact that you've underlined _Raw charisma is drastically over rated by technical founders._ Very true, and very important, especially if you're selling complex b2b products to the sort of audience that usually will do deals with the socially-awkward stereotypical geek that understands their needs and won't do it with the beautiful, bubbly person that wants to take them out for a delightful long lunch to distract from the detail.

(1)useful, but you hire _lawyers_ to ferret that stuff out and bizdev guys to come up with propositions compelling enough to discourage the other party from weasel-wording their contract clauses

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback. I agree with your point about "incredibly aware of your market".

"Customer-need oriented" I think is great for a sales person. For a great BD person maybe a similar axiom should be phrased as "understand the other sides objectives clearly" and really dig into what the other party wants (versus what it claims it wants).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This seems like a good advice to me if you're hiring a bd guy. Any extra advice if you (a hacker) are _partnering_ with a bd guy?

The only thing I can contribute is to look if the would-be partner has any friends from previous engagements joining the new venture. If so, it establishes that your prospect is not a pathological liar (no one would stick around with that sort of person). It's important because a compelling bd story could be a great business opportunity, or complete bullshit, and a hacker type is normally unable to tell them apart.

It's not much, admittedly, but maybe this will get the conversation rolling?

<comment><USER6> You need to see their track record. Have they published anything? Do they talk about their failures? How much actual business experience do they have?

As someone who does both sides (software and business) I've come to realize that the best way to approach is as you would approach hiring a developer. You want someone who has shipped code and can ship code. Sometimes people exaggerate things, that's normal due to the competition. It is a red flag, but not a complete deal buster. Keep an eye for it. If it sounds fishy and does not have real data to back up then just send them out politely.

By the way, I get way more red flags from hiring developers than from hiring business people. Dunno why.

<comment><USER7> Care to elaborate on the red flags?</comment></comment></comment>


Hundreds shot and beaten as Chile takes to the streets - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/27/chile-hundreds-shot-and-beaten-street-protests <comment><USER2> I read this article and got the impression that the "19 dead" figure would be military killing protesters. So I thought that this was another heavy-handed putdown of _relatively_ peaceful protests.

But Wikipedia's breakdown [1] is quite different. By my count, 15 deaths don't involve the military at all. These deaths are from protest-related fires, looting-related shootings, and a citizen? who drove into a crowd of protesters and killed two people. 5 more deaths were direct results of military activity, so the apparent number is 20.

However, I can't judge the Wikipedia sources because many of them come from Spanish-language news sources. And, as the original article says, the government is actively impeding accurate statistics.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Chilean_protests#Deaths](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Chilean_protests#Deaths)

<comment><USER3> This is pretty much it, as we've seen and heard from the media and the INDH (National Institute of Human Rights)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think at this point we can agree that a subway price hike leading to tanks in the street a mere week later is not the true issue. Something about privatized pension companies taking way more than what would be their fair share is the likely culprit.

[https://protectpensions.org/2016/08/23/chile-failure- privati...](https://protectpensions.org/2016/08/23/chile-failure-privatized- pension-system/)

<comment><USER5> You're linking to a left-wing organization. But you're ignoring the fact that, just two years ago, a decisive majority of Chilean voters (55-45) voted in the center-right, pro-market party and Presidential candidate: [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/17/chileans- cast-...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/17/chileans-cast-their- ballot-in-decisive-presidential-runoff)

> Months of campaigning exposed deepening rifts among the country's once > bedrock centre left, an opening former president Piñera leveraged to rally > more centrist voters around his proposals to cut corporate taxes, double > economic growth and eliminate poverty in the world's top copper producer.

The current President ran on corporate tax cuts and won. The majority obviously did not do so under the belief that Piñera was going to nationalize the pension system. The protestors evidently are mad about that.

<comment><USER6> Voter participation was 50%. Decisive indeed.

<comment><USER5> That's not atypical for elections in Switzerland, Japan, or the US. That doesn't invalidate the outcome of elections.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "The latest protests follow grievances over the cost of living, specifically the costs of healthcare, education and public services. Unsatisfied by partial reforms following widespread education protests in 2011, the metro fare rise has proved the spark that has awoken Chile's formidable student body, according to psychiatrist and writer Marco Antonio de la Parra.

"Over the past decade, the Chilean state has lost touch with these problems," he said. "The places that have been targeted tonight are deeply symbolic: transport and energy represent the success of the state and the model it upholds."

On top of social discontent, anger has also been directed at the Carabineros national police force, once one of the country's most respected institutions but whose reputation has been eroded by corruption scandals and a reputation for brutality, whose heavy-handed repression of protests has also come under the spotlight."

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/19/chile- protests...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/19/chile-protests- state-of-emergency-declared-in-santiago-as-violence-escalates)

<comment><USER8> "over the past decade"... don't they have elections to solve these issues instead of acting like monkeys? Or is this the usual case of a minority making a mess because they don't like what the majority of the country has chosen?

<comment><USER9> Because it's an organized strike by the extremist-left wing in order to take over the goverment. They never win elections, so they organize chaos.

<comment><USER8> I see. I was suspecting something like this. I hope the government can resist this and democracy is preserved.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> When I see articles like this I ask myself some questions:

Have I ever been to Chile? No.

Do I know any Chileans? One.

Do I know Spanish? Probably less than the average Chilean gradeschooler.

Have I ever read any form of media, even entertainment, coming out of Chile? No.

Given the above, how can I ever verify that the media reports I see on HN and elsewhere are anywhere close to reality? Chances are the actual reality there is completely different from what I'm reading in ways I can't even imagine. I think before we make comments on Chile's or any other distant country's situation we should all consider that maybe we do not have sufficient information to have a valid opinion. Otherwise you're probably just regurgitating the narrative your media is pushing.

</comment><comment><USER11> It seems like there are dozens of massive anti-government protests all over the world right now.

<comment><USER12> Was there a time where that wasn't the case? It's a genuine question. It could be that such situation has always been relatively common but that nowadays it is way easier to learn about it without explicitly looking for it. because of speed of information and the fact that everybody has a camera and platforms where to share their voice.

<comment><USER11> I mean social media is not new and don't recall a time in the last 15 years or so when it seemed like there were so many happening simultaneously

<comment><USER12> Events I personally remember from the past ~10 years:

\- arabic spring, ~2011, ~6 countries (from memory: morocco, egypt, tunisia, yemen, lybia, syria), all in the same year

\- major greek protests (I believe 2009 or 2010, may be earlier)

\- ukranian revolution (~2014 IIRC)

\- major protests in Turkey around 2013

\- big protests in the US (Ferguson was around 2014 I think?)

\- massive protests in Spain in 2017

\- protests in Thailand before and after the military coup of 2014

A quick google search gives me a list of "crisis situations in Europe since 2000" with some dates [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_situations_and_unrest_i...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_situations_and_unrest_in_Europe_since_2000) . That's only for the small part of the world I'm the more familiar with.

<comment><USER11> Key word is simultaneously.

<comment><USER12> Sure, check a bit the dates I mentioned. If you look for big civilian protests worldwide in let's say 2011 or 2014 you will se a lot of things happening during the same year. Of course it depends what you consider to be simultaneous or not. My point is that it isnt clear to me that the current situation is unique. I feel that we are pretty bad at remembering the zeitgeist from the past. But I only have a limited knowledge of protests and conflicts around the world, I m sure that I missed a lot of things happening.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Chilean here, AMA.

<comment><USER2> The Wikipedia article on the protests [1] makes the run-up to the huge march on October 25 seem pretty chaotic. In particular, the deaths and fires from looting, as well as the destruction of public transit stations, makes the declaration of emergency look like a reasonable response, even if the subsequent shooting of protesters looks less reasonable.

So my question is, just how much chaos has there been, and where do you think the situation lies on the spectrum between "peaceful protests receive disproportionately violate suppression" and "military does its best to control chaos"?

And if I can ask one more, what do you think the general reason is? The claimed main reason, a ~5% increase in public transit fares, seems implausible.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Chilean_protests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Chilean_protests)

<comment><USER14> As someone living in a middle/lower class neighbourhood, I would say that there's been some chaos. I myself saw two train stations being burned and a supermarket being looted in front of me. However, as someone who's been to these peaceful protests since October 18, I think that the treatment the government and police have given to these protests is one of the big catalysts for the chaos and violence. Peaceful payment evasion protests started on October 14 and the government just decided to treat protestors as criminals, sending police's special forces units to train stations, where violent encounters between officers and protestors (at this point most protestors were 13-17 years old as the movement started with secondary students) which would infuriate people and on Thursday of that same week protestors started to destroy charging devices and opened gates to closed stations. From that point violence only would escalate.

I think that both police and military forces have shown a disproportionately violent response.

Last INDH (National Institute of Human Rights) report [1] says there have been 3193 detainees, 1092 injured in hospitals, and 88 lawsuits, of which 17 are for sexual harassment (including rape).

It might sound "reasonable" for some to declare emergency state and send military forces to the streets, but it's the first time that something like this happened since the dictatorship. Police officers are throwing teargas to kids and the elderly in the protests. There's also a big number of injuries that will never get to be informed.

About the reasons, I would say inequality. The increase in train fares is nothing more than a detonator. There's no organization leading the movement, so the demands are scattered (pensions, health, social contract, neoliberalism, concessioned highways, etc).

[1] [https://twitter.com/inddhh/status/1188525375577645057](https://twitter.com/inddhh/status/1188525375577645057)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Interesting how a story is told can influence perspective: [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin- america-50197673](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-50197673)

Equally, you can read one side from one perspective and ends up fueling it in that direction or read it from another perspective and be more focused upon the resolution and maybe fuel that tangent.

Just interesting how news is portrayed and how it can emotionally drive social media ,which can only fuel the angst over solving it. At least, that is one aspect I've become more mindful of over time.

</comment><comment><USER5> There is important context about Chile that people need to understand. Chile is by far the freest economy in Latin America: [https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking](https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking). Chile also has the highest per capita income: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_South_American_count...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_South_American_countries_by_GDP_\(PPP\)_per_capita). And it has the highest human development index: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_countri...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_countries_by_Human_Development_Index)

Unsurprisingly, many people don't want to rock that boat. The current center- right government was elected in 2017 by a decisive majority. (The President won 55-45 in the run off election).

The protests in Chile are largely socialists and labor movement that are trying to get policies passed they couldn't get through the democratic process.

<comment><USER14> About 33% of that GDP is controlled by the richest 1% according to The World Bank [1].

Yes, Chile's HDI is quite high for a Latin American country. The problem is, in the same city (Santiago) you've got communes with HDIs above Norway's (Vitacura, Las Condes, and Providencia got HDIs above 0.953) and then there are communes less than an hour away that got an HDI lower than Panama's (San Ramón HDI is 0.786) [2][3][4].

By OECD's data, Chile is the third country with the highest income inequality amongst OECD members [5].

[1] [http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/496131468228282235...](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/496131468228282235/Chile- Efectos-distributivos-de-la-reforma-tributaria-2014)

[2] Calculated with INE's data (2017) [https://imgur.com/GKMcGw9](https://imgur.com/GKMcGw9)

[3] [http://reportescomunales.bcn.cl/2012/index.php/Categor%C3%AD...](http://reportescomunales.bcn.cl/2012/index.php/Categor%C3%ADa:Comunas)

[4] [http://www.desarrollosocialyfamilia.gob.cl/informacion- socia...](http://www.desarrollosocialyfamilia.gob.cl/informacion- social/informes-de-desarrollo-social)

[5] [https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income- inequality.htm](https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm)

<comment><USER5> Panama has the fifth highest HDI in Latin America. And you can bet that the HDI in poorer regions of Panama are much lower than that of poorer regions in Chile.

But besides that, these trade offs are for Chile's voters to resolve. Those voters decided that sticking with markets, even in the face of higher inequality, was the way to go.

<comment><USER14> Yes, probably Panama's poorest regions are poorer than Chile's. However, is important to take into account that Panama's GDP is not even half of Chile's and Gini Index of Panama and Chile is almost the same [1].

Anyways, yes, that's something that voters should resolve. Sadly, there's a big discontent towards the political class in Chile (against both left and right-wing) and last elections had low participation (around 50%).

[1] [http://documentos.bancomundial.org/curated/es/24225147670682...](http://documentos.bancomundial.org/curated/es/242251476706821424/pdf/109215-REVISED- PUB-PUBLIC.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> How typical: we Americans have to learn about this from foreign media because our media is obsessed about Trump.

<comment><USER17> It has been very widely covered in US news since the protests / riots began.

CNN, CNBC, Bloomberg, CNN, WSJ, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, Fox News, NY Times, Washington Post, USA Today. All have had regular coverage of it.

6 days ago, USA Today: [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/10/21/chile-p...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/10/21/chile- protests-violence-looting-and-canceled-flights-santiago/4051262002/)

6 days ago, NY Times: [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/20/world/americas/chile- prot...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/20/world/americas/chile-protests- riots.html)

6 days ago, Washington Post: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/21/chile- prote...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/21/chile-protests- santiago-dead-state-emergency/)

6 days ago, CNBC: [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/21/chile-protests-president- ext...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/21/chile-protests-president-extends- state-of-emergency-after-riots.html)

6 days ago, WSJ: [https://www.wsj.com/articles/protests-in-chile-leave- three-d...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/protests-in-chile-leave-three-dead- five-provinces-under-state-of-emergency-11571617543)

And so on.

<comment><USER18> Nothing on the homepage of the NY Times today, above or below the fold. NY Times and other outlets did report on it, as you show in your links, but attention has lapsed. It feels like it deserves more focus as it could be a harbinger of more widespread unrest.

<comment><USER19> Says a lot about the NYTimes. I usually use aggregators like Google News, Reddit, HN, etc, and heard about this over a week ago.

The "more widespread unrest" is already here - there's ongoing civil disorder in Chile, Hong Kong, Lebanon, Iraq, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Kurdistan, Palestine, and Catalonia; ongoing civil wars in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Libya, Mali, DRC, Sudan; and endemic violence and state failure in Mexico and Central America. India is a potential flashpoint that could go up in smoke at any time (they have a demographic bulge that usually results in civil unrest, and I've read many young people there believe Gandhi "should've been more violent"), while the U.S. and U.K. both face potentially destabilizing internal conflicts. If the U.S. goes up in flames the whole world likely will, as we've been a deterring force for many regional conflicts.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: MusicWalla - A Social Online Radio : Review my product concept - <AUTHOR>

Hi guys,
I recently came up with a concept for a social online radio. It is just a half-baked idea as of now but the following presentation should give you a gist.
I'm a user experience researcher so all it's features are a result of different user data acquisition techniques. I am working on adding game dynamics to this model(foursquare style badges and user upvoting).
I would love to get some valuable inputs from you guys!
www.vikasvadlapatla.com/musicwalla
Direct link to presentation: http://www.slideshare.net/vgvikas/musicwalla-business-pitch-7864740 <comment><USER2> Interesting idea, though I think I like it more on a broad friend sharing stream than all listening together. There doesn't seem to me to be a benefit of only having people in the same room.

You've also gone with a 'fair' way of playing users tracks, though as a group, you may have better luck with playing the tracks recommended by the most popular users.

As a user experience researcher, you should know that you'll have the majority of the users just as listeners, and a much smaller percentage who are actively building the playlists, so you'll have to account for that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I had three types of music rooms in mind: location-based, genre-based, and friend/follower-based.

with respect to playing tracks by the most popular users, i think you've brought about an interesting point. I am currently working on a model where, at the end of every music "round", the most popular user is decided based on upvotes scheme and he/she gets to pick an additional song for the next round.. also allowing him to unlock badges and gain more credits! So far in my user interviews, people have liked this scheme and one of the user's mentioned that a sense of "competition" enhance the playlist and the listening experience.

The third point you made is particularly intriguing and something I hadn't thought about until now..But I am sure users would want to join the room just as listeners. In that case, either the control would automatically move to the next person in queue or it would switch to a computer generated playlist based on the previously played songs.

<comment><USER3> "So far in my user interviews, people have liked this scheme"

I'm sorry, but you're doing user experience research all wrong if you are asking them if they like your feature ideas.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Peter, this question came about in my second round of user interviews.. I asked users about the applications they used on a day-day basis. 9 of the 12 users mentioned Foursquare in this list.

I asked them a follow-up question to judge what made them use foursquare on a daily basis. To my surprise, all users mentioned acquiring more badges as one of their main motives. Some also mentioned the Leaderboard.

This prompted me to further ask the users whether badges and leaderboards would motivate them to use an online radio. Although most of the responses I got were quantitative, I did get a lot of qualitative feedback as well. One of the users also added that he would love to be rated by fellow users (instead of the computer). This encouraged me to ask them about the upvotes, etc..

How would you recommend me asking the users about new features?

<comment><USER3> You shouldn't ask users if they would use feature X, their responses will be almost meaningless. You should ask users about problems they have etc., not about features.

[http://fitzgeraldsteele.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/guerilla- re...](http://fitzgeraldsteele.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/guerilla-research- methods/) "You never ask the question you really want answered. If you ask the question you want answered, you'll miss all kinds of rich information."

If you ask users if they want more features, or feature X, they'll almost always say yes. It doesn't mean anything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> You have WAY too many features for an initial product idea. It's not focused.

Try to describe the value and differentiation of your service in 1 sentence.

Don't add game mechanics, upvoting and the kitchen sink unless it is part of the core value/differentiation.

The competitive advantage matrix you have at the end shows how unfocused you are: your competitor have few features, and you have checkboxes against ALL features.

More features isn't good.

More features is bad. It's less focused. You'll do them worse.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback Peter! I do understand that these are a lot of features to begin with and a lot of people have mentioned this to me. I am currently working on streamlining the feature list.

Since the product will function on user generated music playlists, keeping the user motivated to come back and use the product is of extreme importance. And I do believe that one of the main motives for users these days (I call them User 2.0) is game mechanics. My objective with using game mechanics is not only to make the user "happy", but to keep them motivated/addicted

<comment><USER3> If your core product isn't compelling, then game mechanics won't help. Leave them out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Uhhhh. I'd look at turntable.fm and see their "version" of what you're talking about. Their "rooms" are effectively channels, and they have heavy integration with music collections (and I think they'll make uploaded music available to a more general library soon).

I think your idea is a good one, though and I get it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Huh! Interesting.. pretty much what I was thinking about. Unfortunately, I could not sign up . but I would love to take a look at their product

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Try TuneIn radio by tunein.com. TuneIn is rediscovering radio and they have huge collections online stream.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll definitely check it out. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> clickable

<http://www.vikasvadlapatla.com/musicwalla>

[http://www.slideshare.net/vgvikas/musicwalla-business- pitch-...](http://www.slideshare.net/vgvikas/musicwalla-business- pitch-7864740)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> turntable.fm has built exactly that and has a very passionate set of early users. Unless you want to start your own startup, you should probably go work for them.

<comment><AUTHOR> I just found out about turntable.fm It does some like the same concept. I guess they beat me to the punch. Do you have any inside contact info for the folks at turntable/stickybits? ;) I tried contacting them on twitter but couldn't find their email addresses

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sounds like a good idea, now build it!</comment>


The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics - <AUTHOR> http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Hamming.html

<comment><USER2> _old proofs of theorems may become false proofs. The old proofs no longer cover the newly defined things. The miracle is that almost always the theorems are still true; it is merely a matter of fixing up the proofs. It is claimed that an ex-editor of Mathematical Reviews once said that over half of the new theorems published these days are essentially true though the published proofs are false._

I'm only around 55% of the way through (according to my scrollbar --- and thank you Readability!) but it's an incredibly interesting read. It's very lengthy, but I really advise taking the time to look it over. It really tickles those brain cells. Thus far, I'm not seeing anything "new" in this article, but seeing all these incredible things expressed and summarized up close is amazing.

<comment><USER3> (Safari Reader doesn't show the full article)

<comment><USER2> File it as a bug. It's in the menu and only a click away.

<comment><USER3> I did. Should have mentioned that, sorry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think our sense of geometry comes from hunting (not body decoration).

It's a little bit like mathematicians invent little "chains of reasoning" rather than "mathematics", and that these chains are interesting and useful; even if their original assumptions turns out to be incorrect, the reasoning is still valid. In the marketplace/ecosystem of mathematics, people then choose the ones that they find most useful and/or interesting.

I love the thought that when we meet aliens, they have utterly different mathematics from us, so it reveals how parochial our particular toolbox is. This has actually happened, in a sense, with Chinese mathematics. Apparently, their approach to "proof" was algorithmic rather than declarative - not just a different toolbox, but a different kind of toolbox.

</comment><comment><USER5> The discussion of beauty in mathematics resonates deeply with me and I seem to always relate such discussions with music. As a musician turned math enthusiast, I think the thought processes involved in the creation of music parallel those involved in the creation of proofs quite nicely. My obsession with music seems to complement my obsession with mathematics on some level that I cannot quite define. As far as I know, there is not a distinctly important practical relationship between math and music (please correct me if I am wrong), but I still feel as though there is some connection. I do not know if this is a personal thing or not, but I cannot stop relating the two!

</comment><comment><USER6> Next up: Unreasonable effectiveness of words in communication. We keep using the same words in different sentences, & they keep making sense.

<comment><USER7> To get a similar result, it'd be as if "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" turned out to _accurately describe ideas_ , without modifying the terms.

i.e., if it turns out ideas and "green" operate in the same locations in the brain, and if you exhibit anger + sleep patterns of thought while brainstorming.

<comment><USER6> Hm, it's not productive to argue over analogies. They're just used to illustrate a point. I was saying math was explicitly designed to work & to be general. Likewise words were designed for communication (not just for describing the real world), & I'd say that sentence communicates your meaning very well.

eg later he says:

>" _Is it not remarkable that 6 sheep plus 7 sheep make 13 sheep; that 6 stones plus 7 stones make 13 stones? Is it not a miracle that the universe is so constructed that such a simple abstraction as a number is possible? To me this is one of the strongest examples of the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. Indeed, l find it both strange and unexplainable._ "

That makes absolutely no sense. You might as well wonder why the word "wheel" describes wheels. Or wonder why wheels exist. These are empirical facts.

<comment><USER8> It's right there on the top: _"It is evident from the title that this is a philosophical discussion"._ In case you aren't interested in philosophy, I don't see why bother reading the article and commenting on it -- unless perhaps you want to say something against doing any philosophy in the first place.

But if you are interested in philosophy, then you should know that the philosopher often starts by wondering about something that most sane people take for granted. Case in point, some people do wonder why the word "wheel" describes wheels. There are tons of papers and books about philosophy of language.

Others ask why wheels exist, what is a wheel, or whether do they really exist at all. You can only be sure that the existence of wheels is an "empirical fact" after you have examined these questions. After all, "empirical fact" is a philosophical term.

Incidentally, "6 sheep + 7 sheep = 13 sheep" is not an empirical fact.

<comment><USER9> Prefacing an article with "this is a philosophical discussion" is not an excuse to stumble through nonsense like a drunken sailor staggering home. Similarly if I preface this post with "I don't mean to be rude" only to continue to slander and defame, I've not excused my actions.

Counting is defined by objects, and 13 is the sum of 6 and 7. Indeed it is an empirical fact in as much as it has a physical interpretation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Mathematics is a product of the mind; the mind is a product of evolution; evolution is a product of natural laws. If you want answers to these questions, it helps to look at what we are, exactly, and how we came to be.

In fact "simple" mathematics are not simple at all by any objective measure. Starting with any truly formal system, you need a stupendous number of deductions to get to things like elementary laws of arithmetic, or basic plane geometry. Mathematical proofs are not formal proofs--they are instructions for our brains. Evolution made the relevant parts of our brains the same, so same instructions lead to same results. That's why there's never any argument over whether a proof is correct, once a few people got to study it in detail. This also explains Hamming's observation that when proofs turn out to be "wrong" after math has evolved a bit, theorems are still usually correct. We find a new, better route to the same place in our brain, and recognize the hazards of the old route, now deprecated.

Okay, here is the key bit: if evolution made the relevant parts of our brains the same, that means it has arrived at a maximum, or at least a local maximum. What is the nature of this maximum? Physiologically, there are constraints on the amount of brain circuity our body can maintain. Brains consume a lot of energy, take up space, etc. So naturally, evolution ended up with a design where the same circuity can serve the greatest possible number of functions.

Of course, evolution only concerns itself with those functions relevant to our survival and reproduction. But there is nothing niche about those goals. If some general pattern occurs often in our quest for survival, then it likely occurs often in other quests that evolution never knew about--like building airplanes.

<comment><USER11> Mathematics is not a product of the mind any more than physics is. All theorems are true (or, more precisely, all theorems follow from their axioms), even the ones we haven't discovered yet. That a mind can choose an axiomatic system to explore does not mean the relationships between those axioms and their theorems are created by that mind.

<comment><USER10> Mathematics and physics are products of the mind, obviously. Mathematicians and physicists do their work by using their minds. They don't channel some divine truth--they merely filter what their mind makes through certain criteria. I don't understand this common tendency, exemplified by your comment, to shift attention away from how mind makes things, to the criteria according to which we filter them before we call them "science" or "mathematics". I've studied mathematical logic, and it has been of little use to me in mathematics. Philosophy of mathematics has been of no use at all. The practice of mathematics can get by perfectly well without that stuff. So maybe it's time to put aside the mysticism, and start looking at how our brains actually make what they make. Especially since we are just now starting to understand what brains are and how they've evolved.

<comment><USER11> I'm not talking about how we build them. I'm talking about what they are, and what they are is as they would be whether they were built by humans or computers or nature. That the theorems follow from their axioms is not a human invention, nor could it be. There is a difference between discovering something and inventing it. Man could not invent mathematics any more than man could invent electricity. When I say physics exists, I mean that the physical world exists and follows rules. If we discover those rules, it does not mean we have invented them.

<comment><USER10> You're "not talking about how we build them", but you were responding to my post where I _am_ talking about how we build them. I'm gonna say it again: I don't understand this tendency to shift attention away from the "how"--rather insistently, in your case.

<comment><USER11> Either you're not just talking about how we build them or I misunderstand you, because the first thing you said was, "Mathematics is a product of the mind."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This guy could easily cut 50% of his words and lose no meaning. He needs an editor.

<comment><USER13> Richard Hamming needs an editor -- that's a good one...

PS: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hamming>

<comment><USER14> for those who haven't read it, the transcript of his "you and your research" talk is worth repeatedly reading.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> saint-loup The original article by Wigner: <http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html>

</comment><comment><USER15> There is also, more recent, the unreasonable effectiveness of data: [http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MIS.2009...](http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MIS.2009.36)

</comment><comment><USER16> So after all that verbiage, he concludes:

Some math was designed to be useful.

Science is by definition those practical problems to which math can be applied.

He still doesn't know.

Very disappointing.

<comment><USER2> Sometimes it's important to realize just how little we know and clearly define it. Knowing that you don't know, knowing why you should, and understanding the inherent difficulties standing in the way of an explanation is 99% of getting there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. -Wittgenstein

</comment><comment><USER18> " Is it not remarkable that 6 sheep plus 7 sheep make 13 sheep; that 6 stones plus 7 stones make 13 stones? Is it not a miracle that the universe is so constructed that such a simple abstraction as a number is possible? To me this is one of the strongest examples of the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. Indeed, l find it both strange and unexplainable."

this is confusing because what he is talking about is -counting- not mathematics -mathematics- is an academic field that may include -counting- as one of its areas of study -but- it is confusing to reduce mathematics to counting</comment>


Review: Purism Librem13 laptop - <AUTHOR> http://www.davidrevoy.com/article341/review-purism-librem13-laptop <comment><USER2> I'm surprised that people call this a weak laptop. Clicking through to the article I thought it would have 2-4GB RAM and a weak CPU. It has 16G of ram and a very recent 3.10GHz Intel CPU. What are you doing on your laptops? This is a deeecent laptop and it is 13". The software you use is crappy if you can choke this machine w/o running a bunch of VMs concurrently.

<comment><USER3> I'm surprised at this entire comment thread.

> Dual core is pretty weak

> I had 16 GB of ram in 2010 and it was not even a top computer at the time

> It has 16G of ram and a very recent 3.10GHz Intel CPU. What are you doing on > your laptops? This is a deeecent laptop

What exactly are all of you people doing with your laptops? I'm running an old W500 Thinkpad at 2.8Ghz dual-core, 4GB DDR2, and a 500GB HDD. The only times this machine has struggled was when I was using a memory-leaking software (Firefox, etc.) or one that tried to load a _whole_ large file into memory instead of chunks.

If I need to work with _heavy_ graphics I can stick an eGPU into the PCI express or an FPGA if I'm doing specialized calculations.

But besides that, I don't understand why anyone needs all this gear.

<comment><USER4> > What exactly are all of you people doing with your laptops?

C/C++ project builds. Losing two cores just about doubles build times, and template-heavy C++ code makes the compiler want gigs of RAM all to itself. In principle I _should_ do this on a desktop or server, but IT isn't on board with that.

<comment><USER2> Do you do _full recompilations_ all the time? Don't you use incremental builds? If yes, the compilation time should only rarely be a problem. But reading people's comments I feel like there are many projects out there using a shell script like "gcc -c a.cpp; gcc -c b.cpp; ...; gcc -o prog *.o" out there.

<comment><USER5> Changing something closer to the root of a large dependency tree triggers a lot of recompilation. The lack of real modules and reliance of `#include` in C++ makes dependency graphs larger than they could be.

<comment><USER2> Not necessarily. Say I'm editing "bob.cc", and in the mean time edited "common.h" #included by many many files. While I'm editing "bob.cc", there is no need for me to rebuild the entire project until I want to see how it links to everything else (which can be postponed quite a bit if you have some tests); so I either run "make bob.cc" or "make test_bob.cc && ./test_bob". I don't know much C++ and all this is theoretical, but I think this is the ideal workflow with C/C++ development, and this is why incremental builds are useful, especially if the code is nicely separated into testable units.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I bought this computer for work just recently. Like he said, I really appreciate how easy it is to open it up and modify it. I'd add that it's very lightweight and small, but has specs just as good as my old MacBook Pro.

Great laptop for travel and customizability.

<comment><USER7> I really like these aspects as well, and would add battery life as a feature (I get 6-8 hours of typing+browsing with the brightness not cranked).

Some are disappointed that it's not a superpowered battlestation, but that's not what it's designed to be. It's really good in its niche.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Librem 13 would without a doubt be my next laptop if it had a >=Retina screen, USB-C†, and ideally a form factor as close to the current-gen MBP as possible.

I think they have a real opportunity to win over the group that doesn't like Windows and is getting increasingly scared off from macOS >= High Sierra, but not if it means a downgrade in any aspect of our current hardware.

† (Edit): I see that it actually does have one USB-C port, but I'm thinking more along the lines of dropping all non-C USB ports and charging over USB-C.

<comment><USER9> As amazing as Retina/HiDPI is, is it really worth trading "freedom" for? I have found high quality traditional 96ish DPI displays are really quit fine. Objectively, what does HiDPI provide? Do you write code faster? Do you write better words? I don't mean this sarcastically, but in a positive inquisitive manner. HiDPI is one of the few real innovations in the last decade. And yet, as cool as it is it doesn't add much as far as I can tell.

I went to a Dell. 32 GiB RAM. Xeon Quad Core. Heavy. But great.

<comment><USER10> > As amazing as Retina/HiDPI is, is it really worth trading "freedom" for?

I think for most people that answer would be a resounding "Yes". Me included, unfortunately.

<comment><USER11> If am not even sure what "freedom" I am giving up. I don't care about upgrading old machines, I don't even care about modifying the OS. I just care about getting work done quickly and with a nice experience. Freedom for me is not having to think about the Linux kernel or carefully inspecting software licenses to be sure I'm not polluting "freedom." I like MIT and Apache licensed open source software — but the almost religious fervor surrounding the Richard Stallman fringe of the tech community wears on me like the persistent, yet infuriating good nature of Mormon missionaries.

I want the freedom to just get my work done without having to consider an ideological struggle each day. I care more about WHAT I create and less about the purity of the tools upon which I create. I submit pull requests for open source software I use and I am happy to by licenses/donate (such as Sidekiq Pro, or donating to the Vapor team,) but beyond that, I'm not going to try to perform tech gymnastics or compromises to make some "free" computer work "almost as good as a Mac." You know what IS actually as good as a Mac? A Mac.

Lots of respect for the FOSS folks; I appreciate your mission despite not sharing the obsession.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I really like the Purism design aesthetic, but hardware-wise they just don't pack enough punch for me to work with.

Last year I ended 10+ years of developing on macos because their latest "pro" edition had a weak CPU and didn't support more than 16G memory (don't even ask me about the TouchBar).

After some research, I went with a quad-core System76 with 32G memory (could have gone to 64) and 4TB SSD. The laptop is an absolute beast for software development; various compile/build times were cut nearly in half (versus my previous MBP), it is a screamer. While I do love it, I must admit it's pretty heavy.

If Purism made a quad-core laptop with 32G+ memory, I'd be very interested.

<comment><USER13> > If Purism made a quad-core laptop with 32G+ memory, I'd be very interested.

Seems like it's difficult to get 32G+ RAM on recent Lenovo models. There's not so many options out there actually.

<comment><USER14> It's the same reason why the macbook pro tops out at 16 GB, most laptops use U series CPU's and optimize for thinness.

The U series CPU's are typically matched with (soldered) LPDDR3 for battery life and thinness, which maxes out at 16 GB. The Xeon and H series CPU's are matched with DDR4 for performance and therefore can go past 16 GB. AFAIK the U series CPU's with 32 GB will come with the cannon lake generation with LPDDR4 support, which should start shipping this year.

Lenovo used to sell the T470p which marries an H series CPU with a small (but not thin) form factor, but since the 8th gen U series chips now also have 4 cores / 8 threads (basically matching the 7th gen H series for performance) they've silently dropped that line, opting for a simpler line-up based on U series across the board, topping out at 16 GB in many cases.

<comment><USER15> I bought my t470p last year (2560x1440 variant) and its the best software dev laptop I've ever bought.

Damn shame imo their won't be a t480p.

<comment><USER14> I have a 32gb t460p (skylake) myself and it is still an awesome machine. All day battery life during normal web dev with the extended battery pack, but it can also handle a 20 gb ram hadoop vm without bogging down, and bioshock infinite ran nicely on the nvidia graphics. It has just one real compromise: it looks very dated.

It seems they intend the t480 series to be its successor, now that you can get quad core cpu's with dedicated graphics in that line.

<comment><USER15> Yep but the P was special because they put the insane HQ's in, the new 15w Quads are impressive but still way behind the 35w in raw crunch power.

That was the thing I liked about the T470p for performance it was the last step before doubling the price and getting a bigger heavier P-series.

The amount of power they put into 14" that stays cool under heavy load was damn impressive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I didn't see a price in the article. But there's a page on the Purism website to calculate prices: [https://puri.sm/shop/librem-13/](https://puri.sm/shop/librem-13/) Judging from that, I'd guess the model in the article is about $1700USD.

</comment><comment><USER17> Aargh, just noticed the keyboard violates another one of my cardinal usability rules: everything directly below the Enter key must be a Shift key. This one invented a need for a second Fn key and then fulfilled it by taking away some of the right Shift key... worse, it took the area that touch typists actually use to press Shift.

Chromebooks, Apple, and Microsoft understand this. Dell mostly does. Logitech does not, nor do second-tier manufacturers who try to shrink down layouts without user-testing with conventionally trained touch typists.

Purism, if you're reading this, please: right Shift must fully overlap the horizontal space of the Enter key.

<comment><USER18> A few of Lenovo's Flex/Yoga line have this infuriating right shift key placement:

[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lenovo+flex+4+shift+key&iar=images...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lenovo+flex+4+shift+key&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images&iai=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.laptopkey.com%2Fuploads%2F2068_1487725612_yyj.jpg)

(the SHIFT key is to the right of the UP_ARROW key)

Why laptop manufacturers feel the need to get creative with the key placement is beyond me.

<comment><USER19> My laptop doesn't have an End key.

Trips me up every time I am without a decent keyboard (to be fair: I mostly use it docked).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Wow, this seems like a pretty nice laptop that supports OSS software out of the box.

Keyboard, screen, and form factor seem to be exactly what people want. I wonder how the trackpad is (usually a major problem with non-Apple devices to get "right").

I also wonder what the battery life is like since I didn't see that in the review either.

<comment><USER21> I know I'm not normal about this, but I can't use a Linux/Windows laptop without physical mouse-buttons on the touchpad. This is actually the only reason I didn't buy a Librem13.

Apple's touchpad is better than the other OS's at least in part because the software driver is smarter. I think Purism themselves were working to improve the linux driver so there's hope on that front.

I read Apple's touchpad-driver source-code about 10 years ago, which was available to read under some OpenDarwin apple license. It was pretty neat. IIRC they draw a perfect circle from the center of the touchpad, radius extending to the top and bottom. Any time there's a keypress on the keyboard, within a small time-delay, any mouse motion outside of the circle is discarded. Brilliant! In comparison, the Linux and Windows drivers of the day would typically just say: within some larger(!) time-delay of a keypress, discard ALL touchpad motion. Which is noticeably more frustrating -- you had no way to reliably move the cursor at all while typing.

In any case, Macbooks were less enjoyable to me when they removed the physical button, but their driver is still ahead enough that it's not so bad to use, and their UI requires somewhat less right-clicking than I need especially on Linux. But for Linux usage I require precise left and right clicks which I can only get from real buttons.

I'm currently using a Dell Latitude 7380. The touchpad is great with real buttons :) But hilariously, I found (and taught them about) a bug with their keyboard firmware causing me frequent typoes, which affects all XPS 13 and Latitude 7xxx laptops. Last month they issued a BIOS update to fix it, specifically for the Latitude series. But if you have an XPS 13, I think they have not provided a fix yet, so you are probably running into typoes that are not your fault!

<comment><USER21> I suppose I shouldn't leave on a cliffhanger, even if it's off-topic.

If you have a Dell XPS 13, try the following in any editor: 1\. Type the letter "k". 2\. At virtually the same time, type the letters "o" and "k". Press them at basically the same time except so that the "o" is first before the "k".

You should expect to see "kok", but if you encounter the bug then you'll just have "ko". This problem is for any two keys on the keyboard, if typed in that "A, BA" pattern.

Let me know if you have the bug! If it's not solved in the latest BIOS, then Dell probably needs a kick-in-the-pants from a real XPS13 owner to solve it (even though I tried my best to convince them that it has the same bug as the Latitude 7xxx, which is basically the business-equivalent but with my beloved touchpad buttons).

<comment><USER22> Just to add a data point, I recently bought a Latitude 7370 (refurbished from eBay), and it does not seem to have this issue (BIOS 1.7.4). And now that I look at this version on Dell's site, it looks like I really need to update!

Side note: If you're looking for a laptop like the XPS13, under $500, and don't need as much processing power, check eBay. The refurbisher I purchased from seems to have lots of these, and may take offers. I got one with 3200x1800 QHD+ matte touch screen, m7-6Y75 CPU, 16GB RAM, and 256GB SSD for $475 shipped in the US. The service tag says it was in use almost exactly one year, and it looks brand new. I've only had it a few weeks, but so far my only complaint is that the battery life could be better (seeing ~4h average).

<comment><USER22> So, after updating the bios to the one released Feb 2018 (1.15.3), I can reproduce this issue, but only about once every ten or so attempts. Hopefully I didn't just start a nightmare :)

BTW, if I had to guess, BIOS 1.8.3 sounds like it probably introduced the issue:

\- Resolved internal keyboard double letters issue.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Does anyone know whether the USB-C port will charge using a typical USB-C charger? I don't buy anything that requires anything else anymore.

Very annoyed that the Dell XPS 13 is barely compatible with any USB-C chargers. It won't even recognize USB-IF certified chargers.

<comment><USER23> I have a Librem 15 v3 and it would not charge with an Apple USB-C charger.

<comment><USER17> Though that charger is not fully standards-compliant, it is one of the more compatible chargers out there because it's popular. So if the laptop doesn't work with it, it probably doesn't work with the others, either. That's unfortunate. Thanks for the info.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Has anyone else noticed that, on Purism's website[1], you can only select "Don't Include" for the TPM dialog box if you have also selected the "English (UK)" keyboard layout option? Or is this some bug in my particular web browser?

For a company whose advertising copy on their "Why Purism?" page includes, "We believe people should have secure devices that protect them rather than exploit them,"[2] only allowing removal of the TPM chip for a particular keyboard layout is a pretty big red flag.

[1]: [https://puri.sm/shop/librem-13/](https://puri.sm/shop/librem-13/)

[2]: [https://puri.sm/why-purism/](https://puri.sm/why-purism/)

<comment><USER23> This [https://puri.sm/posts/tpm-by-default-and-free- international-...](https://puri.sm/posts/tpm-by-default-and-free- international-shipping/) says they are moving to including the TPM in all systems, but there are some UK models left in stock without it.

The TPM is a security feature--you don't have to use it. I have not used it on my laptop but I see from the documentation that it is different from some other trusted computing systems in that the end user controls the keys and what is loadable, not the vendor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> The laptop looks nice enough, but the lack of dedicated PgUp/PgDown/Home/End keys is a deal-breaker to me. I'm also on a 13.3" (Lenovo E31-70, previously a HP ProBook) and fitting these keys really isn't a problem.

</comment><comment><USER26> I wonder when it will become illegal to produce such laptops as states progresses with surveillance and data collection about citizens. I would really like to buy privacy oriented laptop as I don't feel comfortable that someone can look up my private life. But this laptop is pretty weak to use it for work I do sadly. When something more up to date is going to come out, I am definitely going to buy.

<comment><USER27> That's a probable future scenario, that computers will have privacy-invasive data collection or some kind of security/encryption bypass _required by law_.

I feel like those of us who are privacy-conscious need to support projects/companies/products like these, that are transparent/open-source and respect their users' privacy.

I also agree with your sentiment that this particular laptop model might not be powerful enough for "serious work" \- although it's getting close, and I'm considering something similar in the near future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I don't see any specs on the wifi card there. _Assuming_ it's an Intel 802.11ac dual band minipci-express interface, (likely 2x2, not 3x3), which has decent linux kernel driver support. But if it's not specified it could be a lot worse. There's a shocking number of "new" laptops that still ship with 2.4 GHz only, 1x1 (SISO) wifi cards, because they're cheap as hell.

<comment><USER29> They say on their website "Atheros 802.11n w/ Two Antenna"

Wi-fi cards are actually a huge issue if you are concerned about privacy. You have no idea what the firmware is doing, and it has access to your entire memory through the pcie interface, and the internet at the same time.

<comment><USER28> 802.11n

in the year 2018

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.................

I don't see how using a Qualcomm (Atheros) 802.11n chipset is any better than an Intel chipset card, developers do NOT get access to the code that's running its firmware. Same as Intel.

<comment><USER30> If you look at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open- source_wire...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open- source_wireless_drivers) you can see that a few of the atheros chipsets have both OSS firmware and OSS drivers, the intel ones only seem to have OSS drivers. Perhaps they are using one of those that have the OSS firmware/drivers combination?

<comment><USER28> It really doesn't matter, the actual RF baseband inside the chip is still closed source. Atheros never released it for any model. The firmware interface to the OS driver, yes, but not what's going on under the hood.

<comment><USER30> It's still better than a proprietery firmware though, right? The baseband does not have as deep access to the system (like DMA), so having the firmware be OSS should at least be better than the alternative.

<comment><USER28> I do not see the logic in having a M.2 NVME SSD attached to the pci-express bus, which certainly has a totally closed source binary in its onboard controller... That's in the laptop, and it's OK? It has access to every disk read/write operation and manages a small RAM cache for the SSD flash, organizes the write wear leveling algorithm, etc.

But they have to go with some weird, ancient 802.11n card instead of a modern 802.11ac 3x3 MIMO, dual band Intel chipset card, because they don't like the binary blob in the ROM of the Intel minipci-express card?

At some point in time you have to trust the devices you're attaching to the pci-express bus in an x86-64 system or you won't have any useful functionality left.

<comment><USER30> I agree in principle, but there is also something to be said for not having a closed system being able to talk both to a wireless network and have DMA.

Anyway, the more open components the system the better, and if this shows there is an interest for an more open system, the next one might be more open than this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This looks like a really great system. The gpu is a little of a letdown but other than that maybe this is the laptop to replace my MacBook.

</comment><comment><USER32> What is up with that battery life... Lenovo X laptops with older batteries I have (i5-i7) run 15+ hours while coding and browsing. And lighter laptops I have with Ubuntu/Debian get well over 20 hours. Does this thing have a very small battery or is it too powerful? So little battery life is a shame so wondering if it is software or hardware.

</comment><comment><USER33> From what I can see, still no RYF certification, meaning no purchase for me. I will continue to watch any further developments.

See also: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15358342#15359710](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15358342#15359710)

</comment><comment><USER34> Interesting to see high quality laptops for open source OSs. I would so buy this laptop if it came with a typematrix 2030 keyboard built-in

<comment> loup-vaillant I carry both (laptop and typematrix) on my bag. Heavier, but bearably so. And since I use a Roost laptop stand, I can't use the built in keyboard most of the time anyway.

[https://www.therooststand.com/](https://www.therooststand.com/)

<comment><USER35> I used to do the same. Eventually the cable of my TypeMatrix 2030 USB was damaged and I tried to fix it but I didn't know what I was doing back then. I replaced the first one with two new -- one for having at home and one for having at work.

I bought my first TypeMatrix 2030 USB in 2010 and kept using TypeMatrix 2030 USB until december of last year when I bought an ErgoDox EZ Shine with Kailh Thick Gold switches. Completely black with nothing printed on the keys. The ErgoDox EZ keyboards are ortholinear like the TypeMatrix and they have similar keys in the middle but they are split in two and they have legs so you can angle them. Also they are programmable so you can assign your own mapping. My key map is based on Dvorak of course.

The ErgoDox EZ is quite expensive but it has been worth it IMO. Very much so :)

The ErgoDox EZ is a bit more convoluted to travel with and you wouldn't be able to use it without a table but then again I had already stopped carrying my keyboard and laptop most of the time -- I now only bring them if I am going someplace and will be away from home for many days. Laptops aren't that great anyways; short battery life and the screens are too small. I mainly use a stationary computer with dual 24" monitors, 32GB of RAM, an AMD Ryzen 7 1700 CPU and an Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB graphics card.

Here is the ErgoDox EZ website: [https://ergodox-ez.com/](https://ergodox- ez.com/)

Here is the layout I created for my keyboard using their online tool: [https://configure.ergodox- ez.com/keyboard_layouts/qppwjy/edi...](https://configure.ergodox- ez.com/keyboard_layouts/qppwjy/edit)

There are two things that are really nice about having the keyboard be programmable;

1\. I can use it with any computer without having to configure layout customization on the computer itself. Just set the keyboard layout of the computer to be US QWERTY if it isn't already (I live in Norway) and I can use my keyboard with the Dvorak based variant that I have defined.

2\. It can send different signals based on whether you are tapping or holding a button pressed. Some people remap their caps lock to ctrl, some to esc. Typically people that use emacs will map it to ctrl and vim users will map it to esc. I use vim but I think having ctrl in that position is nice as well, so I have the button in that position configured so that it sends esc if I tap it and it sends ctrl if I press and hold.

Here is a photo of my room that I took just a couple of days ago: [https://i.imgur.com/NcqDL9N.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NcqDL9N.jpg)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Unless purism can prove they are NSA proof, I would not buy their computers. They expect a very large premium for the fact that their computers are open sourced.

Don't get me wrong. I believe what Purism is doing is great and with the direction of where society is heading this is a much needed product. I just feel like they could be doing more to prove that they have a truly secure(from NSA) and open.

With the Chinese social credit system and the vault 7 leaks; this is going to be a massive market segment.

<comment><USER37> Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Purism itself was a secret NSA division :)

That would be the smartest way for them to target specifically the people that are actively trying to avoid being spied (so, logically, they have something important to hide).

<comment><USER36> That could be but if purism open sourced their designs and their drivers etc.(like they have) then it would be harder to mask that fact.

Or maybe you are a NSA agent trying to send false flags! :p

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> > GPU: Sixth Generation Intel HD Graphics 520.

Every time I see Intel HD Graphics I think weak GPU. Bad for image, Intel.

<comment><USER39> Really? I want Intel graphics. Fuck dual CPUs on my developer laptop. I don't want to figure out how to disable or switch a separate NV/AMD GPU if all I'm doing is photo editing and running docker images.

I'd really prefer if the XPS15 or HP Spectre 15in had the option for an Intel card instead of an nvidia GPU I'll never use.

<comment><USER40> What about the new Ryzen Mobile? Decent GPU and CPU, no crazy power overheads with PCIe or GDDRx.

<comment><USER41> Unfortunately the laptops with that CPU all suck. If the XPS 13 would include Ryzen as an option I would have chosen it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Am I to understand this laptop doesn't support uEFI?

<comment><USER43> It comes with coreboot. Is there a free UEFI-based init software that you would want to use instead of coreboot?

<comment><USER44> Coreboot is low-level plumbing, on top of which, you can place either a BIOS (SeaBIOS) or a UEFI (TianoCore). Purism chose the former.

There's an open question [https://forums.puri.sm/t/install-tianocore- payload/2629](https://forums.puri.sm/t/install-tianocore-payload/2629) and a somewhat-relevant developer comment at [https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-v15-boot- issues/1202/7](https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-v15-boot-issues/1202/7) .</comment></comment></comment>


How to "Win" Arguments and Infuriate Opponents (with examples) - <AUTHOR> http://lbrandy.com/blog/2009/02/how-to-win-arguments-and-infuriate-opponents-with-examples/ <comment><USER2> Love that definition of sophistry. One of my good mates is big into running intellectual circles around lesser trained people in oratory, which is apparently quite satisfying to him, but doesn't get down to truth/wisdom/epiphany quite so well.

As for God, despite it not being in vogue intellectually, after some research into theology and philosophy, some cursory touchings on science, and some discussions with some very smart people, I became a monotheist. I'll worship in any house of worship and don't belong to a religion.

There are some very compelling arguments for atheism, and answering the question, "If there was no God and no afterlife, how would I live my life differently?" is very important to do. It might be scary, especially if you're very religious, but take a crack at it. There's a middleground where you can live more for the present and this life without giving up on any duty you ascribe to yourself, and you'll grow stronger as a person for thinking down that road. The question, "How would I live my life if there's no afterlife and humanity will eventually go permanently extinct?" is an even scarier one, and I can't bring myself to seriously consider that one yet, but I'd like to eventually confront it.

As for, "You can't disprove God", I can give some compelling arguments for at least agnosticism and explain my beliefs in more than just desire for God, desire for purpose, Pascal's Wager, or utility of God positions, which are what most take. The easiest way around it? Use that circular reasoning thing - "All theologians are full of it, because theology is BS."</comment>


Spotify's plan to beat Apple: sign the rest of the world - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/2b1b317a-f87b-11e8-8b7c-6fa24bd5409c <comment><USER2> Alternative URL for readers getting paywalled by ft.com:

[https://google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www...](https://google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ft.com/content/2b1b317a-f87b-11e8-8b7c-6fa24bd5409c)</comment>


A one-line change to the Chrome sandbox - <AUTHOR> https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2020/04/you-wont-believe-what-this-one-line.html <comment><USER2> > "You Won't Believe what this One Line Change Did to the Chrome Sandbox"

\- if (root) {...}

\+ if (!root) {...}

One liner can change everything. :P

</comment><comment><USER3> Dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22945630](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22945630)

</comment><comment><USER4> I have always been interested in learning how sandboxing work in Chrome or Firefox. I know that they are implemented as separate processes for different tabs or even addons. What I am interested in is how those sandboxes communicate and be orchestrated with each other. I imagine there is a very efficient IPC mechanism here. Does anybody have more information or point me to a resource to learn more?

<comment><USER5> I think Chrome uses Mojo for IPC? You might find [https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/mojo...](https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/mojo/README.md) useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Duplicate, and the change is in Windows and not Chrome's sandbox.

</comment><comment><USER6> Not sure if the title is ironic or actual clickbait.</comment>


University of Maryland discovery may lead to 'smart pill' - <AUTHOR> http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-07-29/health/bs-hs-memory-drug-20100729_1_smart-pill-cognition-acid <comment><USER2> I'm not optimistic about this ever being legal even if it ends up being safe and effective. The bottom line is that I can't see the FDA ever approving a mind-altering drug that isn't for a recognized disease.

<comment><USER3> Step 1: classify stupidity as a mental disease.

<comment><USER4> Stupidity often has victims other than the carrier.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Schwarcz and other scientists have been studying the link for more than a decade_

Ha, so another ten years before human testing? What if they used an experimental smart drug on themselves and speeded up research? :D

<comment><USER6> ARTIFICIALLY-INDUCED INTELLIGENCE DETERIORATES AT A RATE OF TIME DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO THE QUANTITY OF THE INCREASE.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _mice genetically engineered to produce 70 percent less kynurenic acid had markedly improved cognition... [and] were better able to... remember unpleasant experiences_

Sadder but wiser?

</comment><comment><USER8> go terps</comment>