How to Meet Anyone From Steve Wozniak to the President - <AUTHOR> http://lifehacker.com/5956035/how-to-meet-anyone-from-steve-wozniak-to-the-president <comment><USER2> I was suspicious the first time this hit the homepage, but twice? Are we sure the author isn't manipulating things somehow? He has been publicly promoting his track record of screwing people over to get ahead an awful lot.

Edit: to add a bit of credence, Thun (above) seems almost exclusively to pimp Alex and his company with these bland comments. I don't doubt they're different people, but he doesn't disclose his relationship with Virool very clearly.

<comment><AUTHOR> The article is meant to be useful for the community. There's no use of us manipulating anything as my intent was to share some tips that worked for me (and might work for someone else). It got republished on lifehacker.

I am open to constructive conversations and suggestions. If you have ideas about social hacking, then please share them.

<comment><USER2> The thing is, I don't think this post benefits the community, especially reposting the lifehacker version after the original was front page so recently. I'm not really into social hacking, personally it feels dishonest. I discussed this on the last thread; social hacking only works because you're working against the norm. If everyone adopted it, it wouldn't be effective. So you have to do things that are really outrageous, that most people won't do. The other downside is that social hacking doesn't usually create anything; if everyone was social hacking, nobody would have energy for constructive endeavours.

The broader point of my first post was that I felt there might be some manipulation of the system to put this post on the front page. Unfortunately it's difficult to prove, but we could always say that I'm making baseless allegations for reasons of self-promotion. That certainly feels like social hacking

<comment><AUTHOR> I appreciate your honest input. And I agree to an extent that social hacking (networking) is not everything, far from it. However, in building a company, it's a very useful skill to have.

As far as appearing on front page, I am not sure how hn works, but I can guarantee you that I have no interest in manipulating upvotes, nor do I have time to do it.

And overall, I am just trying to create useful content for the community.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Story on HN/Reddit one week, copied into a Nick Denton property the next.

</comment><comment><USER4> I seriously wish society placed less importance on the famous. I will concede that at least this article discusses celebrities who have done something worth celebrating rather than the latest reality TV star than many young people are so smitten with. However I still have to question why anyone would want to spend so much energy stalking public figures.

I prefer to live by the philosophy of "doing your own thing and do it so well that people will come to you" and thus leave the stalking to those who have fewer skills in life.

</comment><comment><USER5> I spent 0.00001 second reading that

</comment><comment><USER6> Translation: how to creatively stalk celebrities.

</comment><comment><USER7> Alex - impressed with how much you have been able to accomplish. Nice article and keep doing your thing.</comment>


The Big Brotherhood - <AUTHOR> https://iainews.iai.tv/articles/the-big-brotherhood-of-digital-giants-is-taking-away-our-freedom-auid-884 <comment><AUTHOR> The callout quote is particularly useful to me in framing the discussion:

"The existence of the power [of Google and Facebook] is a problem, independently of its exercise. As the benevolence of a despot does not remove the despotism, so it will not remove the power of the big brotherhood."

Also h/t /r/philosophy on Reddit for surfacing this:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/6zwh0j/princeto...](https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/6zwh0j/princetons_philip_petitt_on_digital_monopolies/)</comment>


Why Bitcoin grows unusually faster than normal businesses - <AUTHOR> http://blog.oleganza.com/post/46239534564/why-bitcoin-grows-unusually-faster-than-normal

<comment><USER2> hey good post.I have visited this site.here's my link www.couponinput.com/bluefly-coupon-codes.html</comment>


Too Late? For What? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bucketlistly.com/post/40425981793/too-late-for-what

<comment><USER2> For myself, in my late fifties, I'd say that it's too late to do all the things that I'm interested in, that I'd like to do, but that don't really hold my attention enough to get going in.

Learning to program is one of those things. Always been fascinated by it, always wanted to do it, but every time I've made a stab at it, it doesn't hold my interest.

But for the last five years I've been learning Chinese. Something that I NEVER had the slightest interest in doing (until I started) and never would have believed that I could do. But for some stupid reason, I work at it every day, 365 days of the year and I like it, even though my progress has been painfully slow.

I'm not sure what the moral of this story is. Maybe just that you might as well do what you love, no matter what age. And also, that you might not know what exactly you really love until you try it.

<comment><USER3> I think you're confusing "too late" with "physically impossible". I'm a 28 year old with more things I'd like to do than I can do (barring medical advances that drastically extend my lifespan). I wouldn't say it's too late to do them, just that there are too many to do. I have to prioritize.

It's not too late for you to learn to program -- it may take a couple of years, but you sound smart. I think you're physically capable of programming. Perhaps what you're saying is you want to _know_ how to program, but you don't (yet) like the act of programming. Kind of like someone who wants to be physically fit, but doesn't (yet) like exercising.

So I respectfully disagree. There are surely some situations where it's too late to do something (deathbeds, after a stroke, etc), but I think they are few and far between.

> you might as well do what you love, no matter what age.

Awesome :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is true, for the most art. If what you want to do depends on other people, it may be "too late". For instance, if your dream is to work for a startup in Silicon Valley, and you're in your 50s, it may be too late. No one will hire you. You can start your own startup though...

<comment><USER5> > _No one will hire you_

Out of curiosity, why is this? I've heard similar statements from people who have found or worked in startups that they'd never hire a programmer who's over ~35 years of age or so, but I've never been able to figure out why.</comment></comment>


A geographer's theory of regional inequality as a cause of revolt - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-02-08/how-the-places-that-don-t-matter-fueled-populism <comment><USER2> The same argument has been made by Christophe Guilly, another geographer, this time from France, starting about 3-4 years ago. From his wiki page ([https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Guilluy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Guilluy)):

> In France, Christophe Guilluy has got notability with his theory about la > France périphérique (peripheral France). In his different books he stated > that a great part of the political elite has lost contact to the popular > classes mainly situated in rural France, which he defined as the France > périphérique. Guilluy has also tried to explain the rise of the National > Front in France. In the international Academia his work is currently > unknown.[1] Guilluy has also tried to explain the vote for Trump with the > existence of a peripheral America in an interview in the French magazine Le > Point.[2]

I've just finished reading one of his books, he totally deserves to be better known in the Anglo-Saxon world because he makes a lot of sense in what he's saying.

<comment><USER3> Should English speakers who are not Anglo-Saxon also read him? Or is he only relevant in to the communities that descent largely from English settlers and have never had to deal with the political consequences of influence from for instance Celtic or Asian or African communities?

<comment><USER2> In these parts of Europe from where I'm from "the Anglo-Saxon world" is used as a (apparently not so good) metaphor for the United States and Britain, because that's where most of the "intellectual" books written in English are published (the big universities' publishing houses in US + NYC, OxBridge+London+maybe Edinburgh). It probably sucks for some people who are from Cornwall or the Isle of Man, but in the end it's just an expression.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Coming to a city from one of the depressed regions this rings true for me. People want themselves and their communities to matter - the cold hand of capitalism and progress hasn't done them any favors in the last few decades. All it takes is a drive to the (non-coastal) countryside to see. There's a reason voters there are more interested in being against something than for it, and our political discourse has devolved to troll tactics and attention grabbing on the rural right.

We may be past the point of even being able to listen and change anyone's mind - the solution needs to come from within the right, or a major real reworking of the economic state to include rural prosperity somehow.

<comment><USER5> I wouldn't count on any "major real reworking of the economic state".

The reality is, lots of people have been asking for just that for a long time, and it's not come to fruition because it is an extremely difficult thing to do.

Consider Native Americans. They wanted change for years, and essentially had to start casinos to begin making headway. Even now, a material number of tribes and reservations are still racked by poverty, and are unable to participate in the vast majority of legal industrial activities at scale. The system has not changed for them, some of them have simply been forced to find a method of adapting to the economic system that we have.

Blacks are another example. They're a group that has agitated for change for what seems like an eternity. It's similarly doubtful that the system will change for them either. The ones who have found success are the ones willing to leave their neighborhoods and participate in the larger economy not on their own terms, but on terms set by that larger economy.

I actually would like for a new economic state to take hold that would include people who concerned thinkers have termed "those left behind". It's just that, given the interests embedded in the current system, I can't see how it will change. As I pointed out, many groups have tried previously, and tried for a very long time, yet we still have the same system in place. The best we seem to be able to do, is to allot a few set asides for the purposes of elevating a chosen few of "those left behind". I suspect we'll follow a similar path in the instance of rural "left behinds". But my suspicion is that the inertia in our system will mean that wholesale change to accommodate the majority of "those left behind" is not likely to occur.

<comment><USER6> It hasn't come to fruition because the people they vote for have no intention of living up to their publicly stated goals.

<comment><USER4> Their implicit goals are "we are going to win at all costs against the other team" and at that point they've succeeded enough to have a huge amount of ongoing support.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > The way in which "places that don't matter" have taken their political > revenge fits this pattern, too. They have put a premium on drawing attention > to themselves even if it costs them.

Fascinating. That analysis sounds very much like the assessment of hostage- taker motivations that FBI hostage negotiators have built their more modern negotiation techniques around (see for example the book "Never Split the Difference"). Riffing on that thought, it feels like Trump's verbal handling of them aligns much more closely with the FBI negotiators' recommended techniques than Hilary's verbal handling of them (hers is a better fit to the FBI's older more intellectually focused less emotionally focused strategy that was abandoned in the wake of the Waco disaster).

</comment><comment><USER8> My pet theory is, that it's all about the exposure to the realities of other people in daily life, not through warped representations in the media. Population density correlates well with political preferences[1]. That regions don't need to be forgotten shows the example of wealthy Austria, where the FPÖ gets majorities anywhere not densely urban. I would put the threshold somewhere around 1000 to 5000 people/km².

Also rich gated or very segregated neighborhoods, where people are rarely step out side their homogenous envirements or cars fall under this extrapolation of the _contact hypothesis_ in relation to suspectability to populism for me.

[1] [https://medium.com/@davetroy/is-population-density-the- key-t...](https://medium.com/@davetroy/is-population-density-the-key-to- understanding-voting-behavior-191acc302a2b)

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

</comment><comment> temp-dude-87844 Over time, those that are able to move to areas of growth do so, leaving those who didn't leave behind.

This movement of people ensures that the urban-rural divide, as well as the growth-stagnation divide will persist, because the working definitions will naturally fit around the current facts on the ground.

This is neither a new phenomenon, nor freshly articulated. For example, much of Thomas Jefferson's political career was devoted to addressing issues of the urban-rural divide in the early United States.

<comment><USER9> > Over time, those that are able to move to areas of growth do so, leaving > those who didn't leave behind.

> This movement of people ensures that the urban-rural divide, as well as the > growth-stagnation divide will persist

Counterexamples are Sweden and Norway. A century ago they were stagnation areas with people moving away. Today they're more affluent than areas they were losing population to.

The tide can change.

</comment></comment><comment> aaron-lebo [http://www.pbs.org/video/the-gilded-age- nun3cr/](http://www.pbs.org/video/the-gilded-age-nun3cr/)

Good watch which talks about rural populism in the 1800s quite a bit.

</comment><comment><USER10> HN title is incorrect. Should be:

How the 'Places That Don't Matter' Fueled Populism

<comment><USER11> We changed it to a shortened version of the subtitle in keeping with the HN guideline "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." The article title was arguably a bit baity—on the edge, admittedly, but threads are sensitive to initial conditions and the title is the biggest initial condition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> George Washington and Mahatma Gandhi might disagree that this is a "new" theory.

</comment><comment><USER13> The thing is (at least in the US), it's not the case that these places "don't matter". In fact, they matter disproportionately _more_. Living in a populous state, say CA as the most popular, costs voters power.

A CA electoral college delegate represents the will of ~710,000 voters. A WY delegate represents the will of only ~200,000 voters, so a vote in WY counts more than 3x as much as a vote in CA. (For much the same reason, congress also sees disproportionate representation of smaller states, since the number of senators is fixed.)

Not to mention gerrymandering results in outsized influence of rural/urban boundaries as well.

<comment><USER14> In the sense of strict voting power of course, that's the point of our government setup, a minimization of the influence of 'centers of power.' But rural voters feel alienated from the actual politicians they're able to pick. Take a look at all the top Republicans and Democrats, the ones who are in the news. What has any of them done to help revitalize rural areas? Trump is the only one I can think of that has promised some effort to the problem and even he isn't going to follow through except for a few token, small measures. 'Political elites' don't actually do anything for rural voters despite rural voting power. Hence the breakdown in those areas.

<comment><USER5> "...But rural voters feel alienated from the actual politicians they're able to pick. Take a look at all the top Republicans and Democrats, the ones who are in the news. What has any of them done to help revitalize rural areas?..."

That's a complaint which is not particular to rural voters though right? The same can be said of the impoverished urban masses gripped by hopelessness and drug activity. Or the impoverished suburban masses gripped by hopelessness and an opioid epidemic.

Many voters all over the US "... feel alienated from the actual politicians they're able to pick..."

Closing the chasm between leaders and those being led is an age old problem. It's a problem that was likely present in every great civilization.

<comment><USER14> Yes but cities and suburbs aren't degrading in the ways that rural areas are. I agree that most americans probably sense a divide between their own values and those of the 'political class' but if there's still job opportunity and people are still moving in and home values are still appreciating then they just deal with it. In rural areas though, the jobs are disappearing and people are moving away, entire towns just fading out of existence. They _need_ a politician to step in

<comment><USER3> Everyone in the US will be a lot better off if they just doubled the size of the House. Then there would be a lot more people looking for a lot more jobs. Congress members would begin to represent areas that are only inhumanly large instead of areas that are monstrously large. This benefits rural residents most clearly.

And the democratic principle would be more perfectly approached: At the moment, there's 436 democratically allocated seats in presidential elections, versus 102 non-democratically allocated seats. With a doubled congress, it would be more like 872 give-or-take versus 102 (the exact number will depend on how many congress seats Wyoming earns, as this affects the number of college seats DC receives). This benefits urban residents most clearly.

<comment><USER14> >Everyone in the US will be a lot better off if they just doubled the size of the House.

>This benefits urban residents most clearly.

Yeah it benefits urban residents at the expense of rural residents. There's no way you can claim it would make everyone better off, it reduces rural voting power in presidential elections.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Title should be "Geographer claims _old_ theory of regional inequality as his own".

<comment><USER11> OK, we've taken 'new' out of the title above.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This article absolutely drips with arrogance and unconscious bias. It even mentions allocating "blame"!

TL;DR: People from unimportant areas who don't vote correctly are merely vengeful simpletons having knee-jerk reactions. This is the reason we enlightened people from coastal US cities have been thwarted.

<comment><USER11> Please don't post rants on divisive topics. That's one reason the site guidelines include this: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize."

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: how would you build this user community? - <AUTHOR>

I built a really basic site (http://ilubut.com) to force myself to learn a little something about growing a user-community... and a week into it, I'm running low on ideas.
The overall concept is that you can post messages that generally start with "I love you, but..." Any favorite resources or tips on how to grow a community like this?
FWIW, I'm willing to try nearly anything once. My personal rule is to avoid any sort of paid user acquisition but I'm curious to see what gets proposed. <comment><AUTHOR> Clickable: <http://ilubut.com></comment>


An NPM package to check if a number is equal to 13 - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/jezen/is-thirteen <comment><USER2> I see this composing well with five.js

[https://github.com/jackdclark/five](https://github.com/jackdclark/five)

<comment><USER3> That would never work. five != 13

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> But is it numberwang?

Maybe my weekend project will be a numberwang NPM package.

</comment><comment><USER5> This code comment made me chuckle

        sometimes not a number but not not !NaN

</comment><comment><USER6> I'll just wait for the LTS release.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm sorry, I don't follow. Why is this a thing?

Is this a parody of the plethora of "utility" libraries on npm that could just be replaced with a few lines of code?

<comment><USER8> The NPM library is pretty insane. A slightly more advanced package than this parody is 'is-odd' ([https://www.npmjs.com/package/is- odd](https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-odd)). It has 3 million downloads within the last 7 days.

Other than that, I must say that the repo is quite hilarious. The numerous references to blockchains did it for me. "Perhaps adding a blockchain would solve this problem, although at this stage I'm not exactly sure how."

<comment><USER9> And, is-even, which depends on the is-odd library.

[https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-even](https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-even)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Wow I love the BDD inspired syntax.

Truly, now anybody can check if their number is thirteen without being a hardcore developer!

</comment><comment><USER11>
        "olivia wilde", // AND because SHE's "Thirteen"
        "dr. remy beauregard hadley", // Why not 13's real name?!

These both made me chuckle.

</comment><comment><USER12> At least it is properly unit tested :D

</comment><comment><USER13> >Code Of Conduct and Kindness

Very mature...</comment>


"SKAM," the Radical Teen Drama That Unfolds One Post at a Time - <AUTHOR> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/skam-the-radical-teen-drama-that-unfolds-one-post-at-a-time <comment><USER2> >If a couple got into a fight in school at 12:40 P.M. on a Monday, the clip showed up on the platform at exactly that time, creating the uncanny impression that you were watching something that was actually happening. If the producers posted a clip showing a student getting dressed for a party on a Saturday night, many young viewers would be doing the same thing.

>"SKAM Austin" had many hidden layers, and the producers wanted viewers to uncover them all. The characters, some of them played by local teen-agers, all had Instagram accounts, and, like real people's, the posts offered insights into the characters' pasts and their hopes for the future. Collectively, the video clips, photographs, and comments imbued the characters with a depth that not even flashbacks provide in conventional TV.

Nobody will accuse me of being cultured let alone cultured in teen drama TV/Netflix series but I know attention to detail when I see it.

<comment><USER3> Sure. That's impressive work.

The cynic in me though worries that if a _TV show_ can afford to execute like this, what should we expect/fear from state-run psy-ops?

<comment><USER4> The original Norwegian version of SKAM cost less than a million (USD) to produce an entire season.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is an interesting new medium, built on the foundations laid by a number of media that came before it - social networking, reality tv, soap operas, etc.

As always, McLuhan's 4 questions are helpful in thinking about it:

 _\- What does the medium enhance?

\- What does the medium make obsolete?

\- What does the medium retrieve that had been obsolesced earlier?

\- What does the medium flip into when pushed to extremes?_

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrad_of_media_effects](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrad_of_media_effects)

</comment><comment><USER6> As a parent of a toddler, the future of keeping up with what they're paying attention to seems _exhausting_.

<comment><USER7> You won't have to worry about it if you get them addicted to books from a young age!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Wow. This was essential reading for me. I wasn't aware that Facebook Watch even existed nor that SKAM did and reading this really highlighted how out of touch I am with what kids and teenagers are doing.

This sort of media feels like a true paradigm shift and is both extremely interesting and terrifying. Terrifying because the boundary between real and manufactured seems to be rapidly dissapearing, and interesting because it truly is a new form of created media.

</comment><comment><USER9> Seems like an updated ARG

<comment><USER10> Yeah. It's not nearly as without-precedent as the author claims. Though its predecessors generally offered two-way interaction with their characters as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Skam" is also the name of a extraordinarily popular throughout Scandinavia, Norwegian teen show on regular TV.

Across the Scandinavian languages, "skam" mean shame.

The connection to the Norwegian show, seems to be through the director, but what I'm really wondering is, how does the word "Skam" sound to american audiences?

Like scam?

<comment><USER12> AFAIK the original Skam also featured social media uploads along with the linear TV content. During the week (it was on once a week, and uploaded online at the same time), you were able to follow the characters from the show on Facebook (and probably other social media). While the show itself was quite popular this new way of doing it seems to be what the networks are mostly interested in. And with reason, it was a really popular show because of it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't like social media being used this way.

I mean, I don't like social media at all, i only use irc and gnusocial these days, but it seems dishonest and dangerous to use social media as a canvas for fake interactions. Like reality tv in real life. That's not something kids need to be interacting with on social media imo.

<comment><USER14> Facebook Watch, the platform this is on, is a VOD platform. Serialized entertainment video content on a video-on-demand platform is usually the _raison d'etre_ of the platform.

<comment><USER15> They also publish the fiction via Instagram.</comment></comment></comment>


Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications (A Free Textbook) - <AUTHOR> http://abstract.ups.edu/ <comment><USER2> Is anyone here applying abstract algebra to technology projects which might interest us HN readers?

I studied it as an undergraduate; when I think about applications I've found in technology work and computer science, the following spring to mind:

* Linear algebra -- obviously very useful, although not everyone would consider it abstract enough to lump under abstract algebra. * The structural side (category theory, universal algebra etc) very useful for grokking theoretical computer science * Lattices, order theory, boolean algebras etc -- also very useful for computer science, but perhaps tending a bit away from algebra and towards logic.

I'm not sure I've really wielded in anger any non-trivial theorems from the theory of groups and rings though. Maybe a little bit of basic group theory. But perhaps I've lead a boring life. Interested to hear what people are doing with it in the tech / comp sci field :)

(Crypto, I guess, is one important area. And the 'patch algebra' of the darcs VCS was another interesting application I spotted)

<comment><USER3> Not me of course, but Armstrong began Erlang by writing an algebra for telephony exchanges.

Codd wrote an algebra for relations.

Thompson implemented Kleene's regular expressions (notated with an algebra).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sometimes, I wish I was 20 years younger so that I could have been reading stuff like this all through my childhood.

I wonder how long before we see child prodigies who read all these free textbooks, Khan academy stuff, and online MIT courses coming out in droves?

<comment><USER5> It's an interesting question. I discovered in high-school that an avid interest in science expressed through reading back issues of national geographic, popular science, and other similar magazines can give you a significant leg up (giving me a lot of advantages in biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and computer science).

In some ways a lot of what's available online for free is better (wikipedia is generally better than most physical encyclopedias, not least because it's so fast to search), but in some cases there's still a gap. There are plenty of bite-sized nibbles, but there aren't as many cohesive, well put-together larger bites of knowledge such as you'd find with popularized science books and magazine articles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I tried and quickly stumbled learning abstract algebra from this book. I liked "A Book of Abstract Algebra" by Pinter better because it was lighter on the presentation. But maybe I'm just a wimp. This text by Judson seems to be geared towards graduate studens. From what I can tell it's very thorough, though.

<comment><USER7> I haven't tried learning from it, but it doesn't seem to be higher level than Fraleigh's classic book on Abstract Algebra, which I use and is intended for undergraduates.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Another nice Math textbook - really solid presentation.

</comment><comment><USER9> I also recommend Algebra by Michael Artin--but it isn't free, unfortunately.

<comment><USER10> It's used in the course "Abstract Algebra" (Harvard). Lecture videos are available: <http://www.extension.harvard.edu/openlearning/math222/> Benedict Gross is a great lecturer and I recommend watching them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I just gave this a cursory glance, and I have to say I'm impressed.

Anyone studying CS could benefit from this book.

</comment><comment><USER12> It's on bitbucket too: <http://bitbucket.org/judson/aata>

Nobody's commenting on the fact that this book is open source, GFDL.</comment>


Tools never die ... never - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2011/02/01/133188723/tools-never-die-waddaya-mean-never?sc=fb&cc=fp

<comment><USER2> Ballista, scorpio exist only in re-enactments and are far from the functionality of the originals. The originals required human hair, it was the springiest, had to be processed very particularly and it's very labor intensive to recreate, so re-enactors have not. Their historical range is ~400 meters, replicas do ~150.

Complicated specialized tech made in large urban populations is the place to look. Many things went extinct only to be reinvented once large urban populations arose again. But sometimes there was alternative technology, people did not remake the ballista because there were guns by the time urban populations bounced back in Europe.

Greek fire, Roman concrete, Egyptian concrete lost and reinvented. Damascus steel - exact process lost, Japanese made something similar. Egyptian block built ships are lost [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/building-pharaohs- ship....](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/building-pharaohs-ship.html) but ships for the same purpose were reinvented and drastically better. We don't use large wooden ships today, except for re-enactments. Siege towers not used, city walls not built, but we have tanks and trenches.

So it depends on how you categorize it. Functionality of tools remains, but some specifics are drastically different, so it gets subjective.

<comment><USER3> _Ballista, scorpio exist only in re-enactments and are far from the functionality of the originals...Their historical range is ~400 meters, replicas do ~150._

Being gimped is not exactly "going extinct."

 _Damascus steel - exact process lost_

There is now a compelling claim for having found the process again.

 _Functionality of tools remains, but some specifics are drastically different, so it gets subjective._

That's the thing. It's hard for _functionality_ or the need for it to disappear. And where it's supplanted by superior functionality, there's still reenactment. There is probably technology that has disappeared, but only in the case where we've _completely lost all mentions or records of it._ That's the only way something can get beyond the reach of the re-enactors. However, by the time something's gotten that obscure, it's been too thoroughly forgotten to be counted.

In other words, we can't find lost technology, because technology is really informational in essence, and if it's lost it's lost from anyone's consciousness or any known record _by definition._

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think the more interesting discussion (and where I hopped this was going) was that tools never die, they just evolve.

For all of his examples he was able to come up with some trivial example of some near-extinct culture in some very small part of the world using them. But for instance the chariot wheel EVOLVED into the automobile wheel, hammers evolved into jackhammers and hammerdrills (and just plain hammers), brass helmets into motorcycle helmets.

I think finding a tool that is no longer used and has no "children" would be the truly interesting find. If a tool is used to serve a purpose and solve a problem, are there any categories of problems that we simply don't run into anymore?

And for the people talking about parts for '87 chevy's and IDEs or dead software projects, I think you're taking his point far too literally.

<comment><USER5> > I think finding a tool that is no longer used and has no "children" would be > the truly interesting find.

I'd look at tools used for gas lamps.

Candles are still legitimately used for emergency purposes, but without a gas distribution network using gas lamps is pretty much impossible, given that it's no longer reasonable to keep gas fixtures around as long as electricity works reasonably reliably.

Frankly, gas lamps are the worst of both worlds when compared to candles and electric lighting: They're reliant on complex infrastructure, even if you somehow have your own gas supply, and they're still based on the toxic and fire-hazard-prone technology of burning flammable things. When you factor in the risk of gas leaks, they're actually worse than candles.

<comment><USER6> In Israel some Jews use gas lamps for lighting on the Sabbath because the electric grid is run by non-religious Jews in violation of the Sabbath, and they don't want to benefit from that. (Before you ask: There is no central gas distribution network in Israel because of the risk of war, so all houses have individual tanks.)

The requirement to avoid the electric grid is disputed, and most religious Jews don't, but some do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> One I remember being fascinated about from Latin class: the Antikythera Mechanism[1].

EDIT: Others include Roman cement, which was _masterfully_ produced by them. It's the reason so many of their structures and amazingly engineered roads are still around today, millenia later.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism>

<comment><USER8> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLPVCJjTNgk>

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Seems lots of ancient medicines and herbal plants with special effects were lost like Silphium[1] and Nepenthe[2].

Who knows what other amazing things perished with the Library of Alexandria[3], House of Wisdom in Baghdad[4], Library of Pergamum[5], and Imperial Library of Constantinople[6]?

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silphium> [2]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepenthe> [3]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria> [4]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Wisdom> [5]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Pergamum> [6]: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Library_of_Constantino...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Library_of_Constantinople)

</comment><comment><USER9> My understanding is that we can't rebuild a certain gel that's used in some older nuclear weapons, because we've lost all of the formulas, all of the production processes, and the handful of people who had both the scientific understanding of the stuff and the clearance.

Has anyone else heard this story, and can they back it up with a real source?

<comment><USER10> You're thinking of FOGBANK[1], which they apparently had to reverse-engineer the manufacturing process for after, essentially, losing the any documentation of how to make it.

On the subject of the question in the article itself, it seems trivial to come up with technologies that have stopped being made: semaphore towers, metric clocks, lisp machines, and slide rules spring to mind.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOGBANK>

<comment><USER11> Slide rules are still made ([http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search- alias%3Dap...](http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search- alias%3Daps&field-keywords=slide+rule&x=0&y=0))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The best bet would probably be a tool used in a now dead religion. For example, a tool specifically design to force a live fish down the throat of a duck to appease kurlog, god of pond boats.

<comment><USER6> Maybe the tools Egyptians used to remove internal organs before embalming?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Greek fire (unless you want to count napalm as the same thing).

<comment><USER14> As well as serpentines and such ancient war machines.

<comment><USER15> Damascus and bulat steel too. Lots of weapons mentioned here...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Damascus steel.

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

I'm sure there's tons of tools that are extinct and no surviving record of them exists, so we don't know about them. In that sense, you could say it's all a matter of documentation. If something doesn't exist at a given moment but is documented, it's likely that it will be made again at some point.

</comment><comment><USER17> I would have gone for something big and expensive, like, say, the lunar module. Is anyone making a new lunar module or a hydrogen dirigible these days?

</comment><comment><USER6> I was going to suggest the physicians head mirror (the one with a hole), except <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_mirror> says "They are still routinely used by otolaryngologists in the clinical setting, particularly for examination and procedures involving the oral cavity."

</comment><comment><USER18> "I tried ... Paleolithic hammers (still being made) ...". OK this is too good to be true. I googled and it IS available, for $230: [http://www.stoneageartifacts.com/html/Artifact- Hand%20Axes.h...](http://www.stoneageartifacts.com/html/Artifact- Hand%20Axes.html). It is mind boggling who buys these things.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm currently reading Kevin Kelley's book and am enjoying it, but I find his "technology NEVER dies" conjecture mostly uninteresting. I guess it's a strong enough statement that it begs for disproof, but I haven't heard any interesting conclusions that rely on it.

</comment><comment><USER20> OK guys, this smells like a challenge. Can anyone think of a tool which has been made extinct?

<comment><USER21> I wrote an IDE the other day that nobody uses. Does that count?

<comment><USER22> Not sure why people are voting you down. I've written quite a few tools for coding that have gone unused, and its exactly where my mind went too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How about the tool used to weld a metal link around a prisoner or slave's ankle?

I can't imagine anyone still knows how to do that. (But I'm semi expecting to be proved wrong.)

<comment><USER23> I'm willing to bet money that you will find members of the BDSM community who will know the exact process and are more than willing to hook you up. (So to speak ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I heard this on the radio on the way to work this morning. The obvious thing that came to mind was the technology used to build the pyramids.

</comment><comment><USER21> There is a bit of a survivor bias in this challenge, as the tools that are no longer being made corresponds well to tools which nobody remembers.

</comment><comment><USER25> The problem here is not asking a clear question. There are millions or billions of tools that are no longer being built today. I made one just now as I was writing this post, it will never be built again.

Yes it is a cute conclusion, it outlines an interesting social phenomenon. But 'Tools never die' is not correct.

Also, Fred's steam engine is no longer built, it was unique, if you show me steam engines, it is not Fred's steam engine.

</comment><comment><USER5> [http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/quackcures/radiumemanator...](http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/quackcures/radiumemanator.htm)

I give you the radium emanator, a device used to infuse water with the healthy radiation from radium. From the link, "It appears to have been made from cement mixed with uranium ore."

Needless to say, it was never a good idea, and the use of this tool died out with the end of the radium fad and, presumably, more than a few of the fad's adherents.

I will be very surprised if _anyone_ was still making this or something to do the same thing.

<comment><USER26> I'm sure that along those same lines there are products that have been discontinued because the long term effects of their use overwhelms the actual benefits. DDT, lead based paint, and asbestos ceiling tiles come to mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Williams-Kilburn tubes, which were CRTs with high-persistence phosphor used as memory and display devices beginning in the 1940s. The 'high-persistence' means W-K tubes are the exact _opposite_ of where CRT technology stands today: They're useless for TVs and computer monitors, because the phosphor stays lit too long. However, that's what you want if you're using the phosphor to store bits of data in a vacuum tube computer, or to display the contents of memory in that computer.

Plenty of people are making CRTs today. I doubt anyone is making CRTs that would be useful W-K tubes.

(Another guess might be core memory but, knowing NASA and some of IBM's customers, I have a suspicion someone still has real uses for a few hundred kilobytes of core.)

[as originally posted by me elsewhere]</comment>


King of click: the story of the greatest keyboard ever made - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/7/6882427/king-of-keys <comment><USER2> [http://www.pckeyboard.com/](http://www.pckeyboard.com/)

As I understand it, the IBM design and patents passed to this company where you can buy one today. No relation here except that I'm a satisfied customer.

<comment><USER3> I have the Unicomp keyboard linked above. I also have a Das Keyboard, old MS ergonomic thing, and old Apple Extended II, and a few others.

But my favorite of all of them is the Code Keyboard (I have two but the 'green' switch variant is my favorite). Which I learned about from this site, so thanks HN!

[http://codekeyboards.com](http://codekeyboards.com)

<comment><USER4> I _also_ have a unicomp, which I love, a Das Keyboard at work, and a Code keyboard at home. I have no idea about the different switches - how can you tell without buying them all? But yeah, the code keyboard is amazing, I just wish it had the USB hub like the Das does.

<comment><USER3> AFAIK the Code keyboard only offers Cherry MX switches in Green or Clear. I bought one of each. The Clear is quieter, so I use that one at work, but it doesn't feel as good to me.

<comment><USER5> Clears are 15cN lighter touch and a different switch style. Greens are basically heavy blues. It sounds like you type heavy.

[http://deskthority.net/wiki/Cherry_MX](http://deskthority.net/wiki/Cherry_MX)

[http://www.keyboardco.com/blog/index.php/2012/12/an- introduc...](http://www.keyboardco.com/blog/index.php/2012/12/an-introduction- to-cherry-mx-mechanical-switches/)

<comment><USER3> Well, I _have_ noticed that I definitely do bang harder on the keyboard depending on my excitement level.( That could mean I am having an inspired moment of coding, or just that somebody has once again posted to HN about the technological superiority of the modern Japanese toilet[1].)

In comparing the two Code keyboards, what I prefer about the Green version is that there seems to be this one exact point where the key is pressed. You can feel it (and hear it) and it is always the same.

The clear version feels a bit 'mushier', like the point at which the key is 'pressed' isn't as precisely defined.

[1]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787587](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4787587)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Unicomp Inc. (as mentioned in the article) keeps pretty true to the Model M. Despite their old-looking website, they let you customize with a black body or blank keyfaces. These things are somewhat loud, but I think they feel great.

<comment><USER7> Sorry, I still prefer beige computer parts -- to my eyes, everything black makes everything too difficult to see without just a huge amount of light.

So, I had a tough time at the Unicomp site finding a keyboard with a beige base. They did seem to have one keyboard with a white base. I'd prefer beige.

After some looking, and without an easy to find explicit statement, eventually it appeared that the IBM Model M keyboard uses a standard PS/2 connector. Okay. And for people who want to connect such a keyboard to an USB port, apparently there are some simple converters.

Yes, I might like the _buckling spring_ keys.

A keyboard I did like was from AnyKey shipped by Gateway with a copy of the function keys in two columns on the left. For some years, my left hand was nicely trained to hit those function keys possibly with the control key or the shift key -- I had my favorite text editor programmed to do something good with all 36 or so options. For the function key location above the numeric keys, have to look and reach, and for me that's less good.

Gee, I guess I'm the only one who still prefers beige!

<comment><USER2> You sent me back to the Unicomp site to check. I'm pretty sure that what you call beige, they call white. In fact I'm typing on one--I like beige too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I credit the IBM Model-M with contributing substantially to the continued survival of the PS/2 port in this era of USB dominance. The PS/2 port has been around since 1987 and USB since 1996. Yes, USB is now twice as old as PS/2 was when USB was introduced! PS/2 ports have some advantages over USB that might have kept them alive in certain niches, but there are so many cherished Model M keyboards still in use (this post is being typed on one made in 1993) that no self-respecting motherboard designer would ever leave the PS/2 port out!

</comment><comment><USER9> Typing this on one now... Still says, "IBM Personal Computer" in the top left corner. Someone painted the body of it black years ago. Clickety-clickety- clack! Third desktop I've used it with. Gave the keyboards that came with them away. The only thing I'm missing is the "Windows" key, but that's OK since I'm a Linux man, anyway. Love my keyboard. I feel like I'm accomplishing something when I type.

</comment><comment><USER10> So I have a Model-M from around 1988ish in storage still. When I worked at IBM they were "green tag" parts which meant you did not have to account for them. Order 1 or order 100 (internally). I do love that keyboard. I think my favorite however is a Sun Type-5 which had a custom interface so you cannot plug it into anything but an old Sun. A few years ago I did a bit of googling and found a few projects to make a Sun-to-USB interface. Too much effort :(

Today I use a Sun Type-7 Japanese hooked to my Macbook. I had a need to write in Japanese in the past and just got to prefer the layout. I just custom ordered my Macbook in the US with the Japanese keyboard, etc. The placement of the @ and : are just better as an example.

</comment><comment><USER11> My entire company is obsessed with keyboards. [I type on my Das cherry browns - tanked but not clicky]

We have, collectively, \- Original 1983 Model M \- Unicomp Model M \- Das ultimate 3 cherry red \- Das pro 4 cherry blue \- Das pro 3 cherry brown

We're thinking of trying out the Keyboard.io butterfly split board....

Mechanical keyboards make a huge difference in typing speed, accuracy, and comfort - its worth the extra cost!

There's few feelings as good (that can be had sitting / standing [yes - I'm at a standing desk. Coder, hipster, ceo, startup data miner] at your computer) as your fingers floating over the keys without bottoming out.

<comment><USER12> Comfort is really an undermentioned point here. I've worked in a few offices that haven't been friendly to my Das (despite it having the "quiet" keys), but now that I'm working out of a home office, the clicks live on. And as someone who types for a living, I do notice that my fingers feel different after a few hours of hacking away on the Das than on my Apple bluetooth chicklet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'd forgotten that the original PC keyboard had CapsLock in the lower-right corner, and how perfect that seemed to me at the time.

The current placement of CapsLock is horrible. I don't know why that ever became a standard.

<comment><USER14> I have two original PC/AT keyboards, and I love them, not just for their correct placement of the CONTROL key, but because they are if anything, even louder and more tactile than the model M. To connect them to my Mac I have to use two adapters, one to go from AT to PS/2, and another to go from PS/2 to USB.

To me, they're as close to you can get on a computer to the ultimate expression of keyboard perfection; the IBM Selectric.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I totally love the model-M (I've used it a great deal), and the model-M is inarguably a great keyboard, but calling it "greatest keyboard ever made" seems just silly hyperbole (OK, I know, I know... it's the verge what do I expect)... ><

There have been many keyboards every bit as wonderful as the model-M, and of course what constitutes "great" is obviously highly subjective. Buckling springs are nice, but they're just one of many good mechanisms.

<comment><USER16> I loved my old Next keyboards; also, the Apple Ergonomic; and the Sun classics. I've used the classic Model M as well as the Unicomp versions. I currently use Kinesis Advantage. All are excellent. There is no one keyboard to rule them all.

<comment><USER17> Back in the '80s, I used a VT100 long enough that a substantial portion of the matte finish was worn smooth where my palm rubbed when using the cursor keys, as well as half of the space bar. I still miss having the cursor keys where I could reach them without bending my wrist or raising my arm.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> My Model M is dated from 1993, the same year I graduated from high school. I gave it a thorough cleaning this year: took all the keys off, washed them individually, snapped them back on. It almost feels like new now.

My use even got people in my Chinese office more interested in better keyboards; a couple of them have purchased expensive mechanical keyboards for use at work, which is basically unheard of here (though you can buy them on Taobao).

</comment><comment><USER19> These things _are_ fantastic (I used to own a Unicomp), though of the "modern" mechanical keyboards, which is the best? The Reddit r/MechanicalKeyboards buying guide[0] lists a lot of stuff, but I'm curious what HN likes.

[0] [http://www.reddit.com/r/MechanicalKeyboards/wiki/buying_guid...](http://www.reddit.com/r/MechanicalKeyboards/wiki/buying_guide)

<comment><USER5> Kinesis Advantage (split grid) keyboards. Alternatively, anything with cherry MX blue or MX brown switches, preferably without the 10 key/keypad section. Accountants are probably the only people who should actually have a 10-key built into their keyboards.

<comment><USER19> Awesome. I've been meaning to pick up a Kinesis Advantage—the combination of MX Brown switches plus ergonomic keyboard is great. I had the Freestyle2 which was less than great. I've been typing on Apple chicklet keyboards for years and while they're actually not that bad, they're not ergonomically sound at all.

<comment><USER20> I think the chiclet keys are an ergonomic silver-bullet - RSI probably comes from years of us typing on deep keys in high keyboards.

<comment><USER5> Chiclets are actually worse on your fingers because they shock-load your fingers when they bottom out. Mechanical keyboards are much easier on your fingers because you can feel when the key is activated, and sometimes hear it. This lets you know that you can stop pressing before the key bottoms out and there's much less force put through your fingers.

<comment><USER19> Never thought of that—that explains a lot of the fatigue I get from typing on them for long periods of time. I know that certain Cherry MX keys do the same. Which ones don't bottom out too harshly?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I fall in love with the Model M working at my first job with IBM workstations. The feeling of the typing at the fingertips is just the best. The sound is just of second nature. I know no other keyboard that has that precise and sensitive force-feedback (meaning: the buckling happens just at that point, when the key is recognized -- so you can exactly feel (and hear) it).

\-- written with my own Model M

</comment><comment><USER22> Are there any wireless keyboards like this? I am the unfortunate owner of a cat who really really likes chomping through smaller cables.

<comment><USER23> Haven't seen one. A real model M keyboard cable is not small though. It is pretty thick and sturdy. Kitty would have to work pretty hard at it. Maybe a few chew toys would help it and divert its attention.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The Model M is absolutely fantastic, if you've never used a proper mechanical keyboard you really should. I'm significantly more productive coding or general writing on my MX-Blues then the chiclet keyboard of my Macbook - it's a huge difference.

<comment><USER25> Agreed, I'm typing this on a Filco Majestouch 2 with Cherry MX-Blues. It's a fun keyboard that I actually look forward to using every day just for its own sake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> If anybody is after one:

      http://www.clickykeyboards.com/

</comment><comment><USER27> An alternative that I use is the Dell L100. It's not quite as heavy as the IBM, but they have a nice solid feel, they're USB and you can get them new for under $40.

</comment><comment><USER28> Those keyboards are superb. My first encounter were with a ibm serial terminal, then on some old pc where this one were scavenged.

\-- Sent from my IBM Model M keyboard.

</comment><comment><USER29> I type on a 1995-vintage laptop M keyboard (M6-1), adapted with a custom board and a microcontroller. It has the strong tactility with less noise.

</comment><comment><USER23> I use one and love it.

It is just so satisfying to type on it. It has the perfect design it seems. Keys just the right spacing just the right clicky-ness.</comment>


Show HN: Simple shell script I created to find .com domains - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/sathishmanohar/e25f7d5d6330a0cf035b7723a07f547c <comment><AUTHOR> Requirements: This script depends on whois. Make sure whois is installed

How to use: [https://pli.io/UaZp9.jpg](https://pli.io/UaZp9.jpg)

I found myself searching for a lot of domain names for my project and my clients. I was using the domain search by tools provided by domain registrars like godaddy, namecheap etc. I had two main problems with that approach.

1) These tools aren't fast enough to check the availability in a sense the workflow of a domain search is mostly like okay not this, then what about this, it goes on and on like that. I wanted to know only if the domain is available. I don't want to load a bunch of pretty interface files that slowed me down in the process.

2) The good domains I searched were magically being bought if I don't complete the purchase in a couple of hours or within days.

So, I sat down and wrote this simple script which I've been using for more than a year. I didn't time it but this script should make you 4x more effective in searching domains.</comment>


Boost Your Productivity with a 10-minute Workout - Part 1 - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/better-humans/50c835e15244

<comment><USER2> I actually have been trying this technique (before I read this article) and it actually works. The biggest barrier is just forcing yourself out of bed the first time you try waking up earlier than usual. If I can wake up at 5 or 6 am to catch morning flights, then its possible. Also it's important that when you wake up you get some fresh air - after a while your brain will just start waking up earlier everyday. Thanks for sharing!

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed. The hardest part is waking up, but it gets easier because you realize how much better you feel afterwards. I'll be discussing strategies to overcome this daily morning hangover, as I like to think about it, in the next post.

One of those is to really stick to a good bedtime and to plan a bit ahead. This, in fact, will be one of the things you'll naturally do after your pre- frontal cortex begins to work on all cylinders without you being fully conscious about it.

All in all, you'll find yourself making better decisions throughout the day.</comment></comment>


The curious case of accelerators - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/01/are-all-accelerators-decelerators/

<comment><USER2> To me it seems odd that the goal of an accelerator is to get a startup funded. This just perpetuates short-term pressure to get a company sold within a 7-10 year window so investors can achieve their IRR projections and get another round from their LPs.

Maybe there needs to be an accelerator that focuses on creating singles or doubles rather than homeruns. If the end goal was to build a sustainable and profitable business that took a long-term view, then perhaps this would be better for the entrepreneurs themselves, who are after all, the heroes in the story.

<comment><USER3> > _Maybe there needs to be an accelerator that focuses on creating singles or > doubles rather than homeruns._

The thing is that most new businesses fail anyway. Batshit crazy businesses fail at a higher rate, but some of them pay out so insanely highly on the investment that the overall outcome is slightly better than more sedate investment options.

Mind you, lots and lots of investors will go for the middle-of-the-road stuff. We just don't talk about it much. There's not much drama in "local citizen opens new franchise restaurant with bank loan", except for the local citizen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Although I agree with many points of the article, let's review YCombinator funded projects and we'll see they are no joke.

It all depends on the needs of the project.

The promotion that some projects may get from being in an accelerator can be enough for some. For other it will be the little or big seed money they receive. Other will learn things that wouldn't have learnt otherwise.

And for the majority, as it always happen in business, it will be useless even if they happen to have the best mentors.</comment>


Leak Database – Find passwords for any email or username - <AUTHOR> https://leakprobe.net/ <comment><AUTHOR> Was browsing [1] the web and stumbled on this, thought it was interesting enough to submit on HN.

UPDATE: A friend just told me about spycloud [2]

[1] [https://github.community/t5/How-to-use-Git-and- GitHub/HaveIB...](https://github.community/t5/How-to-use-Git-and- GitHub/HaveIBeenPwned-Password-Cracker/m-p/12817/highlight/true#M4160)

[2] [https://spycloud.com](https://spycloud.com)</comment>


Qualcomm CES 2013 Keynote Video - <AUTHOR> http://www.qualcomm.com/ces

<comment><USER2> I love that loading it on my iPhone 5 causes me to get a screen admonishing me to load it on a bigger screen to watch. So much for "Generation M".

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The Verge's photo / blog coverage to get a sense of how weird this is: [http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/8/3850056/qualcomms-insane- ce...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/8/3850056/qualcomms-insane- ces-2013-keynote-pictures-tweets)</comment>


Sea Water Antenna System  - <AUTHOR> http://www.public.navy.mil/spawar/Pacific/TechTransfer/ProductsServices/Pages/SeaWaterAntennaSystem.aspx

<comment><USER2> But what about high winds, wont the water jet fall apart

</comment><comment><USER3> Yay for old news!</comment>


An origin story for a family of oddball meteorites - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2020-07-story-family-oddball-meteorites.html <comment><USER2> How can they even begin to know these meteorites are

1) from the same body, 2) whether such bodies were melted or not 3) that this body was actually both?

<comment><USER3> Geochemistry and isotope ratios.</comment></comment>


"Must have knowledge of object oriented programming using HTML/CSS, JQuery" - <AUTHOR> https://jpl.jobs/jobs/2019-10773-Engineering-Technical-Facilities-Part-Time-Internship <comment><AUTHOR> Is there any way this requirement makes any sense?

<comment><USER2> CSS and jQuery could be usable for OOP, but I'd hardly call it common to do OOP CSS.

Perhaps the HR dept is mashing things they want together...</comment></comment>


VP8 Codec SDK "Bali" Released - <AUTHOR> http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/03/vp8-codec-sdk-bali-released.html

<comment><USER2> The mailing list post is slightly more in-depth about what's changed:

[https://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/apps- devel...](https://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/apps- devel/browse_thread/thread/059f95a8567f1693#)

</comment><comment><USER3> I'd bet every bullet point is covered by at least 3 ridiculous patents.

<comment><USER4> Related: Regardless of their quality, which I'm obviously not going to speculate on, since you seem to care about patents, please read the patent grant that we wrote for webm.

<http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/>

<comment><USER5> You mean the patent grant for _libvpx_</comment></comment></comment>


Why Investing in Airlines Belongs in the Too Hard Pile - <AUTHOR> http://25iq.com/2016/01/16/more-than-a-dozen-reasons-why-investing-in-airlines-belongs-in-the-too-hard-pile/ <comment><USER2> Seems like everyone involved in airlines makes money _except_ the shareholders. Financiers who sponsor aircraft and engine leases, speculate on residual value, and take other niche risks. Union employees. C-Suite officers. Lawyers, consultants, accountants.

<comment><USER3> My aunt was one of those union employees with United for 35 years, after which she retired and they then cut her pension by roughly 40%. She got to go back to work at 65-years old. Maybe scratch union members off your list of people who do well in the airline world.

Article from 2005 with the details: [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/apr/23/business/fi- ual23](http://articles.latimes.com/2005/apr/23/business/fi-ual23)

<comment><USER2> I did not mean to imply that the union employees of airlines got a fair deal! I think a big problem from a shareholder's perspective is that airlines periodically use bankruptcy protection to renegotiate their deals with everyone, including the unions. But the shareholders aren't the only ones getting screwed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > "I don't care what you cover the seats with as long as you cover them with > assholes." Eddie Rickenbacker, Eastern Airlines.

Yep, it's _the_ Eddie Rickenbacker [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Rickenbacker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Rickenbacker)

</comment><comment><USER5> _" Yet, the net amount of money that's been made by the shareholders of airlines since Kitty Hawk, is now a negative figure—a substantial negative figure."_

I first heard that about 20 years ago, but then it was at breakeven. Apparently it's become worse.

Berkshire Hathaway owns NetJets, an airline for the 1%. That's profitable.

<comment><USER6> Is there a source for that? I always hear that airlines have been break even since Kitty Hawk, but never seen any actual work done to prove so.

<comment><USER7> With oil dropping as it is now, they might get temporarily lucky.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why investing-in-airlines belongs in the "Too hard" pile.</comment>