Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/22/bill-gates-says-apple-should-unlock-the-iphone/ <comment><USER2> In Tim Cook's words, from his latest letter to the employees:

"Some advocates of the government's order want us to roll back data protections to iOS 7, which we released in September 2013. Starting with iOS 8, we began encrypting data in a way that not even the iPhone itself can read without the user's passcode, so if it is lost or stolen, our personal data, conversations, financial and health information are far more secure. We all know that turning back the clock on that progress would be a terrible idea."

The last released non-beta iOS is 9.2.

Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

<comment><USER3> Your Cook quote is DH3 on the disagreement hierarchy.[1] I agree with it, but it doesn't engage with any arguments for or against the court order.

> Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth? I think it's far more likely that he believes what he says he believes.

As much as the HN crowd likes to side with Apple on this matter, reasonable people can disagree about what's best. I hope Gates's position causes people to reflect on _why_ they have the opinion they do. Gates doesn't have some shady ulterior motive. He's simply stating his opinion on the matter, and using some hastily-conceived analogies to explain it to the general public. That's all.

1\. [http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html](http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html)

<comment><USER2> > > Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

> Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and > draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth?

Check which companies sided with Apple this time and which didn't, then compare with some other older cases, for example after Snowden's revelations, then you tell me how you see the current state this time.

Almost certainly the phone doesn't contain anything relevant: it was just a business phone of the killer who actually took care to destroy his private phone and computer, the backup data out of the phone is already owned by the FBI and they just clumsily locked themselves out.

Even if I can imagine Gates believes what he says the context matters and shouldn't be left unmentioned. Interests and affiliations of somebody influential making the public statement are certainly important to mention. Also to compare, Cook was almost presented guilty for trying to preserve the products of his company.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> >"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records," he said. "Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times'."

Seriously? It's absolutely different (not to mention his ribbon analogy makes no sense at all). I see all of this more a question of "can Americans actually have anything remain private on a commercial device?". I don't want anyone but me to have unfettered access to my data, regardless of if it's phone records, bank info, or my phone's contents.

Here's hoping that the iPhone 7 has a secure enclave that either 1.) deletes keys on firmware flash, or 2.) doesn't allow it to be upgraded ever.

<comment><USER5> The reality is that Apple already has unfettered access to this device: they left themselves a backdoor to which only they have the key, in the form of a "secure" update mechanism that is so "secure" that even the user can't control it, only Apple can. To me the actual question here is whether the FBI should be allowed to ask and then force Apple to use the backdoor Apple built into their product; Apple painting this as if they are being asked to build a backdoor instead of use an existing one is them being nothing more than dishonest in an attempt to twist the story and shift the blame. So yes: I think it is fair to describe the security of this device, from the perspective of Apple, as nothing more than a ribbon, as Apple already has "unfettered access to [your] data". Apple trusts users so little that they don't give users control of the hardware they _own_... this is frankly a good lesson on them that this is responsibility they should never have hoarded. "Here's hoping that the iPhone 7 no longer has a backdoor that is controlled by Apple."

<comment><USER6> Sure. It's a Backdoor that only you and Apple know of. Right?

<comment><USER5> No: it is a backdoor that everyone in the world knows of, including the FBI, which is why this is even a question. Apple is the only party allowed to change the software running on the device, using their software update encryption key: _this is a backdoor into at least this device (an iPhone 5C)_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I do not understand why Bill Gates would take a contrary position to Silicon Valley / tech community on this issue. Any insight into why he is taking this stance?

What I have found even more confusing is why the FBI hasn't asked the NSA for help. The NSA's thousands of skilled hackers simply can't break into an old iPhone?

<comment><USER8> Because the US government is Microsoft's biggest customer by a country mile.

Hand that feeds you and all that.

The FBI already have the info they need, don't need nsa's help, this is purely about setting a precedent.

<comment><USER9> Gates is not in charge of Microsoft anymore... and hasn't been for a long while.

Actually, my best hypothesis is that, remembering that the Gates Foundation, which is the organization Gates is actually involved with now, works a lot in government/policy circles, Bill himself might have views that are more common within that circle that within the tech community. Whether that means that he is taking this point because he has more information, less information or just different priorities, I do not know. I don't even remember if Gates took any position on the original crypto wars.

I personally find that the balance of arguments weights much heavier on the side of security and privacy, versus surveillance, and that creating this tool and setting this particular precedent would do more harm than good. I can still imagine a world in which Gates disagrees with that without being knowingly evil, though.

Actually, when it comes to Gates in particular, I admit that when I was younger I spent a long time thinking of him as "knowingly evil" (or at least selfish to a extreme degree) for completely different reasons. Later I realized that he might have simply put priority on different ethical axioms than my high-school self did... and in the balance of things might end up having been a higher positive force in the world than a negative one, by far, see e.g. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Eradication_efforts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Eradication_efforts) . This doesn't mean I agree with him on the issue at hand, though.

<comment><USER8> He's not in charge of, but still holds at least $12bn of MS stock, on which a lot of his wealth is leveraged and predicated, which would certainly give him a vested interest in defending microsoft's interests, which are the government's interests.

You may well be right however that the circle he runs in has influenced his stance on this too, however he has historically taken a pro-government anti- knowledge stance - see [http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates- the-roll...](http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the-rolling- stone-interview-20140313?page=2) for instance in which he trots out the "Snowden is a traitor who needs to come home for a fair trial" rhetoric.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Does he feel that Apple should also unlock the 12 other phones the Justice Department is reportedly also filing court orders for?

[http://gizmodo.com/justice-department-forcing-apple-to- unloc...](http://gizmodo.com/justice-department-forcing-apple-to-unlock- about-12-oth-1760749507) The Justice Department is pursuing court orders to force Apple Inc. to help investigators extract data from iPhones in about a dozen undisclosed cases around the country...

And what about when authorities in the UK also have cases where they "need" phones to be unlocked? And how about China? And every other government in the world that may want to have phones unlocked?

</comment><comment><USER11> In an interview with Rolling Stone's Jeff Goodell, the Microsoft co-founder and richest man in the world did not mince words when asked if he considered whether Snowden is a hero or a traitor.

"I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a hero," Gates said. "If he wanted to raise the issues and stay in the country and engage in civil disobedience or something of that kind, or if he had been careful in terms of what he had released, then it would fit more of the model of 'OK, I'm really trying to improve things.' You won't find much admiration from me."

Gates said that there "has to be a debate" about government snooping, but indicated that some aspects of government surveillance are best left a secret.

Microsoft has seen quite a bit of controversy regarding its alleged cooperation with the NSA. Last July, the Guardian reported that Microsoft had aided both the NSA and FBI in accessing user data, including providing video and audio conversations from Skype, Microsoft's video chat service. A Der Spiegel report in December also found that the NSA would use fake Windows error messages to spy on people.

Ref: [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-gates- snowden_n_496...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-gates- snowden_n_4964311.html?section=india)

[http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the- roll...](http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the-rolling- stone-interview-20140313)

</comment><comment><USER12> @dang: why is this news not on the frontpage? I found out about this news on a local newspaper site - not good :(

So how many people flagged this news? Which company IP address range were involved? Keep an eye on that. Thanks.

It's on 285. right now:

      Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone (techcrunch.com)
      59 points by phesse14 5 hours ago 91 comments

What's going on?

On 212:

      Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone for FBI (macrumors.com)
      13 points by samstokes 7 hours ago 8 comments

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11157328](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11157328)

And on 1:

      Bill Gates calls for terror data debate (bbc.com)
      22 points by lentil_soup 52 minutes ago 4 comments

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11158647](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11158647)

</comment><comment><USER13> I disagree with Gates on this one, I think in the US that has common law legal systems, setting the precedent by unlocking (if possible) the iphone in question would be disastrous.

<comment><USER14> Legal precedents are only set in legal judgements, aren't they? I think Apple unlocking the phone would only set a cultural precedent.

<comment><USER13> Isn't there a court case opened against Apple on this one? Sorry my legal knowledge is very limited but I think the official FBI request goes through a court. Maybe I am wrong, if somebody has the details I would love to read about it more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> So why is Microsoft fighting us.gov regarding access to data stored in another country? Isn't that, to the layman, just another variety of ribbon-wrapped box. Gates should know that, just like extra-jurisdictional data retrieval, signed malware data retrieval is dangerous, bad business and awful precedent. He must publicly set the record straight for his company's stance to have any credibility.

<comment><USER16> The reason Microsoft isn't releasing information stored in other countries is because doing so would break the law in those other countries. It would open Microsoft and its employees to prosecution in those countries.

I disagree with Bill on phone security and agree with Apple's stance, but even so it's pretty clear to me that Microsoft has a stronger case and literally has no choice but to deny the US DOJ access to records held abroad.

</comment></comment><comment> saiya-jin well, what a coincidence, I guess MS phones aren't selling well, so let's undermine competition a bit.

not for a second do I suspect mr gates to be stupid or not comprehending situation in full detail, with all possible consequences. and here I thought that he went from most hated IT guy on this planet in '90s to somebody actually concerned about good of the mankind. can somebody shed some light what would be his true motivations for these statements?

</comment><comment><USER17> Bill Gates: "Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times'"

...Well, that sums up his understanding of the the encryption technology. Then what are we to expect of the general public, when even Bill Gates sees a "ribbon around a disk drive"?

<comment><USER3> I thought it was quite clear that Gates was making an analogy for non- technical readers. He doesn't really think of encrypted devices that way.

Unfortunately, there's no way Gates can win here. If he uses technical language, journalists and/or readers won't understand. Or worse: they'll misunderstand his views. If he uses simplistic analogies, he invites mockery from technical readers.

<comment><USER18> Yes, but in the second case he'll win the sympathy of the laymen who will think "hey, if even bill gates says they're wrong, maybe they're wrong. The guy's a genius". These people are less vocal than tech readers, but they vastly outnumber them.

<comment><USER3> I doubt Gates has any hidden motive behind his statements. He's just saying something he believes to be true, while trying to make sure others understand him. Why would he care about getting sympathy from laymen? He's the richest person on the planet. He's got more important stuff to do, like sparing millions of people from disease, poverty, and hunger.

<comment><USER18> Then it's even less understandable why should he muddle the waters with an ill conceived analogy like the "ribbon around a hard drive" one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> No, Mr. Gates, cutting this ribbon would mean that all the other ribbons are cut by default. Not just by your allies, but by your not-so-friends in North Korea.

It's not about cutting a ribbon. It's about putting a hard drive in a box that self destructs when you try to open it. What your friends are asking is not to cut a ribbon, but to make the box open safely with a master key. Your government could not even stop wikileaks and your own employee to turn against you -- how do you expect the world to trust them with master key?

Overreaching beyond means and have it blow up in the face is quickly becoming an American virtue in the 21st century.

</comment><comment><USER20> Wasn't MSFT the first company to hand over all data to a three letter agency? Yes it was. So no surprise. Win10 was born in this context too. And he still owns billions worth of its stock.

</comment><comment><USER21> Considering Windows 10 full disk encryption sends the keys to Microsoft, I am not surprised.

[https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a- window...](https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-windows- computer-microsoft-probably-has-your-encryption-key/)

</comment><comment><USER22> Can anybody explain why unlocking just this specific phone is bad? Can't we decide on a case-by-case basis? It's not like Apple is being asked to backdoor all Iphones so FBI can read everyone's data. Just this specific one ordered by court. What am I missing?

<comment><USER23> First of all, it sets a precedent that companies can be forced to create software that willfully compromises their security mechanisms. This is very much different from your typical data dump ordered by a judge. It's quite likely that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies would use such a precedent in many future cases.

Second, it's unclear how easy it would be to create firmware that only works on a specific device. What if there's a bug, or what if someone finds a way to spoof the device ID that would probably be checked? It could very well end up being a backdoor for all iPhones after all (or, at least, for all iPhones without a Secure Enclave).

This EFF article has a couple more points[1].

[1]: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical- perspective-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective- apple-iphone-case)

<comment><USER24> Yes, the precedent is the key thing here.

Let's say that Apple crafted an update that does what the FBI wants. That in itself wouldn't put other iPhones at risk, as long as a signed copy of that malicious update didn't leave Apple's custody. The FBI hasn't even asked for that. They say that Apple could do all the work in house. Furthermore, it's unlikely that this malicious update would work on newer iPhones.

But the precedent would be established.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Anybody remember this? [http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html](http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html)

</comment><comment><USER26> "No computer will ever need more than 640K memory" \- Bill Gates 1981

"There is no future in the Internet." \- Bill Gates 1988

</comment><comment><USER27> Wow. Just wow. I keep thinking there is some huge cavet missing from the story, but if there isnt, that is massivly disconnected from reality.

Call and message info, okay maybe, but full access? There is no way you can say thats fine.

I have said it in an earlier comment and ill say it again, i think they are inly doing this, on this case, to make a precedent, and only on this case, as few people will want it to be on record, that they are 'siding' with terrorists.

Imho, its bullshit, all the way through.

</comment><comment><USER17> Coming from a man who created aptly named "Windows", where FBI never needs to ask for access.

</comment><comment><USER28> Gates does some great things but he's not thinking far enough into the future here.

If our law enforcement cannot understand that terrorists will simply switch to use another encryption tool, then we have a much bigger problem than unlocking a single iPhone. Our security force does not know how to keep us safe. I'd rather they figure that out sooner than later.

</comment><comment><USER29> Bill Gates led a company that shipped products with poor security for decades just to maintain their first mover advantage. He actively and deliberately took part in abusing the fact that security is not the first thing assessed in a product.

He might be a brilliant man, but he clearly doesn't have the vision when it comes to security and privacy.

</comment><comment><USER30> No surprises, considering his attitude to Bitcoin.

</comment><comment><USER31> Is anyone doubting apple unlocked the iPhone? I don't understand B Gates stance. of course they did unlock and give it to the police. of course they will never say it in a PR and we all know why. Is anyone doubting that we are now living in a world where EVERY one of us is a potential suspect being processed in a set of crappy ML algorithms and stats where our faces, fingersprints, RFID cards are being captured at every instant of our lives? and don't worry IOT is coming. Alexa is already the premise of HAL except that the AI that controls the world will never happen. Much worse will happen. People that do not care about mankind or freedom will listen to our every moves, every instant of our lives.</comment>


New 'painless' treatment to repair teeth - <AUTHOR> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/New-painless-treatment-to-repair-teeth/articleshow/30562836.cms <comment><AUTHOR> Looks like it is not very new, there are other articles on it:

[http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-sci- tech...](http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-sci-tech-and- agri/breakthrough-dentistry/article5081112.ece)

Here is the medical paper [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23112478](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23112478)

Here is the patent [http://www.google.com/patents/US20120231422](http://www.google.com/patents/US20120231422)

And this is the picture worth a thousand words [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20120231422A1/U...](http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20120231422A1/US20120231422A1-20120913-D00000.png)

<comment><USER2> Thanks!

More bad journalism about medical research. Why is this so hard? Is it that the reporter simply cannot understand it? Or it is purposely distorted to make it more appealing to readers? I think it is usually a combination of both of these reasons.

<comment><USER3> "..misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent." — Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

<comment><USER2> I completely agree that ignorance and laziness are much more representative of humane behavior than deceit and evil. And I believe it is just good practice to always assume the best intentions in others for your own peace and happiness.

However in this case the 'painless' claim which is the most appealing element of the story appears to have been made up - it appears nowhere in the longer article, abstract or patent.

<comment><USER4> Sorry about this, but you mean 'human' instead of 'humane', right?

<comment><USER2> Right I meant "human" \- sorry for the typo, too late to fix now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Having had root canal in the past, this doesn't seem particularly helpful.

The drilling and cleaning is the painful and time-consuming part.

The actual sealing it up at the end was relatively trivial in comparison (from my perspective).

<comment><USER6> Just out of curiosity, didn't they deaden your nerve befor they went in and drilled and cleaned it? Once that did that for me, it was no more painful than getting a cavity filled...

<comment><USER7> You get anaesthesia, then the nerve _in_ the tooth is basically ripped out. Then comes cleaning and shaping the root canal which for me at least often was painful when the file basically poked into the tissue (and nerve) underneath the tooth. That's also the part that hurt for weeks after I had the procedure.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A little more skepticism:

 _> Instead of filling the root canal with artificial materials that may pose bio-compatibility problems_

Gutta-percha[1] is what is traditionally used to fill the empty canals. It is used _because_ of its bio-compatibility and inertness. The most common complication of a root canal procedure is inadequate cleaning of the canals and related tissues, not bad apical sealing.

1: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutta- percha](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutta-percha)

</comment><comment><USER9> Not to be dismissive, but there are a lot of claims in this article that are difficult to assess.

<comment><USER10> That's because it's a news article, not a research paper.

<comment><USER9> Some news articles are kind enough to mention the journal results like those claimed here originally appeared in.

I see some helpful links in other comments now too though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > repair teeth

This is not reparing. Repairing would assume that afterwards you've got the same features as before, but replacing nerves and blood vessels with plastic (or in this case, regular tissue) doesn't really provide the same features as before.

I'd like to see much more the possibility to replace teeth with ones you've generated from your own stem cells.

<comment><USER12> That research is progressing rapidly:

[https://singularityhub.com/2013/08/26/scientists-grow- teeth-...](https://singularityhub.com/2013/08/26/scientists-grow-teeth-using- stem-cells-harvested-from-urine/)

I have a high risk of cavities due to my genetics, am 31, and my teeth are falling apart even with a high level of care (brushing 2-3 times/day, flossing, baking soda rinse after meals to return mouth ph to baseline quickly). I'll be happy to pay for replacement teeth grown from my own cells when available.

<comment><USER13> Have you looked into having your teeth sealed (like they often do for children teeth)? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_sealant](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_sealant)

<comment><USER14> I had a bunch of teeth sealed and years later cavities started to appear underneath the seals, which were hard to clean because of the seals. So sealing didn't turn out to be that much of a holy grail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This makes me very skeptical:

> _The root canal is restored to health by gradual build up of tissue by stem > cells over a period, extending from a few weeks to some months._

<comment><USER16> Sounds like a description of what stem cells generally do. Which part makes you skeptical?

<comment><USER15> It's supposed to sound good, but in practice making stem cells work, for example implanting them and stimulating them to become anything but unspecific fatty connective tissue is really hard. I could be totally wrong of course, and the article doesn't go into any detail, but the way it's presented triggers several snake oil alarms.

<comment><AUTHOR> The idea in this case is that they documented stem cells in the gums or tooth root. The only stimulate to let the blood enter the tooth area and let it do the rest. So they don't have active involvement in implanting and stimulating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If this is legit, it sounds great ... but you couldn't pay me enough to be one of the first people this was tested out on.

</comment><comment><USER18> I love that 'painless' is in quotes.

<comment><USER19> Yes, I do mind the quotes too. Most dental procedures are "painless" according to what my dentist says about it before the procedure at least.

<comment><USER20> I doubt it hurts him much at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Soon they will just be injecting some acid to stimulate stem cell production.

[http://www.nature.com/news/acid-bath-offers-easy-path-to- ste...](http://www.nature.com/news/acid-bath-offers-easy-path-to-stem- cells-1.14600)

</comment><comment><USER22> Articles from indiatimes usually smell of propaganda.</comment>


PG on the cover of Forbes  - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/best-small-companies-10-y-combinator-paul-graham-disruptor.html <comment><USER2> "Y Combinator--a computer term for a program that runs other programs"

Heh... completely wrong, but I suppose it's the best you can expect a non- techie/math nerd readership to get. Heck, it's probably close to the most you can expect the average programmer to get.

EDIT: And another one...

"Graham met Morris, an authority on the Unix computer language"

<comment><USER3> > _Heh... completely wrong, but I suppose it's the best you can expect a non- > techie/math nerd readership to get. Heck, it's probably close to the most > you can expect the average programmer to get._

How would you explain the Y Combinator to the Hacker News readership?

<comment><USER4> There have been explanations for the HN readers. Here's one that I'd put in a non-techy newspaper:

The Y Combinator is a way to make computer code self-referential without having to introduce names for parts of the code.

Or a bit less accurate:

The Y Combinator is a clever way to make computer code self-referential.

<comment><USER5> Non-techy readers would have no idea what "self-referential" means. Probably best to just leave it alone.

<comment><USER6> I'm a coder/writer at Forbes. If I had to guess, that's exactly what an editor might say. Also, we're always crammed for word space so shorter (even if perhaps less nuanced) always wins.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Here is the actual cover:

<http://imgur.com/gOyI9.jpg>

<comment><USER8> A nice, striking (against the red), somewhat atypical picture of PG. Did the photographer coach to suppress the usual smile?

<comment><USER9> His eyes are smiling, I bet he's about to crack up.

<comment><USER10> his left eye makes me happy. i wonder why.

<comment><USER10> i think it's a right brain bicameral lateralization thing, but if someone more knowledgeable than me can get more explicit, i would _absolutely love_ to hear

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Slipping a link into the headline to (presumably) your startup, even if it is inside a "// not related" comment, is pretty tacky. You might even call it spam.

Update: Thanks for removing the link.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think this is a repeat of <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1831471>

<comment><USER11> And also <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1813445> (which is even older, and has quite a lot of comments)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've got to imagine any photographer trying for a YC photo would look at the Inc cover which reprised The Last Supper and just despair.

</comment><comment><USER13> And here was I expecting a typically insightful commentary by PG regarding the front page of a business journal.

<comment><USER14> It has unusually clean design. I've noticed that in other consumer goods lately. E.g. cereal boxes. I wonder if it's the result of a/b testing, or just a fashion.

<comment><USER15> It was an existing trend accelerated by the recession. An excess of stuff is no longer fashionable. Hopefully it lasts awhile (the fashion, not the recession).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Print version (with single page view): [http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/best-small- companies-...](http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/best-small- companies-10-y-combinator-paul-graham-disruptor_print.html)

</comment><comment><USER17> ♫ I wanna be on the cover of Forbes magazine, smiling next to Oprah and Paul Graham. ♫ Heh.

Congratulations, pg. If nothing else, being on the cover of Forbes must put a smile on your face.

<comment><USER18> <http://ytinstant.com/#Travie%20Mccoy%20-%20Billionaire>

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Y-Combinator has something in common with the Moore Law: self-fulfilling prophecy.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_Law>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-fulfilling_prophecy>

<comment><USER20> There weren't any prophecies behind YC. We just decided to make something to make more startups, and executed.

<comment><USER19> Same with the Moore Law.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> i thought the virtual absence of women was interesting. Jessica Mah got two paragraphs near the end, Demi Moore a passing mention, and Jessica Livingston merited two sentences. she co-founded YC and is married to Paul, and they couldn't even ask her for a quote?

other than that it was guys, guys, guys. <http://bit.ly/ycturgor2> has more.

<comment><USER22> That's because most founders are guys?

It's like the leaflet I got from our local hospital the other day. It features on the cover an african, an indian, a few other minorities, and one small white person. It's like they're trying way too hard to appear diverse. (The area it serves is probably 90%+ white).

I'd rather they project what is actually out there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> That cover is awesome. Congrats pg!

</comment><comment><USER24> And an earlier occasion:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1831471>

</comment><comment><USER25> This brought a smile to my face :)</comment>


Ask HN: Anything legitimate about keeping vitamin D levels up? with Coronavirus - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> See

[https://examine.com/supplements/vitamin-d/](https://examine.com/supplements/vitamin-d/)</comment>


Show HN: A site to look up DNS records - <AUTHOR> https://dnsrecords.io/ <comment><USER2> So just `host -a whatever.com` with the addition that you're tracking me with Google Tag Manager and God knows what else in the backend?

<comment> old-gregg I was expecting to see something like [http://dnstrails.com](http://dnstrails.com) <\-- this one shows you historical data, which can be useful for checking the history of a domain before you buy it.

<comment><USER3> This website's UI is terrible. It automatically suggests domain names instead of let users to input themselves. So if ones' domain name extensions are short or not in their database, they can't provide you anything. For example: key in any .co domains, they'll search .com for you. What a shitty design.

<comment><USER4> Hi! I just came across this comment. There was a super annoying bug in the autocomplete of a new UI we launched this week. Can you do me a favor and shift-refresh and try again? Any other feedback is appreciated and will be implemented.

Drop me a note at chris at ueland com with any other feedback. Thanks for trying it out!!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So someone else commented on this and was down voted, but let's try again.

This site literally wraps a shell command [1]:

        dig +nocmd example.com any +multiline +noall +answer

Wrapping shell commands into more usable services isn't necessarily bad. But this is a pretty crazy example.

This 'app' is 500K (500 thousand!) lines of PHP. To run one shell command.

1: [https://github.com/spatie/dnsrecords.io/blob/master/app/Http...](https://github.com/spatie/dnsrecords.io/blob/master/app/Http/Controllers/HomeController.php#L39)

<comment><USER6> While I agree with the broader sense of what you are saying I agree, but counting the lines of code like that is a bit unfair. Yes there are many, even for an app, but the source code of your terminal and the commands that you use should also be counted by your logic.

<comment><USER5> You can only count the lines of code for my terminal if you also count the lines of code for the Browser.

The source code of the command in question (dig) also doesn't count, because their application literally calls the `dig` shell command. So they need not just those 500K lines of PHP (I didn't bother to count the CSS or JS) but they are also dependent on a shell (probably /bin/sh, which could be anything deepening on their host OS) AND the dig command itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How is this "beautiful"? It's just the direct text of a database look up in a moderately nice font. I'd rather have a nice table layout without all of the programmer-y info in there on a white (or maybe slightly off-white) background with black (or very dark gray) text at a reasonable size, personally. To me the font and coloring is far less a part of the beauty than all the other crap that the database returns and that didn't get discarded or reformatted.

I don't know if the other info is useful to other people. But if so, perhaps you could have a few different "pages". One that gives all the DB stuff, and one that just prints the human readable stuff?

<comment><USER8> I think it's a nice project. I like the output format and the simplicity of it. But I too find the trend of describing one's own work as "beautiful" rather grating.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Was expecting something worthwhile. Was disappointing.

You could have made an nice ui with presents the information in a simple to understand way. Instead if showing stuff like seconds etc. you could have translated it into more understandable.

Instead of saying mx record, you could have used an email icon.

</comment><comment> pablo-massa Not a technical person here.

I just check my personal site with this tool and see that is possible know that I use Google G Suite.

Is no way to opt out this? I'm more vulnerable to an attacker, right? They can try to login to my account on gmail.com.

I thought that for not using an email address like @gmail.com, etc. I had the advantage of hiding my login page XD

Maybe I'm a bit paranoid. Sometimes I have the idea that the Internet is not well designed from the ground up for privacy in mind. Recently I check the product Hotjar [0] and was amazed how creepy it is, you can see screen recordings of the users interacting with your site, where are they from, and more. I made a video about this [1] (spanish). Why by default the Internet is like that?, all those features should be opt in imho, with user consent. What do you think?

Excuse me if my wording is not perfect, my english is not the best :)

[0] [https://hotjar.com](https://hotjar.com)

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDgybTvnhjY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDgybTvnhjY)

<comment><USER10> >Is no way to opt out this? I'm more vulnerable to an attacker, right

Others can't send you a mail unless you publish those DNS records that say you use GSuite. Hiding your email host doesn't give you much in the way of security. If you're really concerned about security, see Google's Advanced Protection Program[0].

[0]: [https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/](https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/)

<comment> pablo-massa I understand.

But I was thinking, a potential attacker receives an email from me (firstname.lastname@example.com), with this tool, they can look up and see that I use G Suite and try to login on my account on gmail.com.

Thanks for letting me know about Google Advanced Protection Program.

<comment><USER6> Using a good password and two-factor authentication basically eliminates this issue. You are looking for what is called 'security through obscurity' which is never a solid defence plan over real, verified, security (like real encryption, proper passwords, multi-factor authentication, etc)

<comment> pablo-massa You are right. Thanks for let me know about 'security through obscurity', I'm reading the Wikipedia article now [0]. Yes, I'm using two factor and strong passwords (and encouraging people to do that, too).

Thanks for let me expand my knowledge through education.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Very nice! I was just doing this for some domains yesterday on ad-laden, ugly as sin sites.

It would be nice if the page URL would update with each request and provide a copy-pastable link (e.g. [https://dnsrecords.io/q/ycombinator.com](https://dnsrecords.io/q/ycombinator.com)).

<comment><USER12> Out of curiosity, why are you not just calling, say, `dig`?

<comment><USER11> At the time I was in Windows. I believe there is a Windows CLI command for this as well, but didn't know it off the top of my head.

<comment><USER13> "nslookup" is the tool you'd use, under windows.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I normally use [https://toolbox.googleapps.com/apps/dig/#ANY/](https://toolbox.googleapps.com/apps/dig/#ANY/)

But I liked your UI better.

</comment><comment><USER15> Looks very nice, but instead of sending ANY queries it should just send multiple queries for different RRs, because ANY is deprecated by Cloudflare (and probably more services)

<comment><USER16> Agreed. I block ANY queries using iptables string filters. I also block anything other than NOERROR responses from myself. Their site doesn't work with any of my domains.

<comment><USER17> Interesting--I'd like to know more.

Would you please provide example command(s) of blocking both ANY queries and NOERROR responses that you've had relative success with?

Thanks!

<comment><USER16> Certainly!

      -A OUTPUT -p udp -m udp --sport 53 -m string --hex-string "|8500|" --algo kmp --from 30 --to 31 -j ACCEPT
      -A OUTPUT -p udp -m udp --sport 53 -m string --hex-string "|8400|" --algo kmp --from 30 --to 31 -j ACCEPT
      -A OUTPUT -p udp -m udp --sport 53 -j DROP

The above used in the filter table drops anything that does not match NOERROR recursive and NOERROR non-recursive responses.

      -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -m string --hex-string "|0000ff0001|" --algo bm --from 40 --to 65535 -j DROP

The above used in the raw table drops "ANY". It could probably be optimized to search through less of the packet.

      -A INPUT -i eth0 -p udp -m state --state NEW -m length --length 24:120 -m udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT

Above is the inbound rule that blocks some overflow attempts.

<comment><USER17> Thanks a bunch.

I'll take a crack at implementing something similar, much appreciated!

<comment><USER16> No problem. If you run into issues, it could be that your particular DNS server may put the result code in a different part of the packet. If that is so, simply use

      tcpdump -p -i interface -NNnn -s0 -c100 -SeX port 53

and look for the 8400 and 8500 hex codes and what the number in the far left column is. Then adjust iptables accordingly to look in that part of the packet.

Another way to do this is to modify the source code of the DNS server, but I found that to be too time consuming.

Disclaimer: I should also add that the above method of using iptables to drop anything we do not know about does violate some RFC's and instead follows the thing our Mom's taught us, "If you don't have anything nice to say...". That said, you would have to decide if bending some RFC's is ok. In a Corporate environment it can lead to confusion and time lost troubleshooting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If you're pretty new to software development, good job on making something.

</comment><comment><USER19> Vulnerable to XSS.

<b onmouseover=alert('XSS')>click me!</b>

<comment><USER20> XSS implies that you can get this script to run for _other_ users, not just yourself.

<comment><USER19> I suspect it would work the same if the script was stored in a TXT record for a domain being queried.

<comment><USER19> There is even a tool for this called dnsxss.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> For whatever reason this reminded me of Zork. I tried several things without success:

open mailbox go house open window get lamp

nothing worked. You might consider adding a game too. That way people could play a game while looking up stuff.

</comment><comment><USER22> I love retro tools like this, so I dig the look. But I agree with sigi45 that you could parse the information and display it in a more meaningful way, because as of now I can just pop over to a terminal and do the exact same thing. And whenever I input keygen.sh, it fails because ANY is deprecated by Cloudflare [0].

[0]: [https://blog.cloudflare.com/what-happened-next-the- deprecati...](https://blog.cloudflare.com/what-happened-next-the-deprecation- of-any/)

<comment><USER23> Same here, I dig the look and the feel. It seems very intuitive

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> ANY requests are considered harmful due the large response sizes (DNS amplification!).

Some DNS servers will truncate the response or refuse (like CloudFlare).

</comment><comment><USER25> You're getting really mixed results here on HN, but personally, I love it for the "cool" factor. Would I use this? No, not really, I have an entire suite of command-line tools I'm familiar with already that don't require a browser.

But this is nice, it's pretty, and you've got a great domain name which you've put to great use.

</comment><comment><USER13> See also my API-like site:

[https://dns-api.org/](https://dns-api.org/)

Which seems like it could replicate yours with requests like:

[https://dns-api.org/any/steve.fi](https://dns-api.org/any/steve.fi)

</comment><comment><USER26> Tried using it for a .me and a .com but I get this message for both of them: [https://imgur.com/a/RiseT](https://imgur.com/a/RiseT)

<comment><USER27> Both domains are probably on Cloudflare. They block ANY requests with that message.

<comment><USER26> They are both on Fastmail's DNS

<comment><USER28> [https://www.cloudflare.com/case- studies/fastmail/](https://www.cloudflare.com/case-studies/fastmail/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I really DIG this site

<comment><USER4> how Punny.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Nice! Would be nice to see replication too.

</comment><comment><USER31> nice but dig +trace would be really really nice to add since dig alone doesnt help much with troubleshooting.

</comment><comment><USER32> Love simple tools like this. Pinned.

</comment><comment><USER33> Great website!</comment>


"fs" unpublished and restored - <AUTHOR> http://status.npmjs.org/incidents/dw8cr1lwxkcr <comment><USER2> I'm not sure why publishing modules with the same name as core ones is even allowed. I get that it probably won't be possible to remove stuff like `fs`, `console`, `vm` and others, but maybe worth adding a policy for preventing this in the future.

You probably won't even be able to `require` them without some fancy tricks in newer node versions: [https://nodejs.org/api/modules.html#modules_all_together](https://nodejs.org/api/modules.html#modules_all_together)

<comment><USER3> What does that accomplish? There's an "http" package on PyPI and Py3k adds an "http" package to the standard library. This does not seem meaningful. As I suggested in my downvoted comment, if you're doing `pip install os`, or `npm install --save fs`, your problems are external to the tools you've chosen.

<comment><USER2> Why don't people just stop making mistakes, right?

The tool rejecting to do obviously wrong thing is always nice to have. No matter how trivial the mistake might seem to you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> What a farce. Remind me again why this is killing Django and Rails for mindshare? (I'm serious, somebody please remind me.)

<comment><USER5> Because for a good chunk of the "web developer" or "web programmer" community, Node.js leverages the HTML/CSS/JS skillset they already have honed writing WordPress plugins and themes.

It's easier to get adoption of your platform when it's a syntax one-trick-pony mom and pop "website design" companies understand, because now with some tutorials they can say that they, too, can write server side code.

<comment><USER6> Forgive me for a blunt reply to your snarky comment, but this is ignorant hyperbole, and I'm surprised you got away with it on HN.

I've never written 'WordPress plugins and themes'. I've worked in C, Java, PHP, Python, Ruby. Yet I gravitate to Node for backends because it makes sense for many reasons over alternative platforms that are still playing catch-up in terms of practical solutions.

One example: Node had solid websockets solutions from close to day one. Several years later, Django just added 'channels' to its org. Rails just added 'action cable'. Both feel very immature.

Also Python and Ruby are slow as hell compared to Node.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I love the Node.JS ecosystem for the entertainment it brings to my life.

</comment><comment><USER8> this article is kinda old, yesterday's news tomorrow?</comment>


Conversations: Your Privilege - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/code-like-a-girl/conversations-your-privilege-c3976c2a62ce#.b6a2j2eu8 <comment><USER2> I think a better word than privilege would be network. Networks confer priviledge to their members. That's less personal than saying you're priveledged. Out groups would like to be included in prosperous networks. Who wouldn't? I don't believe networks are just about providing value. If they were, women and others would already be included. Networks are also very much about identity and loyalty and fitness signalling. My limited understanding of women's issues around this appear clustered around fairness. Essentially this amounts to a recess argument that the boys are having more fun and that's not fair. Obviously a gross oversimplification, but the vernacular of the argument will fall on deaf ears more likely than not. It's not that you are wrong you just aren't playing by the "rules".

</comment><comment><USER3> "How can we reach males who have empathy for women's causes, but are oblivious to male privilege?"

Women have higher reading rates, better graduation rates, and more are graduating from college than men.

We have a much higher percentage of women as: teachers, vets, and biologists to name a few..and nobody is complaining or fighting for more 'equality'.

We have women executives in almost every large company in the US and contrary to popular belief, there is no gender-pay gap when you actually account for the career/position.

There was male privilege in the 1950s and 60s, but our society is different now.

I don't agree with most of the feminist causes online because I can see that when they get any sort of power, they only want to oppress men. It has nothing to do with true 'equality'.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> We are excited to have our first installment of Conversations up on #CodeLikeAGirl. It is a discussion of a previous post about male privilege that spurred a lot of discussions here on Hacker News. We posted this here to share how the conversation continued!

<comment><USER3> "#CodeLikeAGirl."

The irony of discussing privilege and equality on a forum entitled '#codelikagirl' is not lost on me. If you want equality, you should act like it..instead of creating websites and forums that segregate yourself into gender-based groups.</comment></comment>


A Woman Who Spent Six Years Fighting a Traffic Stop - <AUTHOR> https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/08/10/the-woman-who-spent-six-years-fighting-a-traffic-stop <comment><USER2> > Larvadain, who is now 74, worries that young lawyers are less concerned with > right and wrong than with chasing dollars. Although Patricia Parker's > lawsuit against Woodworth offered small hope of a big payday, Larvadain > agreed to represent her. "Because I saw wrong had taken place. And I knew > someone had to take a stand."

I know a lot of young lawyers who'd love to take on a case like this one. But matching people who need help to lawyers who have the time and institutional resources to take on these projects _pro bono_ isn't easy when you're talking about folks wronged in rural Louisiana.

Also, I think there's something of a hesitancy to for business law firms to add suing municipalities to their pro bono docket. Which is a shame--a few New Orleans firms building up a pipeline of pro bono suits against places like Woodsworth could do a lot of good.

EDIT: If you're interested in (potential) justice porn, it's worth following _Fant v. City of Ferguson_. The DOJ gave a lot of ammunition to plaintiffs' lawyers when it concluded that the city was systematically using fines and other police actions as revenue sources, particularly against poor black people. It's Woodsworth writ large. The complaint is here: [http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/08/us/ferguson- co...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/08/us/ferguson- complaint.html). The docket is available here on Justia: [https://dockets.justia.com/docket/missouri/moedce/4:2015cv00...](https://dockets.justia.com/docket/missouri/moedce/4:2015cv00253/138015). With her opinion last month on reconsideration, the judge has effectively denied the city's motion to dismiss. Dispositive motions are due May of next year, so we'll likely see by then whether this is granted class status. If so, things will get interesting.

<comment><USER3> First:

 _...young lawyers are less concerned with right and wrong than with chasing dollars._

then:

 _But matching people who need help to lawyers who have the time and institutional resources to take on these projects pro bono isn 't easy..._

Sounds like an excellent opportunity for a startup that is more concerned with right and wrong than with chasing dollars.

Any takers?

<comment><USER4> Right and wrong is also a subject of opinion. Even the story in the OP is based on some real lawbreaking. We might all agree that these traffic stops go way to far, but they often do start with legitimate infractions (no insurance etc). Perhaps the better answer is to change these petty laws, or amalgamate them into something less difficult to obey. Frankly, the american approach of license+registration+insurance on three separate plans with three separate expiry dates is a minefield.

<comment><USER5> _" We might all agree that these traffic stops go way to far, but they often do start with legitimate infractions (no insurance etc)."_

Umm... Did you read the story? The original stop was illegal to begin with (that is, _the cop_ was doing an illegal activity). Then the driver in question had all her papers in order (which she proved to the Mayor/Judge with documentation). But the fine was not just not dropped... they _arrested_ her for not paying that unjust fine and threw her in prison for 25 days.

<comment><USER4> Lawyers can argue about the stop, but it happened. They happen all the time. The cop might not have had probable cause, he stopped the car for no better reason than he wanted to, but that isn't the cause of all the difficulties. It hit the fan when the cop starts running the paperwork.

"When Godwin ran Parker's license, the computer said it was suspended. He also said the registration card was expired."

That's the root problem, not the stop. There was, from the cops perspective, a real infraction here. So rather than debate the constitutionality of the stop, we should address the overly-complex system that resulted in this perceived infraction. If the computer was wrong, fix the machine. If the paperwork was actually expired, why are they still using paper? If we don't want cops issuing onerous citations for these things, change the laws so they cannot. We should not patch over bad laws by simply not enforcing them.

In many jurisdictions (ie mine) the entire stop would have been perfectly legal. We display out registration/insurance details on a license plates. So cops are perfectly justified in pulling cars over with expired registration/insurance/plates. They need not speculate. They cannot claim suspicion or the need to check paperwork when the plate shows validity. And and driver stepping into a car can see on the plate whether everything is correct. Every cop should be able to lookup a plate and check all the paperwork prior to pulling anyone over.

<comment><USER6> > That's the root problem, not the stop.

No, the root problem is that a police officer decided to unconstitutionally stop a car with 3 African Americans, because they had committed the crime of being African American.

<comment><USER7> This discussion of the root problem is useful, but let's not let it become a red herring or distraction from the rest of the problem: I mean even if the stop happened and was legal, there is a real and valid problem in the way the trial occured, once she presented the proof of valid license and insurance, that should have been the end of it - including a reimbursement for expenses incurred.

I am curious about racial motivations and racial disparity though. It might be reasonable to think that the cop didn't pull over the people due to their race, as it was dark and I don't know if there was any way he could have seen that well. I wonder though if there is a way to find out a stops vs "run the license" ratio and if it indicates any racial biases. The run the license part should be gleanable from logs, but the number of stops part may be difficult - I don't know how those are recorded and how accurately they are recorded.

<comment><USER6> From the article (and the actual judgement the article links to)

> Absent a traffic violation, so far as can be gleaned from this record, the > only visible attribute of Parker and her passengers that might have > distinguished them from other motorists turning on Methodist Parkway was > they are all African Americans. There simply is no other distinguishing > thing that can be surmised.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've always felt that all fines - for any cause - should be turned over to the state. Even simple parking tickets.

The state should fund the court for hearing those cases (but not enforcement).

Then we'll see if cities really care about safety or about money.

<comment><USER9> Probably the money should simply be destroyed. There's too much conflict of interest when law enforcement can become a profit centre.

<comment><USER10> You could say the same thing about alcohol & vice taxes.

It might make more sense than I realize, but destroying punitive damages seems like a terrible option. Damages are meant to penalize the offender; destroying wealth penalizes everyone.

<comment><USER11> So how do you remove the conflict of interest? They have every incentive to abuse these revenue (more like theft) streams and become dependent on them.

<comment><USER12> Give or take demerit points, in my area of the world there are 9 points and when gone you no longer have a driver's license. It's for severe infractions such as DUI, reckless driving, excessive speed.

Although for a speeding ticket one point is harsh maybe 1/2 point or 1/4 point if less than 30km/h over the posted speed with a 10km/h grace (speedometer error/wind etc.).

No monetary gain or loss for either side no incentive to catch speeders going a little bit over the limit and a big incentive as a driver to not get caught.

<comment><USER13> My area of the world (Utah, USA) also has a licensing point system. Accrue enough points and your license gets suspended.

Problem is, like my wife a decade ago when she tried to get her license renewed, it had been revoked a year prior to that because of excessive speeding tickets and due to her being young and moving a lot managed to not receive the postal notification (or she ignored it, you can choose). What do you do when people just start ignoring the points? Have more points that accrue on subsequent violations that further prevent someone from renewing their license after a probationary period? What if they ignore that point system also?

The executors of the Justice system of the United States relies almost entirely on trust. It's trivial to break trust.

<comment><USER14> Up here in BC, we have a points system for traffic violations. A typical speeding-just-a-bit ticket would earn you 3 points. But 3 points get removed from your balance every year, so it's like being able to have one 'free' speeding ticket per year. When your points exceed 3 points your insurance rates go up and if I remember right there is a threshold at which you can no longer purchase insurance. So the points are a pretty good enforcement system for most people. Of course it still won't stop the people willing to drive without insurance or a valid license, but that's a different (smaller) category of offenders :).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It boils my blood to read about such incidences.

US is turning into the India that I came here to avoid. Policemen in India will stop you at their whim and find a reason to fine you (exact a bribe really).

A cop followed my car in Salt lake city for 10 miles before he stopped me for turning on my blinkers for only 2 seconds before changing lanes. Apparently the law in Utah says that it should be 3 seconds. I wish I had recorded that incident, simply because it is so unbelievable.

The incident smelled racist, and made sure I will never live in Utah / Salt Lake City.

<comment><USER16> Did you have an out of state plate? It frustrates me how often one hears stories about out-of-towners being singled out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> "Godwin's testimony shows a complete lack of knowledge of the restraints imposed upon police conduct by the U.S. Constitution and the laws and Constitution of the State of Louisiana."

This. The 4th amendment protects against seizure (which a police stop constitutes) without reasonable suspicion of a crime. The problem is, unless you are fined, as the woman was in this case, and then appeal, what recourse do you have?

Is there some way to seek damages for the violation of your constitutional rights? (even if the inconvenience is minor) It seems like this problem would go away if the police department and city had to pay for their violations of the constitution instead of just forfeiting potential money from fines.

<comment><USER18> There are "stops" all the time without suspicion of a crime. As a passenger, I went through a sobriety check point last week, where the police officer asked for ID, and then asked the driver if he had been drinking. Every car that passed through that part of town during that hour or so did the same.

<comment><USER19> The key there is that every car that passed through that part of town during that hour or so did the same.

You can set up checkpoints as per Federal law (though your state may vary-- some states have provisions against it, in which case your recourse is to state, not Federal law). However, these checkpoints must be indiscriminate: they have to stop everybody that passes them while they're active.

A cop cannot just pull a single car over to see what's going on. He has to have reason.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Wow. "A woman told the paper that she was pulled over by Woodworth police while in labor — and was kept for more than a half hour."

<comment><USER21> Yeah, that got to me. I spent a good few minutes wondering whether I'd physically assault a police officer who was preventing my wife from getting to the hospital.

<comment><USER22> I wonder if it would be useful to call 911 in that situation. Even though the authorities are involved, getting some more people aware of what's going on might put a stop to the nonsense.

<comment><USER23> It might help - but then again, it might not: [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/547/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/547/transcript)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> In case you miss the link inside the article, be sure to read the ruling[0]. It is both thorough and entertaining.

[http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi...](http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER25> Read the judges findings from the appeal. The article did not even mention the purported signed confession:

"Ms. Parker admitted that she made the initials "PP" but stated that none of the other handwriting was hers. She also indicated that none of the other handwriting was on the document, including Ms. Gunter's signature, when she filled in the initials "PP.""

Woodsworth went so far as to commit fraud in order to take money from Parker.

[http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi...](http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi.pdf)

(thx gknoy)

</comment><comment><USER26> I used to live near a town like this. Thornton, Illinois is the site of a giant limestone quarry and there's one major road you can drive on to get around the quarry if you don't want to get on the expressway (which is a bit out of the way depending on where you're coming from). These streets have 25 or 30mph signs, yet are wide and underutilized enough to easily be 35-45mph streets. Drivers unfamiliar with the area would be taken off-guard by these slow speed zones as they enter from neighboring towns. The police there pull people over for 2 or 3 mph over regularly.

According to IDOT, there were 2,334 traffic stops in Thornton in 2014. This town's population? About 2,300. That's one stop per man, woman, and child in this town! This is naked profiteering and pretty much all small towns in strategic areas turn into police-led profit centers. The real question is why isn't anyone stopping this?

<comment><USER27> It would be nice if gps apps (Google, Waze, Apple Maps, etc) would start showing this on their maps, and effectively treating them as a toll road. All the needed data is publicly available: town population, number of tickets, percentage of town revenue coming from fines, etc.

If the law isn't going to require signage for speed traps, the software can.

<comment><USER28> Waze would inform you, (assuming enough nearby users) but not in any special way. You'd just see a cop ahead.

By the way, if you aren't using Waze on trips of any significant length, I highly recommend it. It's good for more than just cop-spotting. You'll also know when a semi loses a tire in the road.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Wow - that's a much more interesting article than the title would imply. I wonder if anything changed in Woodworth in response to the verdict (I doubt that it did, but still).

<comment><USER30> The article seemed to try to indicate that Parker's (outragrous) treatment was indicative of a more systemic problem, but I didn't think the argument held up very well.

So Woodworth collects a lot of revenue by enforcing the speed limits. Good for them. What is the connection to Parker's case? Is it just the implication that the town is too focussed on revenue-raising? That's pretty weak.

As is the implication of racism, really. This one incident seemed _arbitrary_ , not targeted. Again, without evidence of a wider pattern this just seems like one (egregiously) bad case of motivated reasoning in a town that (charitably put) seems generally to be interested in upholding the law to the letter.

<comment><USER31> This is an issue that people are only recently getting a grip on. In isolation all these cases seem arbitrary and not targeted. And, absent any overt action, it can seem difficult to ascribe racism. Additionally the court system has made it very difficult to use "statistical" evidence in individual cases.

But, when one steps back and look at the statistics, an overwhelming number of practices by law enforcement are disproportionately applied to people of color. This includes "fishing trip" stops, "consent" pretext searches, as well as unequal application in the court system (bail practices, pressuring to plead guilty by "overcharging", and more).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> > On Feb. 18, she provided the documentation. Her license had, indeed, been > valid. But the mayor didn't drop the two license-related charges. Instead, > he "asked her how much money she had with her," an appeals court wrote. "She > responded she only had about $300. The Mayor informed her she could at least > pay the unlawful use of a driver's license charge that day."

> So she did, paying $215.

> But despite what she paid, despite the documentation she showed, despite the > registration count having earlier been dismissed, she was presented this > same day with a bill of information, saying Woodworth was charging her with > all four counts originally written up by the officer. She was given until > March 18 to pay whatever money was still owed.

Uh... what? I didn't expect the shakedown to be quite that blatant.

</comment><comment><USER33> > in fiscal year 2006, each officer wrote an average of 1,539 tickets.

Assuming a 2080 hour work year, that's 1.3 tickets per hour. To my (admittedly naive) idea of how many tickets police write per hour, that's nuts.

<comment><USER34> Your ratio is reversed. It is 1.3 hours per ticket, or .73 tickets per hour.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Good for Lavardain and the appellate court.

</comment><comment><USER36> "The case also exemplifies a suspicion that, at times, law enforcement's motive is profit."

"At times"? Really?

I think they mean all the time for a growing majority of districts.

</comment><comment><USER37> "You can't help it that you're a racist. Your daddy's a racist. Your children will be racist. It's in your blood."

Now, is it me, or does that sound racist?

<comment><USER38> No, not unless the person who said it is attributing the racism to a race, rather than a family.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> This is quintessential americana.

</comment><comment><USER40> Life imitates art? This is straight from 'Nothing But Trouble' (1991)

</comment><comment><USER41> it is completely unlawful to require non-commercial travellers on public roads to have licenses, insurance, inspections, and registrations, let alone subject them to stops, arrests and tickets or fines when no crime has been committed. unless actual or imminent destruction of property, or violation of anothers' rights has occurred, there is no valid cause of action. no right for a stop. traveling on public roads is not a privilege granted by the government [1].

it's already been adjudicated, by the supreme court, and state supreme courts, many times [2]. it seems, however, that the irrational fear of chaos and harm that might result from people travelling without government licensing and regulation is enough to keep these absurd and sometimes incredibly harmful and costly situations going for the foreseeable future.

ask yourself; would you spend tens of thousands on a vehicle only to crash it into others' property, or use it to intentionally murder or otherwise harm others? no? have you ever met anyone who would? if yes, would having or not having a license in their wallet stop such a person? i don't think so.

police should only be involved when actual crimes occur or are potentially about to occur. see a vehicle hit a mailbox, get in a wreck, with a leaky exhaust disturbing the peace, or someone driving recklessly endangering others, etc. then you can call 911.

search "Driver Licensing vs. Right to Travel", for a fuller list of relevant case law.

[1] "Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct."

II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135

[2] "The right to travel is part of the Liberty of which a citizen cannot deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. This Right was emerging as early as the Magna Carta."

Kent vs. Dulles, 357 US 116 (1958)

        "The essential elements of due process of law are ... Notice and The Opportunity to defend."

Simon vs. Craft, 182 US 427

        "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."

Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491

        "Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by government sufferance of permission."

Davis vs. Massachusetts, 167 US 43; Pachard vs. Banton, supra.

        "... the only limitations found restricting the right of the state to condition the use of the public highways as a means of vehicular transportation for compensation are (1) that the state must not exact of those it permits to use the highways for hauling for gain that they surrender any of their inherent U.S. Constitutional Rights as a condition precedent to obtaining permission for such use ..."

Riley vs. Laeson, 142 So. 619; Stephenson vs. Binford, supra.

        "We find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another."

Simons vs. United States, 390 US 389

        "... For while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or a license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion."

State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516

</comment><comment><USER42> Is this hacker news?

There are loads of general news stories or people being wronged that I would love to post here, but I resist because although interesting and relevant to people (as this article is) it isn't really tech news.

<comment><USER29> I feel that (much like yesterday's story on selling lead settlements) it's a very specific, interesting, and well written case of systematic wrongdoing that can provoke some interesting discussion. Just like how there's lots of math in the world, but every once in a while somebody posts a particularly interesting tidbit that makes it to #1 on HN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> If you want this to stop, presumably you need to step out of the middle age and allow actual automated speed cams as every other country does.

Now, there are two sides here. A matter of fact debtors prison for poor people and a vicious cycle where they keep accumulating more fines through inability of paying is a travesty of law.

But I can hardly sympathize with the discussion on speed traps, in a country where apparently 10mph over is considered a crass misuse of law (here, this nets you a month long driving ban) and tickets need to be written by officers, which naturally drastically limits enforcement, and driving on a suspended license is seen as a violation on the level of failure to use turn signals. Frankly, driving without a valid license should cause your car to be immediately and permanently impounded and any license only reissued on a retest after a ban. We can't get into a situation where having a valid license is more or less immaterial.

<comment><USER44> Americans complaining about speed traps and red light cameras are a constant embarrassment to me.

I live in New York. This city should look like a less architecturally tasteful version of Amsterdam. Instead, it's infested with cars. We should have red light cameras at every intersection, zero-tolerance enforcement of speeding laws, congestion charging, etc., instead the subway is crumbling.

I've given up, I'm starting to learn Dutch... I want to live somewhere that actually cares about transportation.

<comment><USER28> Red light cameras are a real problem. Since tickets are incentivized, some of the more greedy agencies have shortened the yellow light timing, leading to more tickets and also more accidents.

<comment><USER45> I literally can't understand how some agencies can just go ahead and "shorten the yellow light timing". In EU the length of the yellow light is mandated by law and a small town in a middle of nowhere can do nothing to change it. There are a few exceptions - like in Portugal light changing from red directly to green, but no one anywhere has any power to change the length of the yellow light timing. It's mind boggling because EU consists of different countries which could very well make their own rules but decided to standardize them so all EU citizens can drive all over EU and expect the same rules everywhere. Yet US is a single country and can't have consistent driving rules??

<comment><USER46> There is a difference between having rules and the governments actually following them...</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Bank Account That Pays 200x MORE Interest - <AUTHOR> https://meetbeam.com/ <comment><USER2> I'm confused. They say they can give more interest because they don't have the costs of traditional banks. But then in the FAQ, they say that they're a middleman for a bank acct provided by a traditional bank ("Your money stays in an FDIC-insured deposit account provided by Beam's bank sponsor"), so the 'no costs' explanation makes no sense, they're adding an extra layer.

So where does the extra money come from? "Beam makes money by providing value- added services to our partnering bank and other financial service partners in the banking ecoysystem".

Well, that's... nonspecific. What services? What's the actual thing they'll be making money from? Why are they being vague about it? This smells of the nominal customer actually being the product, unroll.me style

</comment><comment><USER3> What credentials are there to prove that this is a legitimate outfit?

<comment><USER4> None of the documents contain an address, neither does the domain registration or SSL certificate. For all I know they might just collect 20k email addresses of people who are interested in such a product and then go out and contact banks to work with.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Terra Ex, a 4x multiplayer online game - <AUTHOR>

http://www.terraexgame.com
Terra Ex will be a 4x ("explore, expand, exploit, and exterminate") multiplayer online browser based game. Our Kickstarter will begin Oct. 16th (link to KS preview is on our site). We are making this game, in part, to fund STEM education. Details are on our site.
About the game (from the site):
"Our story begins eons from now, when Earth collides with Mars. Humanity must face an uncertain future: we must forge new civilizations in the far corners of space. Your ships are small at first, but opportunity is endless. Will you become a merchant society or focus on espionage? Do you seek to dominate the universe or live peacefully among other races?
Once you branch out into the galaxy, you'll have the opportunity to work with or fight against other players. You can build up your weapons or search for planets rich in minerals."
The stack is: PHP, MySQL, Memcache+APC, nginx, JQuery, SOLR, CloudFlare, our in-house Javascript+PHP framework, hosted at DigitalOcean.
We added an "Easter egg" on the site where you can click the starports on either side of the "ACTNOW!" button to launch fighters. And once launched, you can click them to shoot them down. Have fun! :)
Thanks! <comment><USER2> I feel like this is just another dumbed down space-aliens-lazors-whatever browser game where the progression involves waiting for the next day or spamming forums with an affiliate registration link. I'll pass.</comment>


Translating Mathematics into Code: Examples in Java, Python, Haskell and Racket - <AUTHOR> http://matt.might.net/articles/discrete-math-and-code/ <comment><USER2> > Mathematics has no side effects.

I'm aware the author is a professor of CS, but this is a statement I always see people originally trained as programmers claim, and as a mathematician and a programmer I respectfully disagree.

Mathematics does what you define it to do, and if you can communicate your idea to another person it doesn't matter whether you "mutated" a variable or not. Likewise, you could say that there's no such thing as mutation in programs because the value of a variable in a language that supports mutation depends implicitly on time; you just don't express that in the source code. It's a matter of perspective, and more perspectives are often better than fewer. In math if you want to index a variable to have "pretend mutation" to avoid confusion you can, but there's no rule about it. If you feel the best way to communicate that idea is with mutation, then that doesn't stop it from being mathematics.

<comment><USER3> One obvious example of a mutable variable is in math's very own expression of the for loop:

         n
        ∑  ƒ(i)
       i=m

This implies a mutating variable (i) and a hidden mutating accumulator that tracks the sum. It seems like a perfectly clear mathematical expression of the concept, though, in spite of the fact that it is fraught with 'unmathematical' mutation.

I can think of many mathematical algorithms which, when stated most simply, imply the mutation of state. Dijkstra's shortest path, for example, requires you to label graph nodes with distances and states which change with each iteration. You _can_ implement it, obviously, on purely functional data structures, but doing so with mutable graph node structs isn't going to undermine the validity of your implementation of what is at core an iterative algorithm designed to be efficient in terms of the amount of additional data you need to store to run it on a given graph.

<comment><USER4> I disagree completely on both examples. The first I have a technical nitpick to illustrate a deeper point and the second I have merely a stylistic point.

Firstly, I disagree completely that sum notation implies a hidden mutating variable. The most obvious way to attack this point is to note that sum notation is often applied when the summing domain is _infinite_ and therefore if it means anything constructive (and it easily can!) then it certainly cannot be interpreted as a mutable loop.

Instead, it's best to merely have it represent the well-defined notion of a sum and note that it can be _interpreted_ in many ways. This interpretation could involve using an algebraic identity (as one must with infinities) or, in the exact case you have an ordered finite domain, be interpreted _either_ as a mutating iterative summing algorithm _or_ a recursive immutable one.

The recursive bit applies exactly and only when the mutating algorithm one does.

\---

As for Djikstra's algorithm, Djikstra wrote it using the popular computer science notation of the time. Nobody denies that this formulation of the algorithm requires mutation to implement, but it's merely a formulation of it used for proof purposes. The idea of Djikstra's algorithm can be expressed without using a mutable language---it's trivial at its basest, merely replace mutation with a bunch of copies of your graph---and there's no particular reason to prefer either one!

<comment><USER4> As a further intensifying point, _this is why Djikstra spent so long making sure he understood and communicating ALGOL and FORTRAN and the like so well_. He wanted to explore new notations and needed to be absolutely clear how they worked.

This is similarly why Milner, Tofte, Harper, MacQueen _completely specified_ the behavior of SML. [0]

[0] [http://www.amazon.com/The-Definition-Standard-ML- Revised/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Definition-Standard-ML- Revised/dp/0262631814)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This:

        public Node(SortedSet<T> left, T element, SortedSet<T> right) {
          this.left = left ;
          this.right = right ;
          this.element = element ;

Isn't really mathematics. Nodes have a label. Any record attached to the node is business logic. It doesn't matter if the tuple is (first, last, address, department) or (value left, right), these are not part of the mathematics. Sure (value, left, right) looks like math, but it's just a convenient place to cache the edges describing a particular form of graph.

A graph is defined mathematically _G = {V, E}_. A single vertex with no edges is a graph. A set of vertices with no edges is also a graph. These may or may not be interesting, but edges are dependent on vertices. The converse is not true.

This example with Node(value, left, right) is standard object oriented fair. It's worse than Car(model, manufacturer, color, year). The Car simplifies something complex. Node(value, left, right) makes something simple more complicated. It's an implementation not an abstraction.

<comment><USER6> The article seems to be not-so-subtly hinting that Java is an anti-math programming language, and I agree. The language encourages each developer to reinvent and reimplement key concepts in terms of "classes" that are much more succinctly described in languages that embrace abstract algebra. The example of using inheritance and dynamic dispatch to represent a union type, is a perfect example.

<comment><USER7> Union types is not a key concept in abstract algebra, I bet that most mathematicians have never even heard of it. I'd like to hear about its use in abstract algebra, how would you define the union type of the simplest of simple objects without breaking its operation: a group with a group?

<comment><USER8> That would be a _groupoid_ \- [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupoid](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupoid)

<comment><USER7> No, groupoids breaks the group operation and thus behaves like neither of the groups. Do type systems allow operations between union types? If not then it is just a simple interface in OO. If they do then you are no longer working with pure functions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The article doesn't mention matrices, which map to multidimensional arrays. One of the basic features of FORTRAN, all the way back to the original version for the IBM 704 in 1954, was multidimensional arrays. Yet C, C++, Go, and Rust all lack them. They all have "arrays of arrays", or some hack involving macros and templates and a multiply for every array access. (Yes, there's a sort of multidimensional array capability in C99, but it is not used much.)

For Go and Rust, this subject has been discussed.[1][2] In both cases, the participants in the discussion got tangled up with how slicing syntax would interact with multidimensional arrays, and ended up doing nothing.

The number-crunching community is mostly using Matlab/Octave, and Python with NumPy.

[1] [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/golang- nuts/Multi...](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/golang- nuts/Multidimensional$20array$20go/golang-nuts/WwQOuYJm_-s/pazcOKRyNz4J)

[2] [http://internals.rust-lang.org/t/difficulty-with- rfc-439-and...](http://internals.rust-lang.org/t/difficulty-with-rfc-439-and- multidimensional-arrays/1066)

</comment><comment><USER10> Maybe my brain isn't fully operational yet this morning, but I feel like this is backwards:

> X ⊂ Y.

> This subset relationship could be represented as inheritence in a language > like Java or Python, if these sets are meant to be types:

> class X extends Y { ... }

If X extends Y, then isn't X a superset of Y, not a subset? I feel like it should be: class Y extends X { ... }

</comment><comment><USER11> Mathematical constructions can be difficult to interpret as code or visualize. I have tried quite a few:

[http://monsieurcactus.github.io/circles/122514-Lima%C3%A7ons...](http://monsieurcactus.github.io/circles/122514-Lima%C3%A7ons.html)

</comment><comment><USER7> I wont believe in functional programming as long as not even mathematicians prefer it.</comment>


Debating Microsoft's comments on the Greek Ministry of Education laptops program - <AUTHOR> http://polytechnitis.blogspot.gr/2012/12/debating-microsoft-comments-for-greek.html#more <comment><USER2> Even being a Linux fan boy, I still hate OpenOffice/Libre because it's so clunky and doesn't play as nice as MS Office when you need to do some complicated things for the workplace. I actually even prefer Google docs now over OpenOffice and find the gmail/Drive integration so handy. As for the Greece thing, MS has a good product (Office), but a bad OS (for the money they charge). They need to approach this differently, like porting Office to Linux.

<comment><USER3> Open/LibreOffice has never been that great and if I were considering a big install of it the fact that it's under Apache stewardship would give me pause. Apache does very good work but their specialty is server-side, highly- configurable, large systems that take a fair amount of skill to get up and running.

If I had to guess what direction OO development is headed in, I'd say things are headed in a more service-oriented architecture direction. It'll be great if you want a customed-out integrated groupware, collaboration, data analysis and document management solution, and you've got a large, skilled IT staff (and/or Oracle or IBM service contract) to set it up. I doubt it's going to be any good for standalone plain vanilla desktop apps.

Could be I'm wrong about this; but it's open to question where this is headed.

<comment><USER4> LibreOffice is not Apache Licensed or driven by Apache. It is a fork lead by "The Document Foundation". You can read <http://www.documentfoundation.org/>.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> MS is not a newcomer to pushing their solutions to schools through government channels. It's their way to prevent people from learning about alternatives. Corruption is all around in these schemes.

</comment><comment><USER6> What a load of crap. Grow up people. Microsoft Office is worth every single cent.

<comment><USER7> That's your opinion on the pricing of MS Office and its commercial value - correct or otherwise. However, I think the question is whether it makes sense to mandate its use in the education system, in several years time, given the rapidly changing commercial realities and - good value for businesses or not - the high price of using Microsoft products in such an environment by a government that is virtually bankrupt.

You may or may not be right on the value of MS Office, but I think its use in this context is easily and legitimately challenged.

<comment><USER8> "Rapidly changing commercial realities" haven't produced a tool as useful or flexible for analyzing large amounts of financial data as Excel. They also haven't produced an alternative word processor that can correctly read and format any arbitrary Word document. Go ahead, try and tell your boss that you never read that important memo he sent out because your office suite mangled the document.

For interacting with the business world, Microsoft Office is _absolutely essential_ \-- a bargain at thrice the price.

<comment><USER9> I've never seen an office application that so badly mangles a Word document that you can't even _read_ it. 100% fidelity is not going to happen, but unless you're designing brochures or things for print, you don't _need_ 100% fidelity.

<comment><USER8> _I've never seen an office application that so badly mangles a Word document that you can't even read it._

Back in a former job, I was managing documents for a big project. The government mandated the use of Word format. When I opened some of the documents up in LibreOffice, only a single, completely blank page was visible. This tended to happen with .docx files but not with .doc files.

So YES, open source office suites DO mangle Microsoft Office documents beyond readability. The only thing that's guaranteed to work is Microsoft Office, so governments and businesses will keep using it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Hmm, there's a mixture of interesting and fairly mundane stuff in here. On the mundane side: one of the points is that Microsoft objects to the requirement to procure the lowest-price software that meets the specs, because there is FOSS that meets many of the specs (as written) and it's no-cost, therefore no commercial supplier can possibly compete. That's an argument you'd expect any commercial software supplier to make, and in fact they do make that argument pretty much anywhere those kinds of procurement rules come up. Whether making that argument is trying to fleece the government or not probably depends on whether you agree with commercial software providers' arguments about benefits of their software vs. FOSS, e.g. in functionality and/or total cost of ownership.

<comment><USER11> If a competitor offers a product/price pairing that the consumer likes more than your product/price pairing, then you competetor makes the sale. If MS cannot compete on price, they need to compete on quality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think the relative merits of Microsoft Office vs. other solutions is something that's been hashed out many, many times. But I do find interesting the request on Microsoft's part for a face-to-face meeting. They don't specifically _say_ a "private" face-to-face meeting, but that seems implied.

Presumably if they want to give discounts or special deals they don't want to do it publicly where everybody (including competitors and future potential customers) can see, but I wonder if this sort of tactic is something that's even tenable going forward? With so many of these contracts coming into the open, will they be able to continue giving discounts on a customer-by-customer basis?</comment>


Apple Inc: A Pre-Mortem - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/adventures-in-consumer-technology/apple-inc-a-pre-mortem-568d1a0b7d72#.j2a7i4kvd <comment><USER2> I'd never heard of a pre-mortem before.

This is definitely going on my list of useful analysis techniques.</comment>