Samsung TVs May Upload Screenshots for Automatic Content Recognition - <AUTHOR> https://www.samsung.com/us/account/privacy-policy/ <comment><USER3> I'm getting ready to go full Battlestar Galactica in all of my appliances. It's now difficult to find high end washers and ovens without these features.

At least right now we can choose not to connect the devices, but what happens if iot LTE connections get cheap enough that the choice is removed altogether, like with Tesla and other high end modern cars?

I don't think I'm just being a Luddite. This really seems like a bad idea. We need some way to assure security and limit data collection.

<comment><USER4> I was talking to a few people in a slack channel the other day about the potential market for a whole set of "dumb" appliances. At the end of the day, we came to the conclusion that it wouldn't be a able to reach mass market because the mass consumers seem to care more about price than security.

<comment><USER5> Make cars too, please.

Manual transmission (actual stick and clutch, not silly paddles), minimal ECUs, disableable seatbelt chime, cigar lighter, and so forth. You know, less cyber.

<comment><USER6> Wouldn't that make it almost impossible to meet emission regulations? I'm not a fan of how opaque cars have gotten, but I'll accept some loss of control for cleaner air.

<comment><USER7> Automatics are still too dumb to keep the clutch engaged while braking.

Officially automatics and manuals are a wash for mileage, but I think driving style can make manuals the winner.

All that kinetic energy getting dissipated by brakes instead of turning the engine and all of its accessories in autos.

I'm quite surprised auto manufacturers haven't implemented engine braking for émissions, reducing brake wear, and quicker « free » cabin heat in cold conditions.

<comment><USER8> Automatics disengage the driveshaft to save wear on engine parts. It's an active decision, not being "too dumb". Wearing out brakes is cheaper to fix than wearing out your brakes, and people like longer lasting, cheaper to fix, cars.

<comment><USER7> I figured they disengaged because they can't know if you're wanting to coast or wanting to brake when you step off the accelerator.

If they always assumed you wanted to brake, that would really hurt mileage.

And it would have to disengage anyway at some point to avoid stalling.

Engine braking is more RPMs in aggregate, but nothing particularly bad for an engine.

<comment><USER8> Automatics don't use a traditional clutch for transmissions, so it wouldn't actually stall, but your other points could be true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The old Soviet Russia and Orwell jokes have taken on a whole new meaning in these "modern times"... 6 years ago it was discovered --- through packet inspection --- that LG TVs actually did something similar:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6759426](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6759426)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6778397](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6778397)

Now I bet they're all using TLS and won't let you trust your own certificates, making it even more difficult to MITM it and verify what exact information it's sending.

For those who don't mind a bit of DIY, you can "lobotomize" a smart TV by replacing the main board with a dumb one of the type used in computer monitors --- there are many online sellers of these, just search for "LVDS board" or "scaler board". You will need to know the model of the panel, and the seller should be able to help with that since the board needs to be programmed with the correct parameters for the panel it's driving. Something like this: [https://www.aliexpress.com/i/32860791745.html](https://www.aliexpress.com/i/32860791745.html)

</comment><comment><USER10> It's hard to believe Samsung has any customers outside of their Korean hegemony.

Samsung hasn't proven themselves as a trustworthy smart electronics vendor in the past, be it smart TV, smart watch, or smart phone:

2015 - [https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-changes-smarttv-privacy- po...](https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-changes-smarttv-privacy-policy-in- wake-of-spying-fears/)

2015 - [https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2015/06/new-e...](https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2015/06/new-exploit-turns-samsung-galaxy-phones-into-remote- bugging-devices/)

2015 - [https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-lg-smartwatches-yield- pers...](https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-lg-smartwatches-yield-personal- data-to-researchers/)

2015 - [https://www.techhive.com/article/2881944/samsungs-latest- sma...](https://www.techhive.com/article/2881944/samsungs-latest-smart-tv- snafu-injects-pepsi-ads-into-your-personal-videos.html)

2016 - [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/19/samsung-g...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/19/samsung- galaxy-s6-explosion-lawsuit-note-7-recalls)

2018 - [https://betanews.com/2018/07/03/samsung-messages-photo- bug/](https://betanews.com/2018/07/03/samsung-messages-photo-bug/)

2018 - [https://www.consumerreports.org/televisions/samsung-roku- sma...](https://www.consumerreports.org/televisions/samsung-roku-smart-tvs- vulnerable-to-hacking-consumer-reports-finds/)

That's not to mention they've been found price fixing, astroturfing, embezzling, and bribing.

Vote with your dollar.

<comment><USER11> I agree, Samsung doesn't deserve our money. I boycotted Samsung after they destroyed my perfectly good Galaxy s5 with software updates. Sadly, the Pixel I got next wasn't much better.

They dominate certain RAM markets though, and that's kind of unfortunate.

<comment><USER12> I had an S5 too, and actually still have it in case I ever need a backup (e.g. last week when _my_ Pixel started getting caught in an infinite boot loop!) Though I hadn't noticed the S5 being destroyed by software updates - the only reason I stopped using it is because they stopped updating it and it was locked from custom ROMs, which was a sad conclusion because it had still decent hardware. Could you elaborate on the villainous updates you encountered?

<comment><USER13> My personal S5 experience leads me to believe that there was some trickery afoot from Samsung's end.

When I realised that my S5 was starting to get a little bit dodgy (having owned it from April 2011 until around December 2018) I went and bought 8 of them. Surprisingly, they were still available for purchase on the Samsung website over 7 years after they were originally released, although they quickly ran out of stock and I needed to go trawling through mobile phone stores asking them to check their store rooms.

From here I noticed that every time I updated my phone to the latest software version, deleted all the extraneous bloatware that actually made no sense to have pre-installed, and go to using a device: it would start to behave weirdly within weeks. Apps that had previously run just fine (like, as an example, google maps) were laggy and constantly crashed.

After going through 6 of the 8 phones in just over 3 months (the rate of failure seemed to have more to do with the fact that they were S5's in 2019 than anything I was doing to them) I eventually just gave up and bought an S10+ (because I honestly just wanted to see what the hell one would do with a terabyte of Storage on their phone - turns out it's absolutely nothing, but the possibilities initially intrigued me, but I guess I'm not really creative enough to come up with something worth doing with all that storage space).

Now I'm still bitterly using the aforementioned S10+ waiting for someone to release a phone that I perceive to be as good as the S5....

So no hard data, just my experience with a large amount of S5's that all seemed to become unusable based on the date rather than actually being broken....

<comment><USER14> There are recent updates from LineageOS for the S5 (multiple variants).

[https://download.lineageos.org/](https://download.lineageos.org/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> How did we go from a country that made it a crime to share video rental records to one where everything you watch is constantly monitored and monetized?

<comment><USER16> Too many people saying, "I have nothing to hide."

Also, people like "free" stuff.

<comment><USER17> It's not even a free problem, it's general pricing. Companies constantly seek ways to increase profits, while customers constantly seek bargain basement pricing.Electronic privacy is not a problem people have dealt with at large, I think. People also often view the competency of corporations much higher than the HN crowd typically does.

I think this is the same for any category of information though. Informed people will heavily advise against things that the public just has no idea on. Health is a big one.

My question is what can we do aside from running around in panic? It feels hopeless.

<comment><USER18> Mandate transparent disclosure.

Consumers don't care about these schemes because they largely don't know the details.

There should be clear, tobacco-esque disclosure requirements of this sort of thing _on the product packaging_.

If Samsung et al. want to data mine their customers in exchange for lower pricing, they're welcome to do so. What should _not_ be legal is doing so and _appearing_ the same as a company who does not do so.

Then the market can make up its own mind.

<comment><USER19> Transparent disclosure doesn't mean shit when the company can honestly say what it's doing and there's zero repercussions for it.

<comment><USER20> I think it would make a difference if some TVs came with large stickers mandated on the box, advertising, and included within, that said:

"THIS TELEVISION MONITORS ALL OF YOUR VIEWING HABITS AND THE DATA IS SOLD FOR PROFIT. ANY TIME IT IS USED, THE PROGRAM BEING WATCHED IS SENT TO THE MANUFACTURER. IF YOU DECLINE TO BE MONITORED, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO RETURN IT FOR 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF PURCHASE AT NO CHARGE TO YOU."

and some did not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Few reasons why I prefer dumb TVs, just a flat LED panel:

1\. You have control over bullshit like this

2\. You can make them smart by attaching the external box

3\. You don't have to throw the TV because your Software is now old, just change the box.

4\. There's new format which requires hardware support (av1 is coming), change the box.

5\. Want to add new hardware? Upgrade the box.

<comment><USER22> What's to prevent you from doing the same with a SmartTV in the future? Just disconnect it from the network and keep a box plugged into HDMI1.

<comment><USER23> Some functions of "smart" TVs are impossible to turn off, unfortunately. I personally don't like the FPS smoothing most modern TVs do, and for many there is no option to turn it off completely.

<comment><USER24> I've never personally seen a TV that can't have the soap opera effect turned off, but I believe you they are out there.

Apples to oranges feature though.

<comment><USER25> it was the first thing i turned off when i bought my LG tv.

funny thing: i did not know the name of it and i couldn't not understand why "Avengers: Infinity Wars" was so upsetting to watch.

took me literally 20min of poking around to find out the option and turn it off (it's called "TruMotion").

<comment><USER24> Yea, it's usually something with Motion or Smooth in it.

What's crazy to me is that some people can't see it! Or think they line it... or the lunatics that actually do!

Once you see it; I don't think it can be unseen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> That sure is one hell of a privacy policy:

Information we may collect automatically includes information about:

access code , advertising IDs , apps and features you use , app usage information , clickstream data , connections to certain Services , connections to other devices , current software version , device model , device settings , Google Ad ID , hardware model , IMEI number , IP address , log information , MAC address , MNC , mobile network operator , non-persistent device identifiers , Personalized Service ID , referrer pages , sales code , search terms , serial number , subscription information , use of third-party websites , web browser characteristics , web pages you visit

<comment><AUTHOR> Practically, a Smart TV is an oversize mobile phone that you use in landscape mode.

In that respect, all ad-supported revenue for a phone is extended to the smart TVs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Unfortunately all vendors do it. Here is how to disable it, for most brands: [https://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=showfull&id...](https://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=showfull&id=1518081245)

<comment><USER28> Here is how to disable it for all brands: Don't connect your TV to the internet.

<comment><USER29> Some of the newer TVs need to be configured with internet access to even work.

<comment><USER30> I'd return it and get a different manufacturer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> If you don't want to read the whole thing, the content recognition part is this:

> Viewing Information Services This privacy notice should be read in > conjunction with the Samsung Privacy Policy, which also applies to your > receipt of customized Smart TV experiences and can be found at > [https://www.samsung.com/us/account/privacy- > policy/](https://www.samsung.com/us/account/privacy-policy/). In order to > provide you with customized Smart TV experiences, some of our feature and > services will rely on your TV viewing history and Smart TV usage > information. Your TV viewing history includes information about the > networks, channels, websites visited and programs viewed on your Smart TV > and the amount of time spent viewing them. We may use automatic content > recognition (ACR) and other technologies to capture this information. Your > Smart TV transfers video snippets or TV tuner information in order to > determine the programs watched.

</comment><comment><USER32> To those in this thread denouncing these dystopian times my question to you is, how do we as technologists create a meaningful and successful career changing this?

I've been against this for a very long time and can't see any easy way to contribute (and also provide $ for my family) short of being in government policy making or law making which would require substantial career changes and further education and then some luck.

<comment><USER33> Unfortunately I don't think there is a legitimate opportunity to work on this problem, and also have a stable high paying job. At the moment I think the best thing to do is educate people. Eventually, awareness will build and the market will emerge.

<comment><USER32> With all the media coverage and growing concern of recent years I was hoping that time had come.. that's a shame

<comment><USER33> Well don't take my word for it. I'm just some rando on the internet. There are positive trends too. Apple sees consumer interest in privacy, for example.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> The answer to connected TVs is commercial display. These are "dumb TVs" that you've seen 10K times at airports manufactured by the usual suspects such as Sony, NEC, LG, and yes - even Samsung. They are offered in 4K, have plenty of ports, and are price competitive to smart TVs

[https://www.necdisplay.com/category?category=displays#1](https://www.necdisplay.com/category?category=displays#1) [https://pro.sony/en_GB/products/small- displays](https://pro.sony/en_GB/products/small-displays)

<comment><USER35> I tried this. At least for larger sizes, the price premium is often 2x or more. Also, finding HDR - let alone HDR, HDMI-CEC ("Turn on the TV when the source comes on"), and ARC ("Generate decent audio without two cables") - <USER2> hard: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21664952](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21664952)

It's hard to find a consumer TV that doesn't have HDR, CEC, and ARC in 2019. Commercial displays may have other missing features I don't know to look for.

Anyway, expect a 200%+ premium for a product that in nearly all respects is inferior for this task.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Stuff like this is the reason I don't connect smart TVs to the internet. If I need web content on the TV, I can connect my laptop with HDMI. The TV should be no more than a display and speakers with a tuner.

<comment><USER37> Can't confirm this myself, but in previous threads about similar topics, people noted that some of those "smart" devices probe every open WiFi they find and use that without your explicit consent. So it's not always possible to disconnect them.

<comment><USER38> Solder the antenna to ground on the wifi module. It's what I'll be doing on my next TV.

<comment><USER39> Or you could just block the TV's MAC address on your router.

<comment><USER40> How does that solve anything? Your WiFi should already be password protected anyway. It's other people's routers with open networks you need to worry about.

<comment><USER41> I don't see an awful lot of open networks anymore... :/

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> I discovered this "feature" when I set up a PiHole on my home network. After a few days I noticed that my TV was phoning home on an almost minute-by-minute basis. After digging into the URL (which had the acr in it), I read a few posts about their data collection and immediately lobotomized my TV (reset to factory) and disconnected it from the network. There is no universe where the manufacturer of my television needs to know what I'm watching on it.

</comment><comment><USER43> The solution most of us fall back to is to never connect a smart tv to the internet.

But that is not a long term solution. It is only a matter of time before devices start shipping with their own sim card that you can not turn off.

I don't know what else to do but to focus on manufacturers that don't do this in the first place. If there are any.

<comment><USER44> Remote comms with no user intervention or control is already happening in medical devices. Almost certainly coming to consumer devices soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Also the FBI recommends you have a separate network segment for your TV/IoT devices [0].

[0] [https://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-recommends-that-you- keep-y...](https://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-recommends-that-you-keep-your- iot-devices-on-a-separate-network/)

</comment><comment><USER46> People like subsidized stuff. People who subsidize things like to do it only when they are paid more than the subsidies they give and they are paid based on who they subsidize because the people who are paying the subsidizers must go to the subsidized people and take their money for the subsidies.

It's a rock-solid business model with a requirement to know your customers, it's not going away unless a better alternative is invented.

<comment><USER47> But consumers are not being informed that they've bought a subsidized tv. For example, Several salespeople have told me in the past few weeks that none of their TVs serve ads. Looking deeper into the TVs the salesperson was clearly wrong. Few consumers even know to ask the question. Even fewer know that the sales guy is wrong.

<comment><USER46> Remove ads pop-up at the first set-up? AFAIK the games that offer this option make a very little portion of their games from ad-removal IAP.

Most people simply don't care enough. For those who care, there will be a niche premium market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> I think I read that Roku does this as well, and it does cause a lot of strange traffic on our network, which is why I want to get rid of our Roku. I'm considering replacing it with an Apple TV when a new version hits the streets.

<comment><USER49> At least Roku can only capture screenshots of content it's serving from itself. Not that I'm defending this practice in any way, but it's significantly less disturbing than my TV doing the same thing.

What if I'm using my TV to watch [homemade] porn, or browsing sensitive personal data on a PC connected to the TV, or something like that? Sounds like Samsung will get screenshots of all my content, regardless of what it is or which input it's coming through.

<comment><USER50> See, that seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen for Samsung.

If it's my content and they're taking a copy and you're living in a place where clickthrough EULAs are illegal, they're violating copyright.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I run pi-hole and have a Samsung smart TV. How do I know that the Samsung DNS servers are being blocked? What prevents Samsung from registering new meaningless-sounding DNS names and continually pushing out TV software updates peddling "Security and bugfix" release notes?

<comment><USER52> This is the exact reason I didn't buy a Samsung smart TV 2 weeks ago. My wife reminded me about ads, so I looked into using Pihole. It wasn't guaranteed to work, so I went with a brand that won't run ads on a TV I paid for. That is a big pet peeve of mine. I hate ads, and refuse to watch them if I pay. I don't pay for the privilege of viewing ads.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> It is simple. Never ever connect the TV to the internet. Use a third party box (or computer) you trust to handle the streaming connection. Apple has fairly reasonable privacy policies for Apple TV. Other boxes may as well.

Related anecdote. My TV needed an update via internet. I noticed that there was no way to delete a wifi password, meaning once connected it was game over. The only solution was to setup temporary wifi credentials, do the update, then change the router credentials again.

The TV also asks for wifi credentials to show you help pages. So, enable help and game over for connectivity and privacy. Nice.

<comment><USER53> > My TV needed an update via internet.

How could it possibly know it needed an update? And what could your advantage be letting it update, considering it would otherwise be forever air-gapped?

<comment><USER44> I knew it needed an update. It was a high-speed HDMI bug that required a software update. I learned about it via internet searching.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Surprised I haven't read this in thread yet, but isn't this Issue what makes homekit enabled routers appealiNg when they finally release ? As I understand it the router can isolate Internet access on a per device basis.

Yes you can VLAN & firewall your way to the same place, but dealing with it at a consumer router level seems like a really great feature of homekit to me.

And yes, homekit supported devices are relatively rare and often more expensive, and they don't have a $€|$$> doorbell. But If we are talking about BSG Colonial style dishwashers, then this seems like a small price to pay.

</comment><comment><USER55> So who is going to start the FOSS smart TV firmware alternative that I can use as a replacement for Samsung firmware? Or do DRM requirements for apps like Netflix make that impossible?

</comment><comment><USER35> I'm not surprised that most mainstream buyers don't know about this, but I'm surprised that this is still news to HN readers. In addition to past HN coverage ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21657930](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21657930) and others), in the last year it's been in NYT, WaPo, Consumer Reports, and tons of other places.

That said, if anyone doesn't already at least skim the privacy policies of any networked devices they own… now is a good time.

Even retailers often sell your info. For example, Target "may share your personal information with other companies." Crate & Barrel may share "a record of any transactions you conduct on our Website or offline" with third parties. The defaults are worse than any reasonable person would expect.

(Have a few extra dollars? Consider spending it on a DIY public service campaign. I've been promoting [https://twitter.com/simpleoptout/status/1191029269691957249](https://twitter.com/simpleoptout/status/1191029269691957249) and other tweets to followers of Samsung's Twitter accounts.)

</comment><comment><USER56> There are a number of gaming TVs coming out that are essentially big monitors with high refresh rates. They're expensive, but they don't have Ethernet ports, or built in apps or any of that bullshit.

I've never connected a TV to Ethernet/Wifi and I don't understand people who have those fucking Amazon/Google/Apple spy devices (aka digital assistants) in their homes. I disable all that shit on my phone too.

<comment><USER57> Any good recommendations?

<comment><USER56> Linus Tech Tips did a review of this one:

[https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/big-format- gam...](https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/big-format-gaming- displays/)

..but in a recent review he actually recommend a high refresh rate LG over it due to price. There might be others too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> I've listed all of the Telemetry servers that I could find my set connecting to should any of you wish to block them on your local network. [https://factory-reset.com/wiki/Samsung_Telemetry_Servers](https://factory- reset.com/wiki/Samsung_Telemetry_Servers)

If you guys notice any others, let me know and I can update the list.

</comment><comment><USER59> If only there was good guy ISP service that would maintain blocking list for these and all tracking tools so that even clueless people are safe.

<comment><USER60> They would be sued to hell as the role of an isp is not to be a regulator of what a company can and can not do.

<comment><USER59> It could be sold as security feature for additional $1 per year.

<comment><USER61> Try $5 a month. $2.99 if you're lucky.

I'm surprised ISPs aren't providing this service already. Just run a virtual PiHole for your customers.

<comment> o-__-o Most ISPs are also content providers, so they may not be able to based on contract agreements they have (e.g. to get the nbc app preinstalled on a roku, they cannot block xyz domains on any of their corporate networks)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> When we were developing Yahoo TV, which ended up being deployed on a bunch of "smart" TVs for a while one of the things we struggled with was "what are people going to do with this?" First thing that came to mind for me was, "look up the show on imdb.com". One huge issue though was that the TV basically didn't know what was on — the connected devices don't transmit that information. So we started thinking about a database of shows & movies so that we could identify what was on (using audio and video) when someone wanted to find out more about it. Amusingly, we were thinking about user convenience and not about advertising at all. I don't think Yahoo ever shipped that but I am not surprised it exists.

</comment><comment><USER63> Apologies as the thread is long, but has anyone mentioned Vizio's creepy ACR tactics yet and how they got sued into submission?

I got a one for the bedroom about a year ago and although it was priced well for a 4K set, I had already heard about their adventures in getting viewing data on the sly and turned all that crap off as soon as I was able to do so.

Sounds like Samsung may well be trending in that direction.

We just bought a Q80 to go in our renovated basement and I'm starting to think about all of the small tweaks I'll need to make in order to minimize the data it collects.

Hard wired w/ Cat 6, Pi-Hole the ad servers, etc.

</comment><comment><USER48> Washington Post had an article about this here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/18/you- wat...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/18/you-watch-tv- your-tv-watches-back/) it was also discussed on HN here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21657930](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21657930)

</comment><comment><USER64> Is this the sections the OP is referring to with their link title?

> Your TV viewing history includes information about the networks, channels, > websites visited and programs viewed on your Smart TV and the amount of time > spent viewing them. We may use automatic content recognition (ACR) and other > technologies to capture this information. Your Smart TV transfers video > snippets or TV tuner information in order to determine the programs watched.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, this is the section.

The Smart TV has many inputs, including PC input (if you connect with your computer), Camera input (to watch the photos you took with your camera), Chromecast streaming from your phone.

The wording in this section syas that any of these are fair play to be sent over to the manufacturer for recognition purposes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> >>>Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., along with our affiliates and subsidiaries, (collectively, "Samsung") knows how important privacy is to our customers.

Translated:

Samsung spits in the face of customers and will do everything in it's power to monetize users private information without compensating users in any way, shape or form.

</comment><comment><USER58> I've actually been researching this a little bit more using some of the test sets that I have, and it seems that there might be a way to disable some of these features through the service menu.

If you enable the service mode / service menu of the set: [https://factory- reset.com/wiki/Samsung_Service_Menu](https://factory- reset.com/wiki/Samsung_Service_Menu) \- then navigate to the "Control" sub menu, disable the following settings:

Voice Recognition OFF, Network Support NONE, BT Support OFF, Samsung Smart Control OFF

With the "Network Support" in particular it seems to disable all internet related settings on the TV.

It seems that in some cases this is in the "extended service menu" for which you will need a special remote to access.

</comment><comment><USER66> Would this cover using your TV as a monitor only? Theoretically, the monitor could recognize/screenshot your wifi/account setup information (presuming passwords weren't *-out), do recognition on it, and then log itself into your wifi while pretending to be a dumb monitor.

</comment><comment><USER67> So why isn't there a market for open source TVs? Wouldn't that make sense?

Or is it a similar story to printers?

</comment><comment><USER68> My Samsung TVs are not connected to the internet. I have never even run the "setup" on them as it turns out you can name inputs and change video settings without excepting any terms. Also before someone post "they look for open WiFi" again it would be great to have proof of that statement that has been made 100 times. Anyway, I was thinking about the screenshots. I wonder what happens if it could not ID the program? Does a human review? It would be a blast to take some shots of Samsung executives and family members and do some deep fake work on them, maybe including Kim Jong Un and some North Korea propaganda broadcast. Except all the terms, hook up to the internet and play the fakes and the propaganda for a month at a time. Just saying..

<comment> rvp-x My TV has an obnoxious full volume boot sound unless you connect it to the internet :-/

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> Good thing large computer monitors are still a thing, and seem to do well.

I don't have a single proper TV in my house, because nobody needs them. We can consume whatever video streams we care about via the internet, using computers that I reasonably control.

Not an option for non-IT people, though, alas.

</comment><comment><USER70> Will Samsung take screenshots even when it runs as a dumb monitor on HDMI or Display Port?

<comment><USER71> I'm sure they would find value in doing so. To understand what you watch on your set-top boxes (cable TV, Amazon/Google/Roku/AppleTV)

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Well, that just justifies my decision to never buy a TV. Yes yes, I own a smartphone already. But I've tried to lock it down as much as possible by deactivating some services, limiting which apps I install. There will always be _some_ tracking if you own a phone by the carrier anyway.

But TV's are becoming a whole other thing. I also just hate free-to-air TV, hate having a black void in the living room begging to be switched on, and I hate the effect it has on kids. A projector that only comes out on special movie nights is more than enough. And a laptop to watch Netflix or something with my wife is better than having a TV.

</comment><comment><USER73> We are beyond fighting this with technical solutions. This can only be properly fixed via regulations and laws. Unless it can be proven that certain information is required for the product to function, it should not be collected. If it is required, it should only be stored for as long as technically necessary.

I am not familiar with the details of GDPR. Does it help in this particular case?

</comment><comment><USER74> Roku has been doing that forever, and now all those cheap TCL TVs are doing it too. Keep this in mind, especially if you use one of these in a productivity context.

[https://docs.roku.com/published/userprivacypolicy/en/us](https://docs.roku.com/published/userprivacypolicy/en/us)

[https://test.tcl.com/eu/en/privacy-notices-smart-tv- services...](https://test.tcl.com/eu/en/privacy-notices-smart-tv- services.html)

</comment><comment><USER75> This is why you pay more for a Dumb monitor than a Smart TV. The monitor has no avenues to sell your data so all cost and profit needs to be extracted from the consumer through the sales price.

<comment><USER76> Is that really the reason though? I highly doubt they would lower prices because they are compensated by selling our privacy down the river. Mining data is extracting more value, why lower your profits?

Before the advent of the smart TV, bumb TV's have always been cheaper than commercial displays or monitors of similar screen spec. The commercial offerings have things like rs232 control, sdi video for long runs, and other features to allow them to be remotely controlled for signage and kiosk use. The dumb TV went away because we're knee deep in cheap SoC's that can both control the TV portion and run hulu and netflix. No boxes, wires or cables. No separate remotes. Digital convenience, aka "faux luxury", is the drug of choice nowadays.

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> Note that this is also in the UK privacy policy[0]

 _> We may use automatic content recognition (ACR) and other technologies to capture this information. Your Smart TV transfers video snippets or TV tuner information in order to determine the programs watched._

And in the german one[1], which is just a translation

 _> Wir können zur Erhebung dieser Daten die automatische Inhaltserkennung (ACR) und andere Technologien verwenden. Ihr Smart TV ermöglicht die Bestimmung der gesehenen Programme durch Übermittlung von Audio- und Video- Ausschnitten bzw. von Informationen vom TV-Tuner._

I doubt that this is defensible under GDPR.

[0] [https://www.samsung.com/uk/info/privacy/](https://www.samsung.com/uk/info/privacy/) [1] [https://www.samsung.com/de/info/privacy/](https://www.samsung.com/de/info/privacy/)

</comment><comment><USER78> I work on this technology(not for Samsung), they do not upload the screenshots. They upload a cryptographic hash of the image and match it to known content. Also, this is true of nearly every smart TV available for purchase and quickly being integrated into projectors. If you want to turn off the functionality, you will have to go through the feature sets of the devices.

</comment><comment><USER79> > Your Smart TV transfers video snippets or TV tuner information in order to > determine the programs watched.

Can this upload screenshots even if you use the TV as a mere monitor?

<comment><AUTHOR> The wording of the privacy policy does not preclude getting video snippets from the PC input. Unless the wording changes, it can be assummed that it can be affected as well.

<comment><USER79> I suppose if I film a sex tape and watch it on a Samsung TV, it will upload images from that as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER80> Samsung Smart TVs do not take screenshots as far as I know. They do audio and video fingerprinting. It would be way too costly and inificient to upload screenshots for content recognition ([https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_content_recognitio...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_content_recognition)).

Disclaimer: I work for Samsung, but not directly in the TV software.

<comment><USER81> So, they do video fingerprinting? To me, that means that they can identify what you are watching, which I think is what the OP was pointing out, regardless of mechanism. Mike (ex-CTO Shazam)

</comment></comment><comment><USER82> My Vizio that I've had for years recently popped up an "opt in" that asked me to allow them to track my usage. Except it wasn't opt in at all. I couldn't use any of their services if I didn't agree to let them track me.

So I promptly did a factory reset and now we use the AppleTV exclusively with that TV.

It is not only the last Vizio product I'll ever own but I'll go out of my way to find a dumb tv the next time I need one, if such a thing exists by then.

</comment><comment><USER83> There was a good conversation about this on HN a few months ago [1].

Has anyone successfully blocked unnecessary outbound traffic from their smart TV using a firewall such as pfsense? Whilst maintaining usability. A separate VLAN for IoT devices seems like a good first step.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21002745](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21002745)

</comment><comment><USER84> If some dystopian scifi author described in a book 30 years ago what is actually happening today regarding the points of consumer data collection they'd likely be laughed at.

The programmatic elimination of any expectation of consumer privacy.

Thank fluky we have heroes doing open source projects. Yet open source hardware alternatives remain quite limited or non existent.

Can anyone suggest meaningful ways to contribute?

</comment><comment><USER85> > We offer you certain choices in connection with the personal information we > obtain about you through the IBA Service. You can opt out of receiving > interest-based ads from the IBA Service on your Samsung Smart TV at any time > through your Smart TV settings menu, at Menu > Support > Terms & Policy or > Menu > Smart Hub > Terms & Policy.

</comment><comment><USER86> I have my samsung spy device blocked at the router. Always amazed at the level of bullshit consumers have to put up with.

</comment><comment><USER87> I think I wish there was a fine per customer per data item when a data leak happens. That it was 3x if it is discovered the company didn't report it in a timely manner and that it was high enough that companies would be reluctant to collect the data in the first place.

not sure what unintended consequences there would be.

</comment><comment><USER88> I initially thought it is anti-piracy measure, but then I slowly recognized that I live in a world where my proclivities are captured, measured, and then sold to whoever thinks they call sell me stuff. I never thought I would say it, I liked previous regime better. At least there was a clear distinction.

</comment><comment><USER7> So uhhhhh, my Samsung TV got stolen, can I compel them to cough up information leading to its current location?

</comment><comment><USER89> Where does it say "screenshot"?

<comment> matthew-wegner "Your Smart TV transfers video snippets or TV tuner information in order to determine the programs watched"

</comment></comment><comment><USER90> Not trying to downplay Samsung's sinister behavior, but could you just not connect it to the internet?

I was recently shopping for TVs and found it impossible to find a model I liked without this kind of stuff baked in.

Then you could plug your Apple TV, Xbox, Chromecast or what-have-you and avoid being tracked — oh wait...

</comment><comment><USER91> Interesting. So say a couple likes to take nude photos . . . Samsung reserves the right to collect and use those photos if you store them on "your" tv. So you decide that you won't store them there to be "safe", but Samsung can take a screenshot of them anyway?

</comment><comment><USER92> For my last TV I intentionally tries to find a non-Smart TV, in part because of the privacy stuff, but also it always is in your face about wanting you to use the SmartTV features. Unfortunately Samsung and LG really have no competition on the higher end of the spectrum anymore.

</comment><comment><USER93> Relevant sections:

> Viewing Information Services

> ...

> Your TV viewing history includes information about the networks, channels, > websites visited and programs viewed on your Smart TV and the amount of time > spent viewing them. We may use automatic content recognition (ACR) and other > technologies to capture this information. Your Smart TV transfers video > snippets or TV tuner information in order to determine the programs watched.

> You may change your privacy choice at any time by going to the settings menu > to disable the particular feature or service at your sole discretion, in > which case your TV viewing history will cease to be collected for that > particular feature or service.

> Bear in mind that your privacy choice may affect the availability or quality > of the specific viewing information based service.

> Interest-Based Advertisement Services

> ...

> In order to make the advertising on your devices more relevant to you, the > IBA service will rely on your TV viewing history (including information > about the networks, channels, websites visited, and programs viewed on your > Samsung Smart TV and the amount of time spent viewing them), Samsung Smart > TV usage information, and other statistical data obtained from trusted third > party data sources. We may use automatic content recognition (ACR) and other > technologies to capture your TV viewing history.

> Based on the information above we create groups of Samsung Smart TV owners > who share similar interests and use these groups for the IBA Service. The > information above is used to determine the groups to which your Samsung > Smart TV is assigned and thus, which advertisements your devices receive.

> You may disable the IBA Service at any time by visiting the Settings menu on > your Samsung Smart TV.

> PSID

> Your Smart TV viewing history and usage information collected for the > purposes of providing interest based advertisements will be linked to a > randomized, non-persistent, and resettable device identifier called the > Personalized Service ID or "PSID".

> You may reset your PSID at any time by visiting the Settings menu on your > Smart TV and, once reset, your Smart TV viewing history and Smart TV usage > information with respect to interest based advertisements will be de-linked > from its previous PSID. Bear in mind that if you reset your PSID, the > quality of customized and interest based advertisements may not be fine- > tuned.

</comment><comment><USER94> Is it possible to open the TVs and snip snip the wifi/LTE/5G module/antenna?

I guess the antenna is hard to snip in 5G since it's probably part of the circuit board.

Are the modules entirely on the cpu chip?

Is it possible to screw up the timing (say replacing the crystals) w/out breaking something else?

</comment><comment><USER95> This is not new. It's been embedded in tvs for years. You can thank judges who don't care about consumer privacy and mandatory arbitration clauses for the spreading of this junk. If consumers could sue these companies none of this would be happening.

</comment><comment><USER96> I join my smart* devices to my network, then add a policy to block all of their traffic on my eero router.

Not sure if this is good practice or not — I remember something about there being an attack vector for devices not on a network. Started doing this since.

</comment><comment><USER97> This is one of the big reasons I bought a projector instead of a large tv. Because all the large(r) TVs came with "smart" crapware in them.

I just need a HDMI port. Please. Let there be options for us that's not only a friggin' projector.

</comment><comment><USER98> The days are coming where STBs and TV's can do Direct Ad Insertion right on top of your existing video stream, either augmenting or outright replacing other advertisers content. Going to be super interesting..

</comment><comment><USER99> I occasionally use my Samsung tv as a second screen. I can't be sure but I may have had my banking information on screen. Does this mean they are keeping screenshots of that too? Isn't that unlawful?

</comment><comment><USER100> My girlfriend asked why I carry a gun around the house?

I looked her dead in the eye and said, "the motherfucking Decepticons". She laughed, I laughed, the toaster laughed, I shot the toaster, it was a good time.

</comment><comment><USER101> I use Pihole and block all my appliances and other traffic I deem unusual or unnecessary. Its also very useful forensically if I suspect shenanigans on my network. I recommend it to everyone.

</comment><comment><USER102> It is possible to post to a Samsung endpoint so we can help them gather data?

This is why I never connect my TV to the internet and made it 'smart' via the HDMI input.

Next step is to rebuild my house as Faraday cage.

</comment><comment><USER103> Ha, if this disturbs you, wait to see what's going to happen when we perfect under display cameras. Your TV may be watching you, just as much as you're watching it.

</comment><comment><USER104> Surprisingly, why are we talking about TVs only? It says they can collect photos stored on the device (including phones I guess), isn't that the the prime crime?

</comment><comment><USER105> I connect my smart tv to my internet connection and then explicitly block it at the router. (Easy to do with eero - yes yes amazon gets my Mac addresses etc though)

</comment><comment><USER106> Just don't buy a smart tv, don't connect it to internet, cover its camera, and disable its microphone if possible.

These things are cyberdystopic surveillance devices

</comment><comment><USER107> Lets say you work with private data such as something under HIPAA- does the liability fall to you for buying one of these or could you go after Samsung?

</comment><comment><USER65> What if _all_ Samsung appliance buyers will buy and then return Samsung appliances back to store because of unacceptable data collection policy?

</comment><comment><USER108> Hm, I was pinged by a company (samba.tv) earlier in the year which does exactly this for a number of TV models. They claimed it was always opt-in.

</comment><comment><USER4> If you buy a smart TV, disable these features, disable network connectivity, and then plug in another 3rd party box you should be fine right?

<comment><USER109> Unlikely, because the third-party box probably uploads screenshots or does something equally noxious as well, if not today, then in the not-too-distant future.

<comment><USER110> I was kinda hoping Apple TV would adopt a more privacy-forward stance. No?

<comment><USER109> Maybe? Depends on whether some Apple exec ever decides they need the revenue or not. For comparison, even Google's "Don't be evil" reputation only lasted about a decade or so.

<comment><USER111> Google depends on data to make money while Apple doesn't. They make their money from the hardware.

<comment><USER109> Sure, Apple makes most of their money from the hardware, currently. When times get tough for Apple and they're in a situation where they need to look for more revenue (remember the MS bailout back in '97?), well, we'll see...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER112> I pihole on my local network and samsung is the biggest blocked domain on my list with the default block lists. It's INSANE.

</comment><comment><USER113> If you just point out that it would ID what types of porn you ware watching, it would make enough buyers opt out.

</comment><comment><USER114> The simple answer for any new TV, as Samsung is not at all alone here, is to never connect it to the internet.

</comment><comment><USER115> Just another of many reasons to push back against 5G. Enabling this kind of crap is an end goal of 5G.

</comment><comment><USER116> Can we stop calling these things smart. What is smart about devices sharing user data with companies?

<comment><USER9> They're smart enough to be rebellious...

</comment></comment><comment><USER117> If they are gonna do that Lowe th price significantly, let us choose to get screwed or not

</comment><comment><USER118> Could something like pi hole fix this problem, without disabling services such as Netflix?

</comment><comment><USER119> Would love seeing the materials Samsung uses to market this "feature" to their partners.

</comment><comment><USER120> And because these things will connect to any open WiFi network, you have to open them up and work over the networking components with a Dremel. Only then can you be really sure it doesn't fuck you over.

My Samsung asshole tv started showing banner ads overlayed on hdmi signals, already in... 2017 or so?

Fuck these practices.

</comment><comment><USER121> What DNS settings do I need to change to block this shit?

Covered under default Pi-hole settings?

</comment><comment><USER122> Is there a Raspbian + dumb (non-monitoring) monitor that's smarter?

</comment><comment><USER123> Spoiler alert most TV's in the US already sell this data..

</comment><comment><USER124> The solution is simple. Stop watching TV and read lol

</comment><comment><USER125> Are they uploading screenshots or hashes?

</comment><comment><USER126> Not sure if it's available to everybody or just Europeans, but there is a checkbox to disable it (I don't remember whether it's checked by default or not).

Settings -> Support -> Terms & Policies -> disable "Viewing Information Services" (there is detailed information about what this checkbox entails, and it includes using ACR on screenshots)

Could be a placebo button of course, but that would be a pretty big violation of GDPR and a risk for a huge fine.

</comment><comment><USER127> That's why we use projectors.

</comment><comment><USER128> Who offers a non-abusive tv?

</comment><comment><USER129> not if I don't connect the damn thing to my network ... right?

</comment><comment><USER130> Which TV's?

</comment><comment><USER131> TLDR: the page says: "Your Smart TV transfers video snippets or TV tuner information in order to determine the programs watched."

</comment><comment><USER132> As soon as 5G is widely available, TV manufacturers will most definitely include a modem in each set. A GDPR style regulation is needed.

</comment><comment><USER133> privacy is dead!

</comment><comment><USER134> Truly WTF.

</comment><comment><USER135> You can disable this feature, but of course you have to trust the manufacturer that it's actually disabled. And if the manufacturer were trustworthy, they wouldn't be doing things like this to begin with.

<comment><USER136> We need something to firewall the Internets from our too-smart house stuff! Something like an inverse firewall. A waterwall.

<comment><USER137> Blocking unwanted egress is already accepted as possibly part of the functionality of a firewall (see, e.g., [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egress_filtering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egress_filtering) ); there's nothing inherently 'reverse' about it. Indeed, note the symmetry in Wikipedia's definition of a firewall ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewall_(computing)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewall_\(computing\)) ):

> In computing, a firewall is a network security system that monitors and > controls incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predetermined > security rules. A firewall typically establishes a barrier between a trusted > internal network and untrusted external network, such as the Internet.

<comment><USER136> I was trying to joke here. The untrusted network in our case is the internal network. In that sense.

<comment><USER137> > I was trying to joke here. The untrusted network in our case is the internal > network. In that sense.

Sure, and I'm sorry to miss the joke; but I think that it's nothing new that the internal network is untrusted. Before one ever had connected and untrusted smart appliances, one still had untrusted _software_ running on one's general- purpose computer, and it was (and remains) often desireable to fence off that software from the outside world. Little Snitch ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Snitch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Snitch)), for example, was designed around exactly that idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER138> Fortunately, you can specify your own DNS to point at a black hole proxy like: [https://pi-hole.net](https://pi-hole.net)

<comment><USER139> Or you could just not connect your TV to your internet connection.

<comment><USER140> I imagine the thinking is that if the TV is not connected to any WiFi, it might try to connect to something public or non-password protected neighbornet so it's better to connect it to something non-functional rather than unconnected. Of course, the TV could just lie about what it's doing anyway...

<comment><USER52> I wish there were more dumb TVs on the market. What kind of dystopian market is it where you can't even trust an appliance you own to not spy on you.

<comment><USER139> I think it's because the phrase, "None of your business" has fallen out of common use.

I would hear that all the time when I was a kid. I don't think I've heard it in public in decades. Or maybe I was just a nosy kid.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER141> This has been a reality for years.

I can't tell you how I know this - but I can tell you it has been a fact for more than five years.

</comment><comment><USER142> Not sure what the problem is. The user consents to this by saying 'yes' when they are asked if they agree with the Terms and Conditions.

<comment><USER143> It's hard to argue a click through agreement presented after they already bought the TV represents informed consent.

I know rejecting it on my Samsung TV just reset the wizard</comment></comment>


Scrappy - Simple Perl Scraping Framework - <AUTHOR> http://ana.im/press/2010/09/scrappy/ <comment><USER2> Most scrapers seem to break down on heavy dynamic/ajax pages. For example, anything made with GWT appears to provide little for the average scraper to grab (say, for automated daily tracking of android app downloads, for example). Short of reversing out the foreign pages api calls, has anyone encountered a solution to do more processing and then scrape the rendered page?

(well, and short of using Selenium to script a login, then scrape the rendered page via a controlled firefox... which works, but is clunky)

<comment><USER3> I was looking at several scraping solutions (e.g. imacros, selenium) that can handle DHTML for a project and they all have significant performance issues since they need to render the actual pages before processing them. A couple of thousands or rows isn't a problem but try anything more and you got a real performance bottleneck.

<comment><USER4> DHTML is server-side. You mean AJAX. Also, think of the page as an interface to a more lightweight web service. You should probably be parsing that directly.

<comment><USER5> He's referring to this: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhtml> I'm not sure what DHTML you are thinking of that would be server-side.

<comment><USER4> Fuck, thinking of SHTML for some reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> At the very least, Scrappy (Perl) should link to Scrapy (Python).

Otherwise, it seems remiss of this developer to pick a name that is easily confused that of an existing open-source project with similar purpose.

<comment><USER7> Oh, at the very _least_!

Then the module author should prostrate himself at the feet of the all-mighty Python community, trembling in unreserved awe whilst acknowledging that the world quite deservedly revolves around _them_!

Module authors of other (obviously inferior) languages, take note: always check if there's any Python code with a similar name _before_ you choose a title for your project, to avoid embarrassment!

<comment><USER8> I don't think that it was Python had anything to do with it. It's sort of like me calling my new programming language made for sysadmin work and bioinformatics "Pearl". It's just a confusing name considering that there's another programming language that's used for the exact same things, and spelled and pronounced identically.

Now imagine if I said on my website, "By the way, feel free to call it Perl, just be aware that there's also another project that calls itself that". Now I'm giving permission for people to be even more confusing!

<comment><USER9> This isn't a great comparison. Perl is huge compared to these scraping tools. With how the name "Perl" came to be, it's not likely that two people developing a similar kind of thing would independently come up with a similar name. It's quite common to add a _y_ to a concept to come up with a name (or the last consonant and y, like scrappy, or ly).</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Fundraising $5000 for my Startup - <AUTHOR> http://www.9mim.com/

<comment><USER2> If you want money, you'll need to explain to me:

1) How kibitzO is different to Quora

2) How moozeekaa will be better or more than just aggregated youtube tutorials

3) What on earth kingdomlove actually is.

I'm not trying to put you off, but I think you need much more focused plans for each of these.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback/questions.

I do have very detailed plans for each one.

However, you can agree with me that having plans (& business plans) is not as important as doing something tangible.

Time is money & spending too much time on planning phase is not wise since I already know what I'll do & even the best plans change & they should according to the real time feedback of the users!

I am planning to engage the users from the beginning & will have a detailed feedback system so I can have a detailed feedback on everything from the logos to layout to features etc

I tend to make complex systems out of simple ideas. This detailed feedback system would be very useful for startups & in fact it can be a startup by itself!. Imagine if you have such a system where money or time is never wasted so you can reach your milestones as efficiently as possible.

From experience, if one can not afford the time one shouldn't engage in such complex endeavors. This is why I need to secure the money to be able to do this.

In today's world it's almost impossible to compete without a backing.

Answers:

1) Quora is just a question-and-answer website & there are many like it. KibitzO is focused on friends/family where you specifically solicit from them "opinions" mainly so it's a social thing not just Q and A. Also, what would be really different is the functionality. Today, uniqueness of functionality is what makes any website/startup stands out as there are many copy cat for almost any kind of a website. If I reach beta then you'll have a chance to see the functionality 1st hand.

2)MooZeeKaa is different than anything out there. I can guarantee that to you because on this one I did a comprehensive market research as I tried to get investment for it. You'll be hard pressed to find quality music lessons for free!. Also, could you imagine having a famous musician be your mentor? or give out free lessons/vids! If you went through the features list you can see that tutorials is just one part of it. The main difference here that it's an ecosystem! it'll have a complete platform to allow anyone from musicians to beginners to 1) have everything related to music in on place (Wal-Mart of music) 2) create an income of it, so you feed the ecosystem & be fed by it

3) Kingdomlove is a social platform to connect people based on what they love (love as a broad term not only as in dating so love of art, money, animals etc) so it has all the social features (like facebook) & a platform that allow useful sharing & growing your love based interest. Example, some people love sports, you ask yourself how 1) allow them to find people based on that love not just interest as someone who loves sports is different than someone who is interested in sports! 2) What tools do they need to allow them to grow this love in a productive way? So, for each love based there are suitable tools! Example, money love> business2business tools/features, lead generation etc, animals love> adaptation features, medical history tools etc

Please up vote!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Fundraising $5000 for my Startup!

This is the best place to get a feedback :)

I'll do them regardless, however with your help it can happen faster

Thanks in advance</comment>


JSON: The JavaScript subset that isn't - <AUTHOR> http://timelessrepo.com/json-isnt-a-javascript-subset/

<comment><USER2> Yawn. JSON isn't valid Javascript, but it sure is a valid Javascript data structure.

I often use code like

         echo "var d = ", json_encode($data), ";\n";

and be 100% sure I'm generating perfectly valid Javascript, no matter what is in $data. (Well, apart from circular references, and "resources".)

<comment><USER3> I think the article's point was that Unicode characters U+2028 and U+2029 are illegal in JavaScript string literals.

Yet, the JSON specification (RFC 4627) officially allows them to exist in JSON string literals:

"All Unicode characters may be placed within the quotation marks except for the characters that must be escaped: quotation mark, reverse solidus, and the control characters (U+0000 through U+001F)."

So with U+2028 or U+2029 you can construct a valid JSON object that JavaScript can't parse.</comment></comment>


Shortwave: iBeacon-powered messaging - <AUTHOR> http://getshortwave.com

<comment><USER2> The app is rated "12+" in iTunes because of "Fear / horror-related themes" and "drug and alcohol references."

This is surprising for an innocent messaging app, but then again, I've never submitted to the App Store. Does it require that you make these disclaimers just because users could potentially discuss the topics using your platform?

<comment><USER3> Yep. I believe Chrome is rated 17+ in the iOS store because people can visit arbitrary websites with it.

Really, though, the app age-ratings system would work much better flipped around. There _are_ certain apps that either have no user-generated content/social interactions, or which restrict what user-generated content/social interactions they _do_ have to being nonthreatening (usually by not allowing that many degrees of freedom in expression. thatgamecompany's Journey is a good example.)

Games that _are_ safe for kids could ask Apple to give them additional vetting; Apple could then declare them to be explicitly "safe for children", put them on additional "For Kids" lists, etc. Unlike the current setup, there would be no such thing as an "adult" app--just an "unvetted" app. The parental controls, if turned on, would prompt a parent to _independently evaluate_ unvetted apps.

<comment><USER4> There is something called "made for children" on the app store. It's an explicit flag that you can set on any app.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> See also, FireChat[0] - released a month prior to Shortwave.

[0] [https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firechat/id719829352?mt=8](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firechat/id719829352?mt=8)

<comment><USER6> I thought that used wifi/Bluetooth rather than iBeacons.

<comment><USER5> iBeacons is bluetooth though (you interact with them via the core bluetooth framework)... FireChat does apparently also use wifi though since they use the multipeer connectivity API.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Isn't "shortwave" radio used for extremely long distance communication?

<comment><USER8> Yeah, I was disappointed to find that the name had nothing to do with the underlying technology or the actual use-case. It's just a super-short-range messaging app.

<comment><USER9> FWIW, "shortwave radio" is a very historical name: the 1.6-30MHz range is no longer "short" in wavelength relative to even broadcast FM at 88 to 100, much less cell starting at many hundreds of MHz, much much less bluetooth at 2.4 GHz. Really, I think "shortwave" applies pretty accurately given the use of bluetooth, and considering the shorter the wavelength, the greater the attenuation with distance.

But you're right, it's not shortwave radio. And since your cellphone doesn't have any shortwave radio hardware on board, I'm not too bothered by that :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> we've released a similar networking app called Loopd ([http://getloopd.com](http://getloopd.com)) which also uses iBeacon technology to let you connect with people at a social gathering, also includes messaging, tagging, and showing context of where and when you met

<comment><USER11> I try to keep track of new contacts I meet in a google doc with info like name, where I met them, what they appeared to be (manager, secretary, etc), what they looked like... Way too much work and it's hard to look through. Can't wait for this app to be on Android! I keep hearing good things about it :)

<comment><USER10> thanks Alex! We're partnering with Evernote and Linkedin to create an even more robust contact management system, so stay tuned!

<comment><USER11> Thanks for the reply! Saw you guys have a facebook group - is this the best way to follow the progress?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Could pick a slightly more inspiring example chat for the landing page!

<comment><USER13> I agree it's a terrible screenshot. Without any context I have no idea what those icon -> icon dividers mean. I guess its someone changing their icon?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I thought about an app like this years ago...a proximity messaging app that allows strangers to connect in public places that is otherwise difficult (ie. the bus, a flight, a restaurant, sporting event). I think the smart way to do it is to limit users identification/info to simply a photo. I visually identified a person physically and can then message them based on the photos of active users around me.

</comment><comment><USER15> Interesting, when looking at it with BLExplr I see it presents a Battery and Current Time service. Are you using iBeacon basically just to discover nearby devices? Pretending to be an iBeacon and then listening for your uuid to wake up the other clients in the area?

It appears to use wifi for the chat once it finds a neighbor, are you using the iOS multipeer API once for the actual chat conversations?

<comment><USER9> The battery and current time service I think is inherent to the iPhone, not necessarily whatever software is running. I've seen that a lot when doing totally unrelated BLE/iBeacon stuff. A... clever combination of CoreBluetooth and iBeacon is used for discovery, messaging is actually handled via data connection. We toyed with some ways to transfer data directly (multipeer and decidedly-not-multipeer), but we haven't used those in this release.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Not to be confused with [http://shortwaveapp.com](http://shortwaveapp.com)

</comment><comment><USER17> hey are you thinking of open sourcing any part of the code? i can think of a lot of further applications of this, especially relating to mesh networking

<comment><USER10> It's actually very simple. We've released a much more featured version of this at [http://getloopd.com](http://getloopd.com)

<comment><USER18> Are you guys planning to open source any of this? I'd love to dig into this a little deeper....

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Talk to anyone

Talk to anyone using an iPhone

</comment><comment><USER20> This is genius. And it shall incite scandal.</comment>


Show HN: Cool Backgrounds – Download images from a curated list of js libs - <AUTHOR> https://coolbackgrounds.io/ <comment><USER2> This is very nicely done! Design & animations are super slick, nice job :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow - incredible design polish. Thanks for making this tool!</comment>


Two i's - <AUTHOR> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3534-two-is

<comment><USER2> I alternate my work days:

On even days I ask "What can I do today that advances my work as much as possible?" and work long hours with little breaks and no frivolous web browsing, etc.

On odd days I ask "What seems like the most interesting and anxiety reducing things I can do?" and allow any music and frivolous web browsing I want.

Some of the benefits I find with this approach are (1) it weens you off of habitual web browsing, so even when you allow web browsing it's moderate and (2) I find even on my "off" days I end up usually being productive, though at a lower stress level, since luckily much of my work is genuinely interesting.

<comment><USER3> How long have you been doing this for?

<comment><USER2> Not long, admittedly... about 3 weeks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> In a conversation with another developer, we debated a development that could be "a project" of some form. We disagreed on one thing, though: My conclusion was "might be interesting, but I'm not sure if this would be useful to others" while the other concluded "this is pointless, would be a waste of time to even start".

This post rang very true in that light. It's all very nice to only do deeply logical and important things, but it drains the brain dry because you arrive in a headspace where you are incapable of surprising yourself. Sure, you make a lot of progress - but only on existing, known problems. Those solutions you build are often useless once you get a new set of problems or the entire domain shifts and your very concept of what a problem is, in itself, is shaken. And, of course, sometimes you need to develop solutions to problems that aren't even seen as problems in the first place.

Usually, I do my best work whenever I act on a hunch, compelled by curiosity.

Screw all the tricks about how to get yourself "into the flow" and the whining about productivity. If you need motivation, do something that is interesting. Usually, it's so incredibly compelling that your brain doesn't even work in the "motivated vs. not motivated" dichotomy anymore.

And finally: If you need to do something that is not interesting, work hard on finding a part of it that is, first. That might be your entrance to finding it interesting again (or at least you get that part solved).

If you can't find anything like that, try redefining your entire approach (like "I should try to write code that in turn writes my program" or "I am now forced to code this in LOLscript"). It might end up seeming as just technological wanking (the usual "engineer takes 12 hours to program software that solves a problem he could have done by hand in 3"), but, heck, I'd rather do that than bore myself out of my mind.

</comment><comment><USER5> I think this advice is correct, but if I follow it I'm going to have a hard time ever getting the most important thing done. Why would I want to work on that, when I can work on the most interested thing instead? :-)

I guess at some point one needs some discipline... but that's not very fun.

</comment><comment><USER6> Jason Fried just invented 20% Time.

</comment><comment><USER7> Should there be an apostrophe in this title?

<comment><USER8> Yes, that is the correct plural of a single lowercase letter.

Mind your p's and q's.

<comment><USER7> Great. I thought, after 35 years with this language, I would have finally would gotten to the end of inconsistent rules that favor what looks/sounds/feels right.

<comment><USER9> > I thought, after 35 years with this language, I would have finally would > gotten to the end of inconsistent rules that favor what looks/sounds/feels > right.

That's your mistake: You're looking for consistent rules, instead of looking for what communicates.

In the "Two i's" title, if you leave out the apostrophe, all you're left with is capitalization. So you can try:

Two is

Two Is

Two IS

All of those are clearly wrong; they beg the question [1], "Two is _what_?"

The problem is, "is" is already a word. You can't possibly use it as a plural of "I", because there's no way in the world that anyone could tell that that's what you meant.

So, you _have_ to use the apostrophe here.

It's really fairly simple if you forget about looking for consistent rules.

Of course, this is not important, but with any luck it's interesting.

[1] This applies to "beg the question" too. Forget the rules, and instead communicate with people the way they do in the real world.

<comment><USER6> "i's" _solves_ a communication problem, by resolving ambiguity.

redefining "beg the question" _creates_ a communication problem, by introducing ambiguity.

Inventing new words like "blog" is progress. Confusing existing words is like solar flares flipping bits in RAM, causing unrecoverable damage to our shared system.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why Facebook comments is a bad idea for your site - <AUTHOR> http://www.techfounder.net/2012/08/15/dont-mix-business-and-personal-why-facebook-comments-is-a-bad-idea-for-your-site/ <comment><USER3> I don't particularly like the trend of sites offloading their commenting mechanisms to Twitter, Facebook, DISQUS, etc. If it's Facebook, I'll never see it, due to browser plugins. Twitter is often too short for a good conversation, but if you do use it, run a script to import/display related tweets instead of making me click. I'm not a fan of DISQUS either, partly because I use Ghostery. (Alhough, it's good that the new version has a quick "enable once and reload" feature.)

If the purpose of your site is to generate discussion, include a discussion mechanism. If you like the clean look and don't want comments, expect less feedback.

Sending users elsewhere, or requiring extra clicks to see the conversation means less engagement. Maybe that's what some want, and use it as an effort to separate wheat and chaff ... but frankly, that's what moderation is for.

<comment><USER4> Commenting is something I'd much rather offload to someone like DISQUS. Creating your own commenting system either requires lots of spam management (for an open commenting system) or forcing users to register for your service before they can comment.

Frankly I prefer to use my existing identities to comment than have to sign up each time on someones service just to be able to comment.

<comment><USER5> I prefer just the opposite: I like having my identities on each site distinct and autonomous. If everyone has a common identity across multiple sites, it prevents any particular site from effectively evolving its own internal community and cultural norms, and raises the stakes of participation.

<comment><USER6> I segment my identities. A very few things will get my real name (or some variant of it). Most go under a generally-topical alias of some sort or another. I don't mind those aliases gathering their own reputation, but it's no major loss if I decide to toss one at a later point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have Facebook resources blocked (thanks Facebook Disconnect!) so I won't ever know if your site has Facebook comments. Even if I saw them I would never comment using Facebook, the same as never using it to log-into a third party service. No need to give FB the opportunity to once again change their rules and share stuff I'd rather they not.

<comment><USER8> I did not know about this plugin before now. I almost feel like I can start reading political articles on news websites again. Thanks!

<comment><USER7> The lack of Like buttons is also a blast of fresh air.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I have a bunch of sites, and I've experimented with various options. (Example of one site with FB comments on: <http://www.hn- books.com/Books/Slaughterhouse-Five.htm> ) I've also tried LiveFyre comments and a few other systems.

If there's a benefit to FB commenting by providing more engagement, I'm not seeing it. I love the LiveFyre system, but I'm not seeing a lot of engagement there, either.

My opinion is that any little thing you do to make commenting harder by even a tiny amount has a huge impact on participation. To make matters worse, you're giving up sometimes valuable feedback and participation content to Facebook, which just monetizes it instead of you.

Maybe there's a way to make it pay off. If so, I'd like to hear it.

<comment><USER10> I think a fair bit of it depends on your needs for moderation, and what you're comparing to.

When you say you're not seeing a lot of engagement with FB/Livefyre, were those sites seeing engagement before with a worse commenting system?

We switched ForeignPolicy.com over to livefyre from the Drupal built-in system and saw a big increase in participation, both in average comments per article and the number of multi-message 'conversations' that people were having in the comments section. That said, we already have an engaged audience, and a big chunk of the benefit may have been new moderation tools that let us reduce spam/trolls.

I don't think that any system will create engagement out of thin air, except in the rare case of a site with a rabid fan base and no commenting/forum system, but i'd argue that systems like disqus and livefyre make people more likely to jump in because they don't need to create an account with you.

<comment><USER11> As someone who reads ForeignPolicy.com every day, I wish you guys would use Disqus. Curious as to why you decided to go with LF over Disqus.

<comment><USER10> I'm curious about what you dislike about LF. I could also explain our choices a bit, but I'd rather offline that.

firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think it's a bad practice to outsource data like comments in general. I prefer keeping controll over the comments. This way the commenters don't get monitored/analyzed by Facebook or another US company, which is important, especially as a European. Maybe Facebook don't like what the commenter wrote on your site and just censor the comment and you won't even realize it. Comments should stay on decentral places, which is important to avoid attacks against the freedom of speech.

<comment><USER13> >Maybe Facebook don't like what the commenter wrote on your site and just censor the comment and you won't even realize it.

Does this ever happen in any appreciable amount? The TOS for what FB will kill a comment for is pretty reasonable.

As to decentral places, _meh_. I don't blog for a living, and don't have time to deal with spammers, trolls, and asshats. Something like Disqus or Intensedebate handles that nicely, with no nebulous "freedom of speech" issues. Heck even Facebook, to a lesser extent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> IMO, a Facebook account shouldn't be a prerequisite for any action on the internet other than using Facebook.

<comment><USER15> You do not necessarily need a Facebook account to post on the comments plugin. See the "other login providers" section on the docs: [https://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/comme...](https://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/comments/)

<comment><USER16> That is using Facebook, and it makes use of the implicit, non-consensual Facebook shadow accounts that Facebook creates for all anonymous users, who are extensively tracked across the internet.

Many people have blocked all domains associated with Facebook in order to maintain privacy and thwart their internet-wide tracking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Sorely needed: "Why generalising from specific anecdotes is a bad idea for your life".

Have sites that enabled Fb commenting experienced a decrease in viewership? Commenting? Quality of comments? How does this vary based on the audience in question?

Some of these questions have academic answers, some don't. The proper way to figure this out is by by experimenting. Not affirming diktats from your personal beliefs.

<comment><AUTHOR> This was not a research paper, this was an opinion piece on Facebook comments

<comment><USER18> Why does someone who'se never used _my_ site have an opinion on it?

<comment><USER19> Well the article was actually mainly presented from the point of view of a commenter (as opposed to blog author). Notice all three points were about why he didn't like to comment via FB (vs. not liking to _receive_ comments via FB). It was "I don't like commenting on FB, so you probably shouldn't use it" vs. "I have experienced less traffic when using FB comments, and thus am extrapolating that you might as well".

Thus, despite not visiting your site, he can still have an opinion about not liking to potentially comment on it if it contains FB comments. This is not some weird generalization or overstepping his bounds, its the same as someone saying "I don't like sites that have ads so think twice about littering your site with them" and then someone else responding "BUT how do you know if you've never seen _my_ site?!".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Facebook comments are also bad for your viewers who don't have Facebook... Me for example.

<comment><USER21> And viewers who block the Facebook domain in /etc/hosts.

<comment><USER22> I also block disqus and have noticed a lack of comments increasing over time, which really isn't a problem at all...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> i did some simple number crunching some time ago (> 8 months ago) on some clients sites and on a few private and friendly (which gave me access to their data) web-properties. it wasn't a big sample (6 sites all in all) but well, it's the data i had. outcome:

using fb comments - on average over all sites - always increase the valid comments you will get - and compared to old wordpress-standard-installations, decreases spam (the difference was between "a lot of spam" and "nothing")

i did not apply a quality metric, but reading over the (valid, not spam) comments i could not determine a (subjective) trend in either (good / stupid) direction.

yeah, i'm not a big fan of fb comments either, but well, if your blogs goal is to get comments (for whatever reason) then i would advise for the fb comment plugin.

and: it would be cool if you prove me wrong (with data).

i think this is a good time as any to quote Jim Barksdale, former CEO of Netscape: "If we have data, let's look at data. If all we have are opinions, let's go with mine."

<comment><USER6> Your data do also inherently self-select unless you're conducting your research very carefully. Once you throw up a "FB required for comments" requirement, you're going to start shooing away many people who'd otherwise be interested in participating. Some/many will simply never come back.

FB has a penetration of roughly 50% of the population in first world developed nations, and that seems to be its zenith (usage has actually started falling in the US and other early-adopter regions). So you're excluding roughly half your potential participants.

How the FB usage pattern distributes across your target/desirable population is of course another question. I don't have the answers on that.

<comment><USER23> as i said before: i would love that somebody comes up with a better study and proves my mini sample wrong, sadly i know none.

i did a similar research of fb enabled signeups vs. non fb signups (on desktop web apps) - outcome: if you enable signups via fb, you get more signed up users.

i think the pro/con fb comments/signups discussion should be based on data (data that is easy to get on our own webproperties) and not on opinions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I am using DISQUS (version 2012) for a while on my personal blog and I am very pleased. I get more comments than the times I installed FB Comments, I get more traction and people actually share through DISQUS star button.

Here's a blog post I wrote about switching to DISQUS [http://ahmetalpbalkan.com/blog/disqus-addressed-my- concerns-...](http://ahmetalpbalkan.com/blog/disqus-addressed-my-concerns- pretty-well/)

</comment><comment><USER25> It's also bad SEO-wise. User generated content can help you with long tail rankings

<comment><USER26> Facebook comments are crawled.

<comment><USER23> if googlebot chooses to render the page, which is - in my experience - <USER2> always the case (sometimes the fb stream got indexed, the spage got found for it, the other time nothing, sometimes a page that got found for a comment then lost the comment again, pretty random stuff). but yeah, if you think it's worth it you can still fetch the fb comment stream and put it below the fb plugin.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I think one advantage of FB comments is that it supposedly cuts down on trolls, spam, and stupid arguments.

<comment><USER28> You must be new to FB.

<comment><USER29> Or to the internet in general.

<comment><USER27> Just sayin - [http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/05/starting_later...](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/05/starting_later_this_week_tpm.php)

<comment><USER29> Same site from the link in the article (<http://labs.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/post-1.php>):

> Now the downsides, which are probably determinative for us. First, quite > simply a lot of people don't trust Facebook for reasons that range from > quite reasonable to totally paranoid. Second, and more significant in my > mind, is that many people don't want to bring their true identities into the > comments section of a political site. [...]

> For those two reasons, especially the second, we're probably never going to > do this.

It's like "yeah we know people probably won't like it, but fuck them."

<comment><USER27> They also say it frees up their staff to do their jobs rather than moderating. Nothing is perfect. They made a tradeoff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Title: " _Why Facebook Comments Is A Bad Idea For Your Site_ " In the article: " _Perhaps in some contexts it makes sense_ "

Parts of the post sound very contradicting to your actually post title.

Regardless, to answer your third bullet, yes the author can setup Facebook comments to give him/her notifications that you did leave a comment. Granted, I guess there is no UI to let you know that the author was notified, but most blogs (not using Facebook comments) don't have a UI for that either.

I personally like Disqus comment system on blogs because it gives you the option to comment in various ways. It's a win-win-win!

<comment><AUTHOR> I am the author - The article lists reasons where Facebook comments are a bad idea for your site, it is not a generalization.

I mention that in some cases it might make sense to have it - but in the case of technical or professional blogs / articles, that usually is not the case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> It's optional to share your comment on your news feed so I don't know why author is hating FB comments.

<comment><USER32> I do the same thing as the author. If I see that the comment stream is somehow related to my FB account, I skip commenting. I don't know how they're used or how they feed into some other FB stream.

Even if I did have a feel for how those comments currently are integrated with other FB comment streams, none of us has any idea of how FB will change their policies in the future that will totally wreck our personal notions of "separation of concerns".

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Here's a slightly different perspective.

I'm part of a group blog with an active community, and we've experimented with various commenting systems. Our problem hasn't been getting user engagement, it's getting quality engagement. The nature of our blog (a cultural blog) unfortunately invites a lot of trollish and abusive comments.

We've experimented with our blogging platform's native comment system, Disqus, LiveFyre, and Facebook. Right now, we've got Facebook Comments active. The number of abusive comments _seems_ to have decreased, as have the number of good comments (most probably because of the barriers of using Facebook). So the jury is still out on which is best for us.

Looking at TechCrunch's comments, it doesn't look like Facebook Comments has helped their quality level that much - though it's much better than Disqus.

So I'd advise understanding your audience before deciding which comment system is best for your site. Each system has its pros & cons. You just have to determine if the cons are worth the pros for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> One of the commentators on my blog (I'm the author of the article), said that ever since TC changed to Facebook comments, he noticed a reduction in critical comments and changed the feel into a "Yes man" type discussions. I guess it depends on how you define quality comments - I prefer people voice their opinions without fear of repercussions. Obviously, this thinking is not appropriate for all cases - if you want product comments for example, by all means Facebook comments might provide the best type.

<comment><USER33> Fortunately, we haven't gotten any "Yes man" type discussions on our blog yet. Many of our most vocal commenters (who often state contrary opinions to ours) took to the Facebook Comment system well, though we've lost a few too. So far, none of the abusive trolls have come over yet.

Unfortunately, I haven't seen the lively discussions we used to get when using LiveFyre. So there's definitely a trade-off. We're definitely not sold on Facebook Comments yet; it's just our most recent experiment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> We use the Facebook comment widget on almost all the pages on Causes.com. Two quick comments:

\- When we run a corporate brand community (such as causes.com/att), our clients LOVE the number of and types of comments that people leave on the page. We've all been impressed with the quality of the comments as well.

\- Grammar filter ([http://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/commen...](http://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/comments/)): adds punctuation (e.g. periods at the end of sentences), trims extra whitespace, expands slang words (e.g. plz becomes please), adds a space after punctuation (e.g. Hi,Cat would become Hi, Cat), and fix common grammar mistakes (e.g. convert 'dont' to 'don't'). tl;dr Comments that look good encourage more good comments.

Facebook comments are obviously not a one-size-fits-all solution, but we've been able to use it pretty well.

</comment><comment><USER35> On a related note: Does the site get a full copy of the comments? Can you do your own search, translate interesting discussions, go back years after facebook have changed their api, or cancelled your dev account, and read over an interesting discussion?

Anyone have experience with disqus in this regard?

Personally, if I enable comments on a site, it is because I hope the comments will form a constructive part of the content of that site. I wouldn't want half my content to disappear on account of a policy change or bankruptcy that is entirely separate from whatever it is I am doing myself.

I've been toying with the idea of hacking together a system that allows replying/commenting via email (effectively auto generating a mailing-list for every post or something to that effect) -- and allowing the comment interface to effectively become a limited webmail gateway to that list.

<comment><USER36> Depends on the website/publishing platform. Disqus's Wordpress plugin actually syncs all of the comments back to the site's WP database. So if they disable Disqus at a later date, all the comments are still there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I have a FB account, but never comment with it.

I don't want my every interaction on the web connected.

I am getting tired of the social web.

</comment><comment><USER38> I think for an article or blog post, yea Facebook isn't that appropriate but most other places I find it useful for the pure fact that I can't really be bothered to make an account for every site I visit.

</comment><comment> jack-r-abbit I have never used the Facebook Comment piece of a site for one reason: I don't want all the people reading THAT site to have a link right to my Facebook page. Under normal circumstances, the chances of some random stranger getting to me Facebook page are pretty slim. But if I comment on some article with Facebook, my real name is right there with a link to my page. The last thing I need it for some nut job to take issue with something I said and follow that link.

</comment><comment><USER39> I really hate any commenting system that requires me to register. I don't want to have dozens of accounts just because of all these various systems for commenting.

<comment><USER40> Isn't that an argument in favour of using Facebook? One account for the whole web, rather than one for each individual blog.

<comment><USER39> I prefer name and comment, no registration system

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> In my opinion comments are a bad idea for your site, unless you're fortunate to have an exclusive audience. Yes, I am aware of the irony of this comment.

</comment><comment><USER42> It alienates those of us without a facebook account.</comment>


Quicksort in Idris - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/bmsherman/blog/wiki/Quicksort-in-Idris <comment><USER2> I have some experience with Haskell [1], but I'm absolutely lost here. Can someone explain all this dependent-type syntax that's going on there, or would that be out of scope for a single comment?

[1] The biggest Haskell program I wrote until now was a spellchecker as the final project for a university course.

<comment><USER3> : is used for type annotations instead of :: like in Haskell.

The double asterisk is syntactic sugar for a "dependent pair" [http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html...](http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html#dependent-pairs) Basically, it is a pair in which the _type_ of the second element depends on the _value_ of the first element.

Here it is being used to pack the result list with a proof that the list satisfies the required properties. The _type_ of the proof must refer to the list, hence the need for dependent types.

The stuff within braces {} are _implicit arguments_ [http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html...](http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html?highlight=braces#implicit- arguments) that are not given explicitly, but are inferred from the type of other arguments.

 _Type_ is commonly referred as the _kind_ * in Haskell, the kind of types that have values.

Unlike in vanilla Haskell, the types of data constructors are explicitly stated [http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html...](http://docs.idris- lang.org/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html?highlight=data#vectors) In Haskell the "types" of data constructors are _kinds_ , and you need to enable the _XKindSignatures_ extension to give them explicitly. [https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/latest/docs/html/users_gu...](https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/latest/docs/html/users_guide/glasgow_exts.html?highlight=#extension- KindSignatures)

</comment></comment><comment> ainar-g This is rather off-topic, but I want to learn Idris or any other purely functional programming language one day to the point where I would be able to read any program, but most programs written in those languages are so terse and abstract, that I constantly find myself lost in them. The fact that most of those languages permit programmers to define custom operators doesn't help.

I really wish someone would create something like [https://cdecl.org/](https://cdecl.org/) but for programs in Haskell/Idris/etc.

EDIT: On the article itself, I wonder how much time does it take to compile the resulting program?

<comment><USER4> I'm in the same boat. I'd really love to see something that's a little bit more beginner friendly than Hoogle.

It's honestly why I think avoiding operator overloading in Java/Go etc was a great idea.

<comment><USER5> Isn't operator overloading something else than the ability to define custom operators?

<comment><USER6> What people do in practice with operator overloading is turn regular operators into custom operators that do something different. Your ability to customize behavior is not as extreme as being able to make any custom operators that you want. But the tradeoffs are definitely related.

<comment><USER7> C# supports operator overloading but not custom operators. That means vectors get to use the plus operator for addition, but no Scalaesque ~~/ operators.

C# is not a language that is generally criticized for operator soup like the ones that support custom operators.

<comment> ainar-g Counter-examples:

* C++ uses bitshift operators for IO. The (in?)famous

        std::cout << "hello world" << std::endl;

Which is _such an improvement_ over

        puts("hello world");

* Ruby on Rails components sometimes redefines `=` as a hash merge. E.g. this

        config.action_mailer.default_options = {from: 'firstname.lastname@example.com'}

actually _adds_ `from` to the default options instead of overriding it completely.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What's interesting is that an algorithm is presented as correct, but which blows up to quadratic behavior given the right input, and since since quicksort uses than tail recursion, could potentially cause a stack overflow. Thus you have a correct, safe algorithm in theory but not in practice.

<comment><USER9> Could you explain about tail-rec causing stack overflow?

<comment><USER10> Looks like a typo. Quick sort is binary recursive so tail call optimization wouldn't fix it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Why oh why all the functional programmers I know use sExps. ;)

You didn't guess the right expansion. I meant shortened expressions. Say a function called forallPerm.

There are million better names most of which start by saying _what it does_. Even foldAllPermutations would be better (if you know what a fold is).

If you're writing in M-expressions do it consistently. If it is logic proof, it is not functional. There I'd expect some lemma names. In plain English.

The datatype called LTEL takes the cake.

<comment><USER12> > If it is logic proof, it is not functional.

Logic proofs _are_ functional programs; at least, they are isomorphic to them, by Curry-Howard.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspon...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence)</comment></comment>