Here's Why Google and Facebook Might Completely Disappear in the Next 5 Years - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/04/30/heres-why-google-and-facebook-might-completely-disappear-in-the-next-5-years/ <comment><USER2> They mentioned amazon as kinda fading into the background as a web 1.0 company not even being able to capitalize on social, but they missed they part where amazon is one of the biggest cloud companies out there, single handedly powering, what, 1% of the internet now all by themselves? They are crazy huge in infrastructure and I can't see them going anywhere anytime soon

<comment><USER3> Remember, this is Forbes.

<comment><USER4> I don't get Forbes.com. I know "Forbes" from their "rich people" list and my understanding was they are a US based print magazine. But the website is nothing like the website of a magazine! It looks like a giant blob of blog posts and fluff opinion pieces of myriads of different authors ("contributors").

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You know what might disappear in the next 5 years? Forbes.

<comment><USER6> When I consider the way their articles seem to consist mainly of link bait without substance, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them disappear within that timeframe. I could swear I remember a time when folks would point to Forbes as a good publication, but I'm not so sure now. Probably a symptom of focusing on ad revenue rather than editorial quality and journalistic integrity.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, the amount of linkbait that comes out of there makes me feel like they have intentionally targeted HN. After clicking on a forbes link, only to discover it was literally Quora wrapped in an iframe, I stopped clicking. I now just check to comments to see if any interesting discussion actually occurred.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Facebook, probably, but I doubt Google. They are no Apple when it comes to building new business models and money-making products, but I don't see anything that could kill Google in the next 5 years.

Facebook on the other hand - I'm noticing a (slow) trend of people getting bored with it. I don't think people are bored with Google searches. Plus, as a company Facebook is much more vulnerable - a lot less money, a one-hit product with nothing else outside the social network to show for themselves. Yes, both use advertising, but that's a business model, not a product/service. It's like arguing Apple only makes money from selling hardware. Google has multiple products/services that use advertising. Facebook has one.

<comment> k-mcgrady I actually think the opposite. Google still relies very heavily on search related revenue and with more and more people choosing apps over the web, plus with the advancement of things like Siri the importance of Google for search could be vastly reduced.

Facebook has massive growth potential. Smartphone usage is continuing to increase and people are using Facebook on smartphones to communicate (free text messaging essentially). Also with their purchase of instagram photo sharing on Facebook will continue to increase further.

Personally I think both will still be around in 5 years (although they will probably look very different) but I think Google carries the most risk.

<comment><USER9> You do understand "things like Siri" needs search to function; and not only google is aware of it's importance, but they built a competitor much before it launched?

<comment> k-mcgrady They need search to some extent but they don't need Google. Siri tries to provide answers so it uses Wolfram Alpha, Yelp etc. Previously I had to google a question and wade through blue links. Now, I ask Siri and it gives me the answer direct from a knowledgable source. No Google.

"they built a competitor"

I've never used it but I thought that the Android equivalent of Siri was just voice recognition/dictation?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Assuming that the article is dead-on about everything (which it certainly isn't), Google won't be MySpace-dead. The interesting thing about Google is that they've gone way beyond mere business models. Google is making _AR glasses_. Google is making _autonomous cars_. Google is _creating new programming languages_. These aren't bottom line things; these are "enhance the world" things.

If Google "disappears", they'll turn into an IBM or a Microsoft. Not even Amazon is quite at that level. And Facebook is absolutely not at that level. Maybe one day, but not yet. Being a Zuckerberg hater, I don't expect it to ever happen.

</comment><comment><USER11> Thoughts before reading the article: "Hah! Notta chance."

Thoughts after reading the article: "Hah! Notta chance."

Perhaps a bit of "Hmm, that's pretty interesting coming from a dead tree magazine.." /s

<comment><USER12> Yahoo, Myspace, Further back AltaVista, AOL. Tech and every non-subsidized "too big to fail" industry is littered with dead or no longer relevant "notta chances".

And you should really work on not letting your biases against the messenger influence your opinion of the message.

<comment><USER11> If you notice in my comment, I said that I had read the article in an attempt to disabuse myself of any preconceived notions.

The article failed to do that. In short, I don't see either of those two companies failing barring some horrendous unexpected event.

As for the messenger, I just find it kind of funny (in a sad way) that one of the last bastions of a dying industry is predicting the imminent death of one that's alive and kicking.. more so one that has an issue with quality control and FUD-filled headlines.

It's like the buggy whip manufacturers saying these newfangled steam buggies will never go anywhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "We will never have Web 3.0, because the Web's dead."

I think that sums up this article.

<comment><USER14> And that's coming from a publication that doesn't quite realize print is dead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't know what revisionist history people lived in where they actually thought MySpace was a good idea with staying power and that News Corp's purchase was a smart bet. I remember distinctly how bad MySpace was and how ripe it was for disruption by a better alternative. People didn't use MySpace because it was good. People used it because everyone was _currently_ on there. I also distinctly remember that News Corp bought MySpace right when all _my_ friends were moving to Facebook. Anecdotally, no one I knew talked about MySpace positively and couldn't wait to switch to Facebook. No more ugly profile pages with animated GIFs and obnoxious music? No more slow unreliable website that seemed to be down all the time? No more ads? No more awkward user experience? Didn't take a PhD to see where the market was heading.

Which is why I'm stupefied that people nowadays continue to use MySpace as an example of "it could happen to you" bogeyman story for startups. It was destined to fail or be replaced. There is no lesson there except don't make a product that sucks and hope that people don't notice. They noticed. They found Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER16> I love that he ends his tirade on the impending irrelevance of current internet companies with [Long YHOO.] I think the major flaw in Mr. Jackson's line of thought is that Web 1.0, Web 2.0, mobile tech companies and whatever comes next are mutually exclusive of one another. When we talk about the stalwart companies of the Web 1.0's, Web 2.0's, etc. we're talking about very different companies which fulfill different types of needs. We see that they're not mutually exclusive but rather that they begin to form an intricate symbiotic web in which each player has an important role. Each new 'phase' and the companies which fill them are only niches which were previously empty (of which there may be an unknown number.)

I would argue that risks come from companies which through ingenuity can deliver a better option to an existing one (search, social, etc.) And while mobile seems to be growing force, I see it as a complement rather than a competitor to the web; certainly not one that will render the 'Web dead.'

</comment><comment><USER17> While mobile apps can certainly provide a better user experience for _some_ tasks, people often seem to forget that everyone in offices across the world still sit at desks and use a desktop pcs (or a decent sized laptop).

This isn't going to change. I can't work on an iPad or on my phone. While we all have two arms and two legs people will be working at desks and while people work at desks they will also occasionally browse social sites at their desks.

Mobile is big, but it's not ever going to completely replace web applications designed to be viewed at desks. We haven't even begun to see the start cloud based software, this is all on top of the fact that a huge percentage of the worlds population isn't even on the internet yet.

The web is changing, as ever, but outrageous claims like this are either a product of ignorance or shameless marketing.

<comment><USER18> This reasoning sounds a little lacking, but it's probably a disconnect from my understanding of "mobile" and "cloud" vs. the commenter's intended meaning. Clearly we need different form factors. We have smart phone size and tablet size. We definitely need workstation size. But I see mobile as a natural part of the evolution to the cloud. If data and apps can live in the cloud, then we're not tied to a machine at a desk. We can carry devices with us. And then when we get to a desk, we can keep doing what we've been doing, just on the larger machine. That's what cloud computing keeps talking about. But mobile computing is a piece in the cloud puzzle. Who cares about keeping data in sync between all your computers if you only have one desktop machine? I only care if I have a machines for each form factor and/or location in which I may want to do work.

Also, one possible technological scenario is that our smartphone acts as our central profile repository and when we get to a desktop machine the smartphone talks to it to connect to data, apps, and log you in. In that way the desktop becomes a seamless part of the mobile experience, providing the larger form factor as needed.

So you can actually implement this as all mobile and no cloud, or all cloud and no mobile, but the two are rather synergistic when combined, since mobile devices talk to the cloud and download software from the cloud. Whether the desktop gets my user data from a phone or the ethernet port doesn't matter, but I suspect it could very well do both, using the phone to handle recognizing it's me and logging me in, then using the internet connection to download my desktop apps and larger data. Dropbox can sync data between devices on the same LAN or the internet as needed, so we can do the same for desktop-phone synchronization too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> >We think of Google and Facebook as Web gorillas. They'll be around forever.

Who thinks that? Especially about Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think the idea that something like Siri will end Google is silly. Siri is just an input-output platform for a search. I think the more likely outcome is that the best search engine will power the best Siri-like app. There's no reason why Google would miss out on being that search engine.

It is also worth noting that Google dominates mobile search even more than it does traditional search.

<comment><USER21> It interrupts their (extremely powerful) brand, though. Right now, the word "google" literally means search to millions of people. If that switches to "let me siri that for you" it opens the door for entrants who today don't even have a chance. If siri can intelligently choose among multiple specialized search services, even more so.

<comment><USER18> Google really does need a way for figuring out the context of my question, so that it can do the specialization part. If they had a better social presence, then they could recognize my interests and habits as part of that context. So knowing I'm a programmer, when I type in "node" they could assume Node.js.

Some context from the question: If they can tell I'm talking about restaurants they can show me just restaurants. If I type in the name of a park, I don't want real estate and insurance companies with coincidentally the same name. Maybe asking a question in a full sentence like you do with Siri gives better context clues? Or maybe Siri just likes to assume a small set of tasks (calendar, looking for a business, making a task) and so is good at guessing those contexts but would be bad at other things. I can't really say much about Siri because I have an iPhone 4 and not a 4S. Oh well.

Google does do a bit of context guessing, like using Geo IP to guess my location, so a business or restaurant name comes up with local businesses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> "Google has done so little in social". What? Google has the leading smartphone OS and Android app store is growing by the hour...

<comment><USER23> I presume you mean mobile, not social there?

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> That's like saying Boeing will disappear because they did not invest in Zynga.

</comment><comment><USER25> I'm yet to read the article but before that, let me award this the best link bait headline award -- off to scratch the itch

</comment><comment><USER26> Typical Forbes link bait:

\- Web is dead

\- Amazon is not social

\- Google the same as Facebook and obsolete ...

This is HN. Please stop posting and up voting this stuff, thanks.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think the author is unaware that Amazon is powering a good chunk of internet businessed.

</comment><comment><USER28> "The tech world" started in 1994?

</comment><comment><USER29> Here's Why Forbes Might Completely Disappear in the Next 5 Years.

Because we will never have Forbes 2.0

Because I think it will.

LOL

</comment><comment><USER30> Ah I doubt that will happen.

</comment><comment><USER31>
      We will never have Web 3.0, because the Web's dead.

Yawn. The person writing this is clearly clueless. The web is not going die. Anyone who says things like this is clearly an iPhone junkie and not really paying attention to the larger picture, and the fact that web apps are quickly catching up to iPhone app experiences, and are quickly going to overtake them. Native mobile apps are a short term fad. They're toast in the long run, because they go against the natural order of things -- network-based software is the future regardless of how cool a silly game you just downloaded is. Data is moving to the cloud, therefore software will move the cloud (not your mobile device), and nothing can change this trend... not even Apple.

<comment><USER32>
      >  web apps are quickly catching up to iPhone app
      > experiences

They are not.

      > and are quickly going to overtake them.

They are not.

      > Native mobile apps are a short term fad.

They are not.

      > network-based software is the future

True. Have you noticed, how many native apps get their data from network.

      > Data is moving to the cloud,

True.

      > therefore software will
      > move the cloud (not your mobile device), and nothing can
      > change this trend... not even Apple.

Have you heard of iCloud? Apple is already there. You are just confusing networked apps, data in the cloud and web apps. Native apps can have all that and still offer superior user experience. They will always have that advantage—no matter how fast the browsers get they will still be a middle man.

<comment><USER31> It's all about software delivery. Native apps, whether they be desktop or mobile based, will always pale in comparison to the simple act of clicking on a link, and immediately running the software - no downloads, no install, no headaches. Mobile natives apps can never provide this level of pain-free software experience. This is especially true if every app that can exist in the future needs to be moderated by a central authority (Apple). Mobile apps are not the future, it is the past, in new clothing.

Mobile apps are essentially a re-invention of the CD-ROM software era, in a new slick iPhone interface. Millions of people constantly re-downloading and upgrading the same software millions of times again and again. It's basically Windows freeware/shareware all over again. Some of these apps might have connection to a website, but it's just tacked onto an ancient software paradigm. Whereas when you starting building a web-based app, you already developing for that new hyper-networked paradigm.

In "the future", your web browser becomes the desktop, or the mobile UI, and the internet is the software. I promise you, in the long term, it does not matter how successful Apple, and previously Microsoft, are at deceiving you of this future. It will happen. And it is happening. Everywhere right now, there are millions and millions of developers building HTML5 apps, and every improvement to today's browsers is building our future software paradigm -- and it will not be controlled by Apple or Google.

<comment><USER18> For a web app to provide the same functionality as a native mobile app the same content must be downloaded. A mobile app downloads compiled executable and all assets in a bundle upfront, then it's permanently stored. A web app downloads UI structure (HTML,CSS) and minimal code (JS) first, appears to instantly be working, then downloads the rest (media assets like images and movies, the rest of the code, etc) in the background. In the end, the same amount of stuff has been downloaded. But web apps have the instant usability feel to them.

Web apps are improving such that they will be able to match the same experience and speed of native apps. JS engines run faster, WebGL allows 3D games, caching of files allows faster starting times. Maybe they'll get close to native speed, unlikely to match it due to middle man (browser, plus overhead of compiling JS vs pre-compiled Obj-C). But you still have re- downloading when the cache clears something out (or else you copy more mobile app features by letting the user declare what stays in the cache permanently). Mobile apps are re-downloaded once per update. Web apps will be re-downloaded more often than that even with good caching (maybe, I guess you could cache infinitely until you run out of space, so with sufficient space it's equivalent). So while web apps are playing catchup quite well, mobile apps still have advantages.

Payment models are different generally, but the models would work fine regardless of the web app vs. mobile difference. Web apps tend to be subscription based, mobile apps tend to be buy once with infinite free upgrades, or using some newer experimental model like "freemium". But you could make a buy-once web app or a subscription mobile app, and IIRC people already have.

So, the technologies are converging, and at the end of the day you still have to get the software from the developer to the user.

JS+WebGL+CSS+HTML+localstorage+... vs. Obj-C+Cocoa, that's just format war. Open web+browsers vs. curated Apple App Store + iOS vs. un-curated Google App Store + Android, that's platform war. Someone will win. But people will be using software on their mobile devices, regardless of how and where they get it or what's under the hood. Mobile is next, and the interconnectivity of the web will be working with it, and social will be working with it, and whatever else comes in the future will also add and change things of course.

<comment><USER33> Personally I think you and wavephorm are going to be getting a very nasty shock in the next 2 or 3 years.

Firstly a browser based application is always going to suck because it's based in a browser. Reflect on that, it's an application running on an OS inside an OS. It doesn't matter how fast it gets, it's a subset of a subset of controls.

Secondly, and this I'm not so confident about, but still believe in. Browsers have sucked at apps for the last 10 years and are going to suck for another 10 years because the HTML standards committees move so slooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. That's why Flash dominated and why native apps are going to dominate. HTML finally has moved to take on Flash just as Native Apps killed flash. They're a whole generation behind!

And the third reason? It's all based on javascript. It is practically impossible at the moment for normal programmers to write medium complexity javascript. ECMA 5 has been released with a whimper instead of a bang. It's pathetic. So anything written as a web app will be inferior to the much more manageable programming languages on the native apps, even though it's [cry] Obj-C and Java. Javascript is an order of magnitude worse for complex apps than those two.

Finally, the growing number of OSes. It ultimately means a growing variance in the quality, speed and modernness of HTML implementations and support, you're always going to get an edge going native on every OS. Previously we had Windows. Then Windows and a little Mac. Then Windows, Mac & iOS. Then Windows, Mac, iOS, Android. Then Windows XP, Windows Vista+, Mac, iOS, Android 2, ICS, Kindle Fire, etc. The OS market is fragmenting.

<comment><USER18> Very good points about why web apps have quality issues.

Some of those issues are not necessarily inherent limitations of the technology. We don't have to use Javascript, that's just what the standard currently is. Flash was a possible answer, as is Silverlight, in delivering apps over the web through a browser. Flash Air (check me on that) was a way to run a Flash app in what looked like a native format. Chrome 1.0 had a mode that hides all browser controls in an attempt to mimic the form of a native app. Java was restrictive in allowed functionality, but people added access to the Windows task bar, to OpenGL, to all kinds of things via JNI. We can add all those extra features to a browser via plugins. So it's technically possible to do all the same things from a browser. It's just a lot harder to get all the people in the middle to agree on reasonable technologies and then implement them the same way.

The large amount of OSs argument is interesting. On the one hand, that means there will be a large amount of mobile OSs for which a native app must be developed. That's a challenge to developers in itself. On the other hand, varying compliance with standards and various performance in a browser is another challenge to developers looking to reach all OSs at once via a web app.

Java could be brought up again, because of their write-once-run-anywhere idea. They did very well at making sure all Java implementations were compliant. But they had to offer a subset of full native capability, a limitation which was partly worked around by linking to native interfaces in a non-WORA manner. It sounds like any attempt to write once and run on every platform and have the software be as pretty and fast and functional as possible is essentially doomed. There will be limitations to those attempts (UI that doesn't fit in, no integration with platform-specific features like address book or task bar or spotlight, no access to technologies that only exist on a subset of platforms). But you still have the trade-off with the need to write many native versions for competing platforms otherwise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I've seen a lot of Forbes articles appear on HN lately. I don't think a single one of them has seemed the least bit insightful or interesting. They mostly seem to write poorly-based opinion pieces that show ignorance of large swaths of tech. They can usually be summed up as, "Web 2.0 ... Web 2.0 ... Web 2.0 ..."

<comment><USER35> Pundits gonna pundit

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> A great example of "how to get 10000 hits in 10 mins". I loved Forbes btw.</comment>


How to have an Acid trip without taking acids - <AUTHOR> http://bycomet.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/how-to-have-an-acid-trip-without-taking-acids/

<comment><USER2> This article recommends getting choked to a near-death experience, but be careful, don't just do it with your friends, consult a near-death choking expert or it might be dangerous. I think it's time for a "what the fuck".

<comment><USER3> Who would have thought that "take acid" would be the SAFER option.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Have a friend that was choked out by a wrestling 'buddy' in high school. That caused a stroke, and he's now got a long life of disability to look forward to.

tl;dr don't be stupid - not worth it.

</comment><comment><USER5> Being choked is nothing like using psychedelics.</comment>


More Evidence That Apple Really Did Reject Google Voice - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/19/more-evidence-that-apple-really-did-reject-google-voice/ <comment><USER2> This "evidence" isn't anything new. Ultimately it boils down to a question of semantics.

Apple verbiage says that they've rejected a "binary". That leaves the door open for negotiations and possible approval of a future "binary" for the same app.

Indeed, many developers have had their binaries rejected and then their app goes on sale at a later point of time (with a new binary).

The bigger question is whether Apple has a right to regulate/control its app store and whether it is appropriate for the FCC to intervene.

</comment><comment><USER3> More evidence that TechCrunch is trolling the entire web with garbage rather than actually trying to get at the truth behind the stories they cover. They'd prefer to fan the flames than answer any questions. Given that Apple already explicitly listed VoiceCentral as one of the applications that they have chosen to keep out of the store, what _news_ is this story really conveying?

</comment><comment><USER4> Can we get an option in HN to hide all posts on techcrunch.com? (Or just a GreaseMonkey script...)

<comment><USER5> See <http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=Xichekolas></comment></comment>


What does Jeremy Clarkson think of Amazon workplace culture? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Judging from the circumstances of his termination from the BBC, he'll probably be quite comfortable at Amazon.</comment>


Ask HN: How to determine body position while sleeping? - <AUTHOR> Hello, I need help figuring how to tell in which position someone is sleeping using a camera (and ML i guess?), i.e sleeping on left/right side, back, sleeping on your stomach.
Is there such a ting that already exists?
Any help to point me in the right direction is greatly appreciated, thank you! <comment><USER2> I saw a 2 Minute Papers video that talks about the paper [0] I linked below. Basically the AI segments up the human body in to pieces.

Using that data you could create a classifier for either pre-defined postures/positions or let it create its own classes (naive classification, I think?)

Source [1] is a different kind of segmentation.

I think your biggest obstacle will be training sets (assuming you want to use AI/ML). Once you've got training sets, the presence of obstacles (sheets/blankets) might not be so much of an issue.

[0] [https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07371](https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07371) [0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEBgi6QYDhQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEBgi6QYDhQ) [1] [https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/12/11/15376](https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/12/11/15376)</comment>


Show HN: An iPhone and iPad app to teach kids how to program - Cato's Hike - <AUTHOR>

Cato's Hike is a game to teach kids how to program graphically.
After a year of on-again, off-again programming I finally released my first game (Universal for iOS). I remember playing games like ChipWits and Logo as a child and they really influenced me.
The biggest issue I have is figuring out the best way of getting some of the programming concepts across.  I have yet to write a manual and still need even more tutorials based on user emails but I'd love to hear any feedback or suggestions you guys have.
I hope you guys like it.
http://hwahba.com/catoshike/ https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/catos-hike/id574335479?ls=1&mt=8 <comment><USER2> 404 Not Found :(

<comment><AUTHOR> That is surprising :( I haven't noticed my site go down recently. Looks up to me right now though :)</comment></comment>


Meat allergies are on the rise. The weird part is that we know what's causing it - <AUTHOR> https://slate.com/technology/2018/12/meat-allergy-tick-bite-cause-treatment-research-alpha-gal.html <comment><USER2> Clickbait title doesnt tell you what causes meat allergies. It's ~~Rocky mountain spotted fever~~ lone star tick bite.</comment>


Mention @somebody. They're notified. - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/blog/821-mention-somebody-they-re-notified

<comment><USER2> Sometimes, I really wish the ~, rather than @, had gained popular traction for referring to users. @ already had meaning, and stuff to the right of the @ was the location of the stuff on the left. Now there are things on both sides of an @ that indicate specific identity.

<comment><USER3> ~ means approximately in many places.

I prefer the pronounceability of @ over ~

<comment><USER2> Does anyone actually say the @? No one says the # in hashtags.

<comment><USER3> Aloud? Yes. Almost always in presentations especially.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Github never ceases to amaze me. Despite all the features Github has, it still manages to maintain an incredibly light and intuitive UI.

EDIT: s/seizes/ceases/

<comment><USER5> Thought you might like to know the phrase is "never ceases" not "never seizes": [http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_saying_never_seizes_to_amaz...](http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_saying_never_seizes_to_amaze_you_or_never_ceases_to_amaze_you)

(Not sure if it was a typo/brainfart/not-english-speaker but figured you might like to know)

<comment><USER4> Thank you, it's the third of your options. (;

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like it! Too bad it'll probably be abused, and force people to turn it off. I have high hopes for the average Github user, but it _is_ on the Internet.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wonder if there will be unintended consequences if this gets really popular. There always seems to be that 'one engineer' who has a combination of good architectural taste, a lot of historical knowledge, and an ability to pull out the wheat from the chaff. Currently the thing that allows them to get anything done at all is that you physically have to go over and bother them if you would like to get their input, but if they start getting a stream of mentions perhaps it would simply get turned off.

That being said, I'm all in favor of putting a user id or group id in a TODO(username) in comments so that whattodo(name)* can give me a list of things in the source base that could use my, or someone on my team's attention.

[1] implementing the whattodo command is left as an exercise for the reader.

</comment><comment><USER8> We use @mentions internally at my company. It helps us to filter/prioritize emails that we are @mentioned in. Definitely a great handy shortcut for getting someone's attention, I hope more services adopt it.

</comment><comment><USER9> My only wish is that you could blacklist (or whitelist) people from whom you recieve notifications, rather than have to disable the feature entirely. Otherwise this may turn into an extremely effective way to spam high-value developers.

</comment><comment><USER10> Awesome! We've had support for this in HipChat rooms for a long time and I find myself using this syntax all over the place only to be disappointed when it doesn't actually notify people. Hopefully more apps will follow along.

</comment><comment><USER11> this is too sweet. but as the notified, can you choose to unsubscribe?

<comment><USER12> Yep, the blogpost linked here reveals the notification center[1], which gives you a bunch of options as to what notifications you want to receive.

[1] <https://github.com/account/notifications>

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wish other commenting systems would implement this feature.

</comment><comment><USER14> <http://twittermentionmonitor.com> is a side project that I started to do this for tweets - whenever someone @mentions you in a tweet, the site forwards it to you as a direct message.

Ignore the payment part and just click the "sign in with twitter" at the top - it's free right now because payment doesn't work yet ;)</comment>


French police: we saved millions of euros by adopting Ubuntu - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars <comment><USER2> The most interesting passage to me was: "Moving from Microsoft XP to Vista would not have brought us many advantages and Microsoft said it would require training of users," said Lt. Col. Guimard.

One of the main barriers to Linux adoption is the fact and/or perception that it requires a lot of retraining. So now that we have the fact and/or perception that moving to Vista requires retraining as well, then Ubuntu becomes just another alternative.

I've dealt with plenty of situations where Windows is the sensible choice and plenty where Linux would be. And I have no problem with someone considering the options and choosing Windows even if I'd personally have chosen Linux. But often Windows is mandated by some executive who seems to consider a computer using Windows to be as necessary as a computer using electricity; that's just what computers use. In most places it would still be a major coup for Linux to even be CONSIDERED as an alternative to Windows, even if it was rejected.

I actually don't believe that moving from XP to Vista would have required much retraining. But I'm happy to see that Vista's perceived problems have led to large organizations at least looking at Ubuntu as an alternative, whether they use it or not.

<comment><USER3> I've never understood the retraining argument. Surely going from computer- illiterate to windows-trained takes orders of magnitude more effort than going from windows-trained to linux-trained. Setting linux up takes a bit of work (solving driver issues and such,) but actually using it seems like it just can't be that hard to learn.

What I heard, from a guy at IBM, is that companies don't switch to linux because installing 3rd party software is difficult. That's not an issue of retraining though, that's an OS problem.

<comment><USER4> Most large companies do not allow end-users to install software themselves so I'm imagining they're referring to their IT departments having difficulty installing software.

IME of having had to manage several hundred Windows XP workstations installing 3rd party software was a pretty big issue on Windows as well. From having to verify if works with restricted permissions, to processes to automatically detect machines with out of date software to finding ways to create automated silent installs, it was a good amount of work. Now I'm curious to see how the required effort would compare on a Linux network.

<comment><USER5> In my experience, it's almost no effort. If you want standalone machines or laptops, you make your own package repo, point all the machines at that and let them run updates. You can install a cron job that lists packages and emails them out when the machine is connected so you can keep track of if and how packages actually are updated. It's even easier with machines that are hardwired/non-portable, because you can NFS boot and do a read-only root setup and remove all the harddrives from the local machines. Updates in this environment come from having them boot from a different root directory, allowing you to test new applications and upgrades without effecting everyone. The NFS root one was for a callcenter (obviously a limited application set, but if you're deploying a large number of machines, many of them will have overlapping usage profiles). Now a-days, I could see storing all the different configurations in git making rolling back, creating new versions, and deploying new versions easy (but you could use git for a windows install too).

I've deployed both setups, and support issues went way down compared to Windows. The biggest recurring problem with the NFS root setup was hardware failures, but the "fix" there is to swap out the machine, which takes 5 minutes, and the user continues to work. Without having to store files on the local machine, by having NFS home directories, there's no need to copy files over to give someone new hardware either. With standalone machines, the backup strategy is even easier also, because you KNOW the user can only write to their home directory.

The hardest part of the NFS root was going through and changing all the configs to not require local write access (like for logging) or having it mount a ramdisk scratch area, and if you're experienced with Linux, this shouldn't be problem. I know there are projects out there that are supposed to make this easier and do a lot of work, so it may be even easier now.

<comment><USER4> I agree with your points for the 90% of software that is pre-packaged and ready to install on your choice of distro. I'm more curious about the remaining 10% of apparently problematic 3rd party software that are 'hard' to install on Linux, and how much work it would take someone knowledgeable to create packages for and compare that with the time someone wastes on Windows with more mundane deployment issues.

<comment><USER5> Are these really comparable? The time it takes someone knowledgeable to do something difficult vs the time spent on more mundane issues where amount of knowledge doesn't really come into play?

But I see what you are saying. The Microsoft provided Windows software maintenance environment is really far behind every Linux distribution. If you have a network of non-mobile machines that mount root via NFS, the work of the admin to install hard-to-install (because it's not available as a package) software doesn't necessarily even require creating package -- you install it on the root. I did this with some one-off stuff we needed that ended up in /usr/local. Voila, everyone has it. And while we all know this kind of software management (packageless) leads to a "messy" system, it's actually easier to pay off that technical debt because you can spend time later to provide a whole new, cleanly managed environment for your NFS root users WITHOUT causing them any downtime at all to do the upgrade. In a properly managed environment, the apparently problematic 3rd party software is just that: apparently problematic. You do the hard stuff ONCE, and that scales out to X number of machines (mobile or not). With Windows, you keep doing the hardstuff over and over and over because each machine diverges and there are so many things you need to touch during the install, and even things like installation are not nearly as automate-able as they are in Linux.

What would be really interesting (and I care about this not very much since I don't do even small Windows network deployments anymore, nor do I have plans to do so in the future) is some kind of installwatch style system for Windows, that re-packages installed software, installed with setup.exe, into, let's say, RPMs, including {pre,post}-install scripts that modify the registry (this is possible, I've used tools that do registry diffs). You'd have to have a clean master Windows machine to do this properly (easily solvable with virtualization), but it could be the difference between night and day when managing Windows installations compared with Microsoft's massive updates and each vendor's own installation method.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This lacks quite a lot of (interesting) detail. The differences between Windows and Ubuntu are more than the icons and the games; what about Office (OO is quite different, particularly for advanced uses of Excel), Outlook, Active Directory, NTLM authentication for internal (web)apps, .Net for in- house development, etc? These aren't all strictly speaking part of Windows, but they are part of the Windows ecosystem, particularly at large sites, and usually don't have Linux slot-in equivalents that are trivial to implement.

So, either the Gendarmerie Nationale didn't use any of those parts of the Windows ecosystem (which seems unlikely), or they made savings in spite of having to replace them (in which case the 'icons and games' remark is disingenuous), or they haven't accounted properly (which, this being a governmental entity, doesn't seem impossible.)

<comment><USER7> I can't agree with you more. At least here in the States the law enforcement agencies use specialized software that runs only on windows (Think report writing, ticket tracking, officer tracking, booking systems, accident reconstruction, computer forensics, etc). Do the French LEA use software that's cross platform? Or did they already move to web-based software so that the workstation OS is a non-issue?

As the parent stated there's a lot more to an IT eco-system than the icons and games. Surely the French used special LEA software, and I'm wishing the article included details about that.

<comment><USER8> They switched to OOo in 2005, and to Firefox and Thunderbird a year later, according to this article: [http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iU4Lq7tOR_WVOJLZ3IeRaIH0...](http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iU4Lq7tOR_WVOJLZ3IeRaIH03x6w)

You were right. They moved their 'Human Resource' application to the browser at some point, as well. See this article: [http://www.osor.eu/news/fr- gendarmerie-saves-millions-with-o...](http://www.osor.eu/news/fr-gendarmerie- saves-millions-with-open-desktop-and-web-applications)

<comment><USER7> Thanks for the link to that article on osor.eu, on that page was a link to the case study: [http://www.osor.eu/case_studies/towards-the-freedom-of- the-o...](http://www.osor.eu/case_studies/towards-the-freedom-of-the- operating-system-the-french-gendarmerie-goes-for-ubuntu)

"the project is one of several similar migrations of French public bodies. To mention just a some examples: the French National Assembly in 2007 decided to run Ubuntu on their 1145 workstations; the Ministry of Agriculture and Fishery switched their servers to the Mandriva GNU/Linux distribution in 2005; the Paris council will use several open souce applications on their laptops, as decided in June, 2008. These developments thus clearly show how open source software is used increasingly in the French public sector."

Apparently they aren't the first in France to move to OSS so the interoperability is easier to handle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think they mean that adopting Free Software allowed them to be more aligned with what their nation stands for: Liberté, égalité, fraternité: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9)

</comment><comment><USER10> I think this is a very exciting development for the open source community. More and more applications are going web based, and I can see a future where the only application anyone will really need is a web browser. We already have Google docs, once that functionality improves just a little bit there's your office suite. Serve your ticket and lien database through a secure web connection or VPN, and you're good to go. Total software cost: 0.

Surely it must be cheaper to employ a couple of Linux techs than to keep bleeding money in license fees. Windows environments needs techs anyway, so most of the cost is already budgeted.

There will be some cost and security concerns, but it seems clear to me that over the long term open source is a better solution. This could even lead to government sponsored developers who are paid to improve open source projects, somewhere way down the line. Exciting stuff!</comment>


Comparison of PHP performance in Windows and Linux, and PHP vs ASP.net - <AUTHOR> http://jack-fx.com/csharp/post/php-versus-aspnet-e28093-windows-versus-linux.htm

<comment><USER2> There is no nice way to put this, but if you are deploying PHP on Windows for anything other than some retarded legacy IT BS, you are mentally deficient. Straight up.

And comparing a compiled (kinda) language to a badly interpreted one is horse pucky.</comment>


Ask HN: If you could define a new CV "standard" how it would be? - <AUTHOR>

I think the actual CV standard is dead. I got my last jobs by other means that I think they are more effective. Would you rather showcase practical examples of work like many do with GitHub for coding or other profiles for more creative work? Proven data? Maybe the content can be or must be written and validated by a coworker?
How would you showcase education? Hobbies, non-work related abilities, volunteer work... Are they any important?
Would you show what you have worked on (specific project) and get credits for that feature you built or contributed to?
Don't think it has to be printed on paper, just imagine what would be your new CV "standard"? <comment><USER2> HTML without CSS or JS.</comment>


Suggestions for game development that wont be a waste of time? - <AUTHOR> I want to mess around with Unreal Engine or possibly Unity. I was thinking of doing my own Real Time Strategy game (like Red Alert / Command and Conquer). But instead of starting something that big, perhaps there is something smaller I can build that might even show some returns. For example, it might be better to try and do some sort of short animation because then I can do short videos for cash. Or perhaps I can do a one-level game with the option to expand?
I'm not asking for ideas for games, but rather if there is a profitable way to learn Unreal Engine by actually building something useful.
Alternatively, I guess, I could try and get work for some gaming company. But I'd prefer just to do this for fun on the side. <comment><USER2> Why do you want to? If you're wanting to make a game, then just pick one you want and scale it down. I was curious about Unity some time ago and did a Lynda.com course (I had free access at the time through work) - it was pretty quick and easy and gave me a feel for unity.

Edit: unity has free courses to [https://learn.unity.com/courses](https://learn.unity.com/courses)

</comment><comment><USER3> love2d is a great intro to game dev and gets you returns real quickly. it's a lot lighter weight than those other engines you listed, but really powerful

<comment><AUTHOR> This solves a bunch of my initial problems. Like Windows vs Linux. How will I distribute it. Etc. I like the idea a lot. I just don't know how I feel about "2d". What do they mean by that? Can I not make a RTS game or a 3rd person shooter? OR animations in general?

<comment><USER3> You can definitely animate. It's a 2d library, but once you learn the underlying API you can absolutely extend it to allow 3d. And remember 2d doesn't mean sidescroller. Wolfenstein 3d is a 2d game, despite the name.

[https://github.com/excessive/love3d](https://github.com/excessive/love3d)</comment></comment></comment>


Tell HN: TheSixtyOne is online again - <AUTHOR> T61 is free music streaming web app where indie artists upload their songs and listeners discover them (and features of the website) with cool "quests"
http://www.thesixtyone.com <comment><USER2> They ditched the unusable interface and brought old.thesixtyone.com back to the main site! This is great!

<comment><USER3> yeah that last one was terribad

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is a huge throwback for me. At the age of 12 I was a big member of the Electro Freeks group, and I even helped curate a mix of theirs. I can't wait to start using the site again -- it was super important to me before they redesigned the site and eliminated groups. I think one of the cofounders is even on HN: [https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=hsiung](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=hsiung) do you have anything to say?

</comment><comment><USER5> I clicked a few "moods" on the side, and it kept saying "We're having trouble playing this song".</comment>


Flappy Bird Typing Tutor - <AUTHOR> http://www.mrspeaker.net/dev/game/flappy <comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, dev here - thanks for the awesome feedback. Rather than one-at- a-time-ing things, here's some responses!

1\. Font sucks? Feature, not a flaw.

2\. Game crashes? Ummm... feature, not a flaw.

3\. Need mouse to restart? Nope, there aren't any real buttons in the game. Just press space.

4\. Did you credit original? Err, no.. it's got the original copyright on the title screen, but I'll add a note to point out I stole the gfx.

5\. How did you steal the gfx? I just copied out the sprite atlas inside the iPhone app and cut it up in javascript/canvas. I tried to recreate things as closely as possible (screen transitions etc, not physics!).

6\. Hey, do you make other awesome games in your free time? Why yes! just check out the blog at [http://www.mrspeaker.net](http://www.mrspeaker.net)!

<comment><USER3> This is pretty cool! I see you've written a JS game lib called Ω, but I can't find any more info about it. Is it not public yet? You seemed to have solved the problem of using sounds in JS, which is something I am very interested in.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey - yeah, "Ω500" [https://github.com/mrspeaker/Omega500/](https://github.com/mrspeaker/Omega500/) is the name for my library/engine thing that I use for game jams. I just wrote it because you have to publicly release any code you use for Ludum Dare before each competition. Several Ludum-Dares later and it's getting pretty good (for me, anyway! I made this game in about 8 hours over the weekend). Though the audio support is very very straight-forward: it's not tough at all if you're only targeting modern browsers.

All the code for the game is in the /ex directory: [https://github.com/mrspeaker/Omega500/tree/master/ex/flapjam](https://github.com/mrspeaker/Omega500/tree/master/ex/flapjam)

If you're looking for a more mature library I'd look at Pixi.js for pure rendering awesomeness, or Impact.js for a great full-fledged engine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> That reminds me of The Typing of the Dead, a "House of the Dead" variant where you had to type words to shoot the zombies instead of pointing a gun.

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

Note that this is an official game and even has the players agents equipped with keyboards instead of guns in the ingame sequences.

<comment><USER5> Typing of the Dead is an awesome game! I remember seeing this at a coin-op trade show when it first launched, it was using Sega's Naomi platform (which was basically a Dreamcast with a JAMMA interface). Everyone was laughing at it but my coworkers and I couldn't stop playing.

If you can find an old Dreamcast, it's worth it just for this game.

<comment><USER6> There's a sequel you can get on Steam: [http://store.steampowered.com/app/246580/](http://store.steampowered.com/app/246580/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Do I seriously have to type slower to make it between things? This is awful.

I'm sure most experienced typers use muscle memory to type words quickly. This entire game is counter intuitive and unproductive for teaching typing since it forces you to think about typing letter for letter and not word for word.

An interesting and difficult game maybe, but it is almost useless as a typing tutor.

<comment><USER8> > Do I seriously have to type slower to make it between things? This is awful.

I found out the complete opposite. I'm a pretty fast typist but I learned touch typing at a rather late age, at around 26 or so. I still don't have a perfect technique but I have not really practiced it either.

Typing slowly pinpointed several flaws in my technique, some which I wasn't aware of. I already knew that using the "y" key with the wrong hand, but playing this game for some minutes also pointed out that I use the wrong hand or finger. For example I noticed that I use my index finger to type out x and c (rather than my ring and middle fingers).

I thoroughly enjoyed this and found it helpful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Right, because Flappy Bird wasn't already punishingly difficult.

<comment><USER10> My thoughts exactly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think the designer might have been trolling ...

I haven't gotten beyond two pipes so far, and the first 3 words I had to type were "thwarts, frustration, vexation"

</comment><comment><USER12> Cute game! Took me a while to realize I had to type in the word at the top of the screen though. I banged on my keyboard for a good long while before accidentally hitting the right letter and noticing that it had turned red. Perhaps a little hint or tip could help n00bs like me.

<comment><USER3> Same issue here. I thought I was supposed to press 1, or I, or l.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Did you reverse-engineer the original Flappy Bird to get the feeling so similar or just experimented until it felt right?

What I don't like is that you ripped off everything 1:1 without giving credit. Yes, right now, everybody knows Flappy Bird, but in a year, it'll be forgotten. Just for the sake of proper archiving, you should mention where the graphics and everything else come from.

<comment><USER14> In a year? You mean next week ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I encountered a bug using Chrome. After dying a few times, I encountered this screen, which I can't get past: [http://i.imgur.com/yWbm8bq.png](http://i.imgur.com/yWbm8bq.png)

It may frustrate some users and drive them away. I'll leave the tab open if you need me to run some javascript code to tell you the current state of the program. Let me know.

EDIT: Pretty fun. After a few attempts, my high score is 34: [http://i.imgur.com/YNaIWI6.png](http://i.imgur.com/YNaIWI6.png) ... It's more of a spelling tutor than a typing tutor, because remembering how to spell words is a huge advantage compared to staring at the words.

Something I should mention: The letter forms are extremely difficult to read. V's look like U's, A's look like R's, and Z's look like 2's.

I think this is a wonderful educational tool. Thank you for creating it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Arrrgh! I can't recreate the crash on Chrome. I tried on Chrome Canary and latest stable. If (for some crazy reason) you still have the tab open - <USER2> it report anything in the error console? Thanks for doing that by the way!

<comment><USER15> I kept it open in case you wanted to debug it. Here's a current screenshot: [http://i.imgur.com/qfgkNRi.png](http://i.imgur.com/qfgkNRi.png)

When I click on the bird and press 'd', nothing happens. Nothing more is output to the console, either.

Is there anything in particular you'd like me to type into the console to help you debug this?

My Chrome version is "Version 32.0.1700.107 m".

</comment></comment></comment><comment> slipstream- "If you thought Flappy Bird was hard, YOU AIN'T SEEN NOTHING YET!"

</comment><comment><USER16> Off topic: Anybody remember the typing tutor shooter game featured on HN a while back? Thanks in advance.

Update: Found it, [http://phoboslab.org/ztype/](http://phoboslab.org/ztype/)

</comment><comment><USER17> One of the hardest games I've ever played, ha.

I got stuck at 2 for a long time, but then finally something clicked and I got all the way to number 5!

<comment><USER17> 7!

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> What a great game! I would love to see a leaderboard -- contrary to most casual games, high scores in this game would really impress me.

</comment><comment><USER19> Now that's hard.

The next logical step is to type in point-free Haskell programs.

</comment><comment><USER20> This is interesting, but... Font isn't perfect for such task. Also there seems to be no key to restart the game. Why game forces me to reach my mouse when it is focused on typing?

In my personal experience best typing game is [http://phoboslab.org/ztype/](http://phoboslab.org/ztype/)

<comment><USER21> There is actually a key to restart! You'd never know though, because of the poor UI design.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think that more time has been devoted to writing articles about Flappy Bird, than went into creating Flappy Bird.

</comment><comment><USER23> Oh man, this was amazing. I just starting giggling and broke out into full out hearty laughter because it was so fun. I couldn't play more than 30 seconds, mind you, because it was infuriatingly difficult, but amazing nonetheless.

</comment><comment><USER24> Going back from 32 to 4 it's too hard. I need to learn to type.

</comment><comment><USER25> Great game. What are your highscores so far? [http://i.imgur.com/8jGJatE.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/8jGJatE.jpg)

<comment><USER26> I got to 12 and have to get some work done :-P

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm sorry but.. what should I do ? which key will work ? because I tried azerty, qwerty, space bar, up arrow key, nothing works..

<comment><USER28> The V looks like a U, but it is V. Feature, not a flaw?

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Imitation aside, the novel thing about this adaptation, is that it practices your typing pace and control. Other typing games focus more on raw speed. Some tutors report/measure your typing rate (Klavaro - fluidity, Amphetype - viscosity). This might some otherway. Though it's doing my shoulder in.

</comment><comment><USER30> This is next to impossible to play for a strong typist, and bad practice for a budding typist, not to mention the game was already frustrating enough when you didn't have to distinguish that V from that U in a word you haven't seen in a book for years, now it's just not fun.

</comment><comment> slipstream- So I bothered to download the game, set it up in a local nginx instance and mod the code a bit..

[http://goput.it/qzb5.png](http://goput.it/qzb5.png) [http://goput.it/shq4.png](http://goput.it/shq4.png)

<comment><USER31> Unnecessary:

        game.screen.state.set("RUNNING")
        game.screen.bird.state.set("DYING")
        game.screen.score = 23

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> found a bug: /dev/game/flappy/ should be /devil/game/flappy

</comment><comment><USER33> I have two words for this: cognitive overload! My brain almost liquefied itself.

</comment><comment><USER34> This is a funny rendition of the Flappy Bird game, you took a frustrating game and made it impossible. It serves as a nice memorial to the now-late game, which is pretty cool!

</comment><comment><USER35> Is it just me or is the recorded score incorrect? Pretty sure I scored 8 but it shows 9. Then again I haven't played the original so maybe I'm missing something :p

</comment><comment><USER36> Doesn't seem to work in firefox? (The search bar keeps getting activated.) I think I have the "automatically search on typing" option selected though.

</comment><comment><USER37> I broke my iPhone yesterday, now my mac :-/

</comment><comment> ryan-allen Haha, this is awesome. Mr Speaker, you rock.

</comment><comment> atom-morgan Maybe it's just me, but I find this to be a much more enjoyable game than the original Flappy Bird.

</comment><comment><USER38> Huh? Typing tutors should encourage speed, not rhythm. I should be rewarded for speed and accuracy.

</comment><comment><USER39> Ridiculously hard. Decent concept. Font really hard to read, especially V's and U's.

</comment><comment><USER40> It is really irritating when you can't score despite trying hard :(

</comment><comment><USER41> And I thought flappy bird was hard itself. This is pretty cool.

</comment><comment><USER42> When ever the first letter is U it won't accept my input.

</comment><comment><USER43> This is great practice for texting and driving !

</comment><comment><USER44> Wow is the js game code open sourced somewhere?

</comment><comment><USER45> Would love to see a game tougher than this!

</comment><comment><USER46> Typpy Bird would be a better name :)

</comment><comment><USER47> Hilarious, but oh my god impossible!

</comment><comment><USER48> This is hilarious. Well played, dev!

</comment><comment><USER49> Already Flappy bird was tough! :(

</comment><comment><USER50> Holy crap, that is difficult.

</comment><comment><USER21> This is awful. Purely awful.

</comment><comment><USER51> That font is unreadable.

</comment><comment><USER52> My best score is 0!

</comment><comment><USER53> That's tricky!

</comment><comment><USER54> this is a new kind of torture.

</comment><comment><USER55> Record</comment>


Bitcoin Futures Could Open the Floodgates for Institutional Investors - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/bitcoin-futures-could-open-to-floodgates-of-institutional-money <comment><USER3> I just cashed out the last of my bitcoin. All in all turned a small (4 digit) profit with which I will buy myself a couple of toys.

I'm sure I left cash on the table, but I was too late to the game to have really made a fortune on this stuff (curse my younger self for giving up on setting up a miner after a little difficulty ("it'll never be worth anything anyway", I said to myself), back when a cpu could still mine).

Good luck to everyone still playing - I'll believe bitcoin is going somewhere when the majority of it's transaction volume isn't speculation, drug dealing or money laundering.

<comment><USER4> This. Like it or not, we are in for a crash followed by a long crawl back for cryptocoin investors. The tech is cool and useful, but not $6400/BTC useful just yet.

<comment><USER5> If you're as confident on this as the comment suggests, you could purchase the appropriate futures with most of your net worth and make lots of money.

If you don't want to do that, maybe it isn't quite as certain as you suggest.

<comment><USER6> We had an article on the Kelly criterion just the other day that handily refutes your point.

Even if bitcoin is certain to crash, without a deep understanding of when (and by extension, how) a naive futures trader still runs a good chance of being eaten alive, or making poor returns.

Stating bitcoin will crash is a bit like the conventional wisdom that smoking is bad for your health. One can reasonably be very confident in the truth of it without being confident in specific odds on any bad outcome.

<comment><USER7> "The market remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent."

<comment><USER8> Or maybe you were just wrong and not everybody else? Just a thought. (I know this is a quote from Keynes)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Again the biggest issue is how to verify the integrity of the underlying instrument, in this case bitcoin.

What the SEC was after when they denied the winklevoss ETF was a way to confirming that they could audit all bitcoin transactions on the applicable exchanges, and following from that, the identities of all the exchange participants.

Here is the reference index that the CME is using

[http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/cf-bitcoin-reference- rate.ht...](http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/cf-bitcoin-reference-rate.html)

and here is the methodology that they are using to calculate the bitcoin price. As far as I can see, they are accepting trade confirms from the following venues....

Bitfinex, Bitstamp, GDAX, itBit, Kraken and OKCoin.com

[http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/files/bitcoin-reference- rate...](http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/files/bitcoin-reference-rate- methodology.pdf)

Interesting that these are cash settled vs being settled in bitcoin. I guess that speaks as to who they expect to use these instruments.

<comment><USER9> > What the SEC was after when they denied the winklevoss ETF was a way to > confirming that they could audit all bitcoin transactions on the applicable > exchanges, and following from that, the identities of all the exchange > participants.

I don't think that's accurate, unless you're using a strange sense of the word "audit". The SEC's criticism seemed mainly to focus on the fact that the exchanges lacked controls to prevent price manipulation, and lacked oversight by regulators (not just the SEC) to ensure those controls were in place and effective.

The constituent exchanges are listed here [1], basically the list you posted without Bitfinex or OKCoin.com.

> Interesting that these are cash settled vs being settled in bitcoin. I guess > that speaks as to who they expect to use these instruments.

This seems an odd decision to me as well, especially since Bitcoin is almost a textbook commodity. I guess they are afraid that there could be a short squeeze if the existing exchange can't handle a greatly increased volume, but trusting that the exchanges can provide sufficient liquidity is a requirement to use their pricing data as well, otherwise you can get manipulation on the other end.

[1] [http://www.cmegroup.com/education/brr-brti-constituent- excha...](http://www.cmegroup.com/education/brr-brti-constituent-exchanges- criteria.html)

<comment><USER4> Drug dealers will use the futures. Drug dealers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Bitcoin Futures have been tried before, with little effect on institutional investors.

Key point is that CME Group (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) will be offering them. Being able to transact Bitcoin derivates _on a trusted derivatives exchange_ will be attractive to more conservative institutional investors.

<comment><USER11> This is how any reasonable institution not 100% focused on cryptocurrencies will gain cryptocurrency exposure. The big reason is they are backed by CME clearing and settlement. It helps to significantly reduce the counter-party risk associated with other venues.

<comment><USER12> Note that storing bitcoin properly comes with no counterparty risk whatsoever. That's like 50% of the entire point of bitcoin!

<comment><USER13> Well, the fact that the majority of the mining pool runs out of China certainly represents a counterparty risk. I'm not sure why folks regularly ignore the 51% issue.

<comment><USER14> While there is certainly some amount of quantifiable risk given how centralized mining is in China, each individual mining actor is still incentivised not to participate in a 51% double spend attack as the value of bitcoin would rapidly fall towards zero if a double spend attack ever did occur, making their ASIC investments unprofitable in a hurry.

<comment><USER15> I don't know. It's like nukes. They say, no one would use them, because that would let the cat out of the box. But... on the other hand, what would happen if someone used only a single nuke? Could we get to the circumstance that Bitcoin was "too large to fail" and a someone could get away with a double spend?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The article states the BTCUSD rate spiked over 5% after the announcement they mention. That kind of spike is fairly common for Bitcoin, and attributing it to news seems pretty arbitrary.

</comment><comment><USER17> Bitcoin futures are regulated by the CTFC.

[http://www.morrisoncohen.com/siteFiles/files/For%20Blockchai...](http://www.morrisoncohen.com/siteFiles/files/For%20Blockchain%20a%20Coming%20Wave%20of%20Change%20-%20NLJ%20-%2010-01-17.pdf)

It will be quite interesting to see how institutional investors and the CTFC come down on this whole phenomenon. I do not share the unbridled optimism of many of my peers.

</comment><comment><USER18> I dunno if this is good. Maybe for miners who want to hedge. But seeing how much bitcoin price reacts to news and how relatively easy it is to spread fake news, I think this just creates more incentives for market manipulation.

It's pretty hard to manipulate commodity futures prices with fake news but crypto currency market trends are pure psychology

<comment><USER19> That's kind of the advantage of making it easier for the professionals to participate - they have a tendency to react better to news and more accurately price things (since they make giant piles of money if they accurately price things that others mis-price). I suspect that bitcoin futures would damp the volatility in the bitcoin market.

<comment><USER18> In theory yes, but how do you price bitcoin accurately even as a professional investor? You can't. There's no edge, aside from market manipulation with fake news, and maybe front running with insider news that might affect the price.

<comment><USER19> >how do you price bitcoin accurately even as a professional investor?

You can arbitrage the price of mining equipment + electricity vs the cash value of shorting a bitcoin future. Mining rewards are approximately known along with the halving date, mining rigs have a known cost, electricity costs are predictable, etc. Every time BTC futures rise enough above your cost of mining on a risk-adjusted basis, sell more short and expand your mining operation.

That's the fundamental pricing dynamic. At least on the short side. The long side makes zero goddamn sense to me, but at least people can place a maximum value based on the forecasted cost of mining and put serious downward pressure on prices that way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Note that the Futures will settle in cash.

</comment><comment><USER21> A futures contract on a real exchange like the Merc is a big step forward for exchange members like tier one banks, and smaller trading shops that have access to futures via brokerage relationships. The article also mentions ETFs, which will give retail investors BTC exposure.

<comment><USER22> ETFs are the reason this is a big thing. The CME contract enables ETFs with viable size and for both long and short BTC (otherwise they would only really be possible as long ETFs, although the ETF could be shorted itself, and long ETFs would have to own the underlying BTC). In turn, that gives retail speculators (it feels difficult to call them investors for BTC...) access to BTC, which is a significant pool of money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Wow this is going to open up the casino to a lot of major players. I fear the hobbyist investor is going to get roasted. Anything that can be traded on such a scale will undoubtedly be manipulated.

<comment><USER24> One could just as easily make the opposite argument; e.g. Bitfinex apparently allows wash trading while "legacy" exchanges like CME probably don't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Bitcoin's market cap is probably wildly exaggerated. The best evidence of this is the Winkelvii's attempt to start an ETF. That's a way for them to unload their Bitcoins, of which they have over 100,000.

There's no market that could absorb over 100,000 Bitcoins and pay out dollars without crashing the price. Who's going to pay out $0.6 billion in cash?

<comment><USER26> The 24h trading volume of Bitcoin is currently at around $2.8b, so I don't think you're necessarily right. There's been $2.8b of Bitcoin sold in the last 24h, and the price has gone up. You could probably sell that many coins over the course of a couple weeks without having much effect on the market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Could these be shorted? It's only a matter of time until one or more of the unregulated exchanges cuts and runs or gets shut down and seized.

<comment><USER28> Or "gets hacked" and all of the coins are "stolen".

<comment><USER29> These will be derivatives, not actual bitcoins. When you enter a contract you will only care about the price level of the Bitcoin Reference Rate, the contracts aren't holding any actual bitcoins, so there is nothing to hack and steal.

<comment><USER30> I'm not sure if that's accurate though. If a large quantity of coins disappeared, surely that would have ripple effects through to even the most convoluted derivatives?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's a good idea, IMO. There's a natural market here on both sides, between miners who have an economic interest in being short BTC futures, and institutional investors who want long exposure through a standardized exchanges and products that they are already allowed to use. And as a side bonus, this should significantly reduce volatility in the market.

</comment><comment><USER31> Institutionals use futures to hedge their other positions. What will they use bitcoin futures to hedge for? An unhedged future position is not an investment. It is a gamble.

<comment><USER32> Bitcoin is a hedge against fiat and the fractional reserve banking system.

<comment><USER33> It doesn't make sense for institutional investors to hedge against "fiat". Because the failure of the current financial system would be catastrophic event for any such investor, at which point his hedging wouldn't help. I. e. the exchange where these futures are traded would no longer be operational.

There's a name for this effect which I've forgotten. But it can be seen, for example, in the markets ignoring the risk of nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The reason is the same: there's no use in considering nuclear war in your decision-making, because you'd be dead anyway.

<comment><USER34> This. If "fiat" collapses that's a catastrophe far beyond the level of "No worries, I have some bitcoin futures in an exchange."

It's like saying bitcoin is a hedge against the end of the world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm curious if anyone here thinks the bay area housing market is a bubble but bitcoin is a solid investment.

<comment><USER36> It sounds like you do? Sell your expensive sf house and take your fdic insured money losing saving account and plow it into bitcoin - invest for the future! It's all solid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This is a very interesting turn of events.

</comment><comment><USER38> This paper from the Journal of Economic Letters two years ago determined that "the fundamental value of Bitcoin is 0": [http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DhMqG0YAAAAJ&hl=en](http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DhMqG0YAAAAJ&hl=en)

If you want to see the choice quote you'll need to go to www.sci-hub.io.

<comment><USER39> The fundamental value is the distrubuted and anonymous ledger.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> the nice thing about bitcoin futures is no conatango, no risk of key loss/theft.

<comment><USER41> Shouldn't the risk of key loss/theft mean the BTC futures will normally be in contango?

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Wonder how they would deal with forks, if it's an issue at all.

<comment><USER19> It's cash settled based off the price of an index, which makes it easier. They just defer to the folks making the index.

If it was physically settled you could squeeze the shorts by having a last- minute unilateral grant of a side-token to everyone who possesses the underlying. The shorts have to come up with the token or cover the contract - either way, you have people who are forced to buy it to cover contractual obligations, and you probably own the only exchange capable of making transactions with NewToken (and maybe also you pre-mined some of bonus tokens to sell?)

When its cash settled, this is much less of an issue. No market? No market price, so it doesn't get included in constructing the index.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> This will end in tears

<comment><USER44> ... of the skeptics when they realize the opportunity they missed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> From bubble to froth.

</comment><comment><USER46> Thanks, but no thanks! I'd keep as far away from this stinking pile as possible! It's 2017! We have instant bank transfers and everybody can get a free Square reader and accept payments. PayPal is not what used to be and you can accept global payments with no friction. It's time to end this nonsense, stop talking about Bitcoin, focus on the blockchain, and let it show its true colors when there are no disoriented people confusing blockchain with Bitcoin who keep buying fueled by their pathological greed. If I want to speculate, there's a more sophisticated method, but, wait, it requires a brain - <USER2> stock market! With Robinhood and the likes - it's scam-free and I don't rely on the Chinese miners or government for my fortune's security!

<comment><USER47> The stock market over bitcoin? Bitcoin is up double the last 30 days. Timing is everything your opionion is dated or belongs in the future in the present bitcoin is a good investment

<comment><USER46> If you sell now, it _was_ a good investment. If you _hold_ , nobody knows (well, I do.)

<comment><USER48> Hey, I earned most of my current Bitcoin at $200-$300. Some I'm selling, of course. But the rest, I'm OK with betting.

<comment><USER46> That's your decision. Nobody in Bitcoin can guarantee you that the value will stay above $200 though.

<comment><USER48> Yes, no doubt.

But on the other hand, since the parent comment was posted, Bitcoin price has increased 10%. And I'm pretty sure that I could sell before it drops 90%.

<comment><USER46> Yeah, so, what's the economic reason for the spike? More people use Bitcoin today? Let's cut the bullshit, please! Mere mortals do not have Bitcoin and are not interested in it - at all. All the noise is around blockchain technology and Ethereum, i.e., it's bearish toward Bitcoin. Russia and China are waging wars against it, so, why is the price climbing?

Well, let me share a secret - the demand is Chinese sneaking money out of the country. I know friends who help their buddies and charge a two-digit percentage to move their money out of mainland China. Here in Orange County, there are a lot of Chinese buying houses with cash, and it's a similar situation in the Bay Are, Vancouver, etc. Given more, and more people sneak out, the demand grows as well. The US is fine because fresh money flows into the US economy, but as we know, China realizes that even though some of the people sneaking money out are possibly close to the government.

I have and cannot have solid facts to prove this, but everything pretty much backs my theory and especially the correlation that the harder pressure China does, the higher the price goes!

But for you, it won't be a nice thing to hear one day that there's a total crackdown on this scheme and people who buy Bitcoin in advance to sell it suddenly want to get rid of it!

<comment><USER48> That makes sense to me.

But US KYC regs are strict, so I wonder how they exchange massive amounts of Bitcoin to USD cash.

<comment><USER46> I have accounts with most exchanges (including one of the first - Camp BX) and I've passed thru their KYC checks and I can tell you that KYC is a joke!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> In the context of futures being a way for a farmer to finance the expenses of growing a crop or raising a herd, isn't this a stretch of the use of the word "future". I get that the word means a lot more today than its origins would convey, but shouldn't the term used just be the generic "derivative" or "index"?

Forgive my ignorance of the finance world, but it feels like they are stretching definitions in order to frame this as approaching crude oil or pork bellies when it's more of an options contract.

<comment><USER11> No, they aren't. There are all sorts of futures contracts, and they are all derivatives and none are indexes themselves. There are equity index futures, single stock futures, foreign exchange futures, treasury futures, etc. Cash settlement vs the ability to take settlement in the physical underlying is where you might be getting confused, but they're all futures nonetheless.

<comment><USER50> Why do futures exist for something that can be settled in 30 minutes?

<comment><USER51> Suppose someone will pay you one bitcoin next week, as per some private agreement.

For this discussion, let's entirely ignore credit risk (the risk this person doesn't pay) but consider market risk.

Like it or not, you carry the risk of bitcoin fluctuations. You might be comfortable receiving $6400 for your bitcoin next week. But bitcoin is volatile. Maybe bitcoin jumps to $8000. But maybe it drops to $4000.

If you're comfortable giving up the upside, for a chance to prevent that downside, this bitcoin future is for you.

You enter a future contract where you agree to sell one bitcoin in one week at a price of $6400 (if that's the going one week forward rate).

In one week, your person pays you the agreed bitcoin, which you then sell to the exchange and receive your $6400.

Meanwhile, for that week you can sleep at night knowing that if the bitcoin market crashes, you still get your $6400. And if the market rallies to a higher price, well missing out on that rally was the cost of being able to sleep at night.

This is what commodity futures were originally used for, eg farmers agreeing to sell their stocks at agreed rates without worrying about market fluctuations.

Companies do this too, eg hedging their cost of fuel to a known quantity in line with expected consumption.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Pentagon puts $10B cloud contract on hold after Trump swipe at Amazon - <AUTHOR> https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/01/pentagon-amazon-contract-1630381 <comment><USER2> Putting all your eggs in one basket never a good idea, regardless of the vendor. If multinational companies diversify their cloud usage, why does the DoD not do it?

What's important here is a mandatory multi cloud buying requirement, where each vendor continually competes on price, quality and features to retain the customer. If any vendor slips, new ones should be able to take their place. Procurement by the feds needs to be more dynamic

</comment><comment><USER3> Trump -> Amazon -> Bezos -> WaPo</comment>


United Airlines Chief Resigns Over Corruption Investigation - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/business/united-ceo-port-authority-investigation.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

<comment><USER2> This is part of the presidential election, to smear Chris Christie and keep the GWB closure in the news.

NB: Not a Republican or fan of Christie, just an observer.</comment>


Netflix to get its own 'cable channel' next week - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/04/24/netflix-to-become-real-tv-and-get-its-own-cable-channel-next-week/?hpid=z5 <comment><USER2> Title could not be worse. Netflix will not be a channel. You need a Netflix subscription and a TiVo. This deal is only working around some bizarre business constraints around streaming video.

The only interesting part here is watching Netflix "without switching remotes or inputs", which frankly is a sign of how desperate cable providers are to keep subscribers locked in to their STB model.

<comment><USER3> The article describes a regular cable channel. I can image Netflix taking its content, and 'scheduling' a 24/7 video stream that plays over a cable TV channel. Its funny to think of Netflix content as "appointment TV" since it was Netflix that went so far with "anytime TV".

<comment><USER4> From my reading of the article, there will be a specific channel (450), but tuning to that channel will simply launch the Netflix app. Rather than navigating some seperate interface for launching the app, you just switch to channel to launch it. It's still on-demand content, just the app appears as a "normal" channel.

<comment><USER5> That's important for the many millions who haven't ventured beyond the "TV model". They don't grasp (and don't want to) anything other than "turn on TV, change to channel X". The "watch what you want when you want" then becomes an extension of the standard model, instead of something fearfully (to them) different.

<comment><USER6> I'm sure that's part of their thinking.

But note that this is only on TiVos, so many (most?) of the consumers will already be used to the idea of HDD recording and series links. Once I got a TiVo it wasn't long before I got into the habit of hitting "My Shows" rather than channel hopping.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "...you would pick up your remote control, you would tune to Channel 450, and there you'd find Netflix. You'd select it and that'll launch the Netflix app. Literally, watching Netflix is as easy as changing the channel."

 _facepalm_

That's some bad old-fashioned UI right there.

<comment><USER8> It may seem a bit crazy to us, but I think it is a brilliant stepping-stone into a (really big) market of people who 1) watch a lot of TV and 2) have shown that they don't really grok Netflix's new-fangled user experience. My parents still switch back and forth between three shows to avoid commercials. They often do this for hours a night. They have a fully configured Roku and Chromecast boxes, and they use their smart phones more than I do, but they still reach for the cable remote instead of the Roku remote or Netflix app on their phone.

It's a good lesson to learn: good user _experience_ has a lot to do with understanding what users you're targeting and how best to do so.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Good news! RCN is actually a tiny, upstart cable company that competes directly against Comcast (in certain markets, anyway): [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCN_Corporation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCN_Corporation)

And they're pretty fast: [http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/usa](http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/usa) (click "INCLUDE SMALLER ISPS")

</comment><comment><USER10> This seems like just an extension of Netflix's desire to be on every device hooked up to a TV. They've been building apps for TVs, BluRay, Roku, AppleTV, etc for years. The cable box is another device, so they want to be on it.

I think this is a little interesting because Netflix and Cable companies are seen as competition today, so I imagine there's been some resistance.

I don't know if the streaming rights modification is that relevant, except as a reminder of how convoluted those agreements must be.

<comment><USER11> Cable should stop seeing themselves as being "competitors in a different industry." They are in the same industry, just with new mediums appearing. Watching what you want when you want is clearly the future. Carrying forward the technical restrictions of analog broadcast is simply insane, if you step back and look at it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> A lot of people in here comment on how this is not tghat big. I have a netflix sub, and every time I visit my parents, they want to watch it, and use it. They don't use it when I'm not there because they can't figure it out. It's an app on a new TV, and is literally 2 or 3 button clicks away. If netflix was channel 500 or something on our TV box they would happily pay for it.remember that not everyone is as technically inclined as we are.

</comment><comment><USER13> Here is what I think happened. Netflix has "new media" rights to the content. They can't play the content over cable. Some cable companies provide a TiVo as a cable box, and Netflix works on TiVos.

This presents a legal problem: is playing netflix on a cable company's tivo box "cable"? Well no, but they probably had to get the content providers to agree. Now that the content providers agree, the Netflix app can be installed on these cable company provided Tivos.

I am speculating, but the article makes no sense otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER6> This has been available in the UK for a while (on Virgin Media TiVo boxes, the only cable supplier here).

I don't have a Netflix subscription so I haven't tried it properly, but the integration with TiVo is good. If you're browsing an actor and find a film, as well as any upcoming TV showings it will give you the option to launch it from Netflix.

It's obviously a big move away from the major TV channels, but (in the UK at least) I think the big money is in the sports channels and Netflix isn't competing with them there.</comment>


Blueprint for a microwave trapped ion quantum computer - <AUTHOR> http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/2/e1601540 <comment> mr-Chip I wonder how many real entangled cubits it has</comment>


AWS issues us-east-1 - <AUTHOR>

I'm a long-time AWS user.  Know when something is "broken" (technical term) TM.  I got an error message telling me that one of my micro instances in us-east-1 was going down etc. and, at first blush, was unable to create a runnable instance from a recent smapshot.   Then, 12 hours later, I find that a long running (> 1year) instance in my us-east-1d has reachability issues and the AWS web interface is asking me to stop/start it.  I can't do either.  It appears to me that AWS has big issues within us-east-1, related to t1.micro instnaces (running the Amazon Linux ami) at this time.  Anyone else seeing this??? <comment><AUTHOR> When I try to run a snapshot of the original machine I get:

EXT3-fs: sda1: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240).

EXT2-fs: sda1: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (244).

Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(8,1)

quote: "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (Shakespear)</comment>


Show HN: Serverless Code Editor framework for any programming language - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/JockDaRock/Time2Code <comment><USER2> I'm confused, how is it server less if it literally had a server.py file that acts as an HTTP server? I'm not sure, but it appears it may also expect to run in Docker, for another layer of complexity. Finally, why this vs any other editor? What advantage does it offer, especially if the first two assumptions in this post are accurate?

It seems to also be a sort of repl or something that evaluates the code you write as you write it maybe? I'd have to look at this from my computer to understand, but it's not what I expected from the title.

<comment><AUTHOR> I apologize if the title seemed misleading. The code execution part is built on a serverless framework, FaaS [https://github.com/alexellis/faas](https://github.com/alexellis/faas). At some point, I might be able to incorporate the web page itself as being executed through FaaS, but for now, it is served up through a service that runs alongside the serverless code execution.

That being said, I chose to go with the FaaS so I could support more languages for execution of code than AWS or Azure currently does. Which I am working on adding more languages as develope new features for this project.

Please let me know if you have any other feedback.

Kind Regards

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> >Serverless Code Editor Framework

Library Reactive Functional Composable

<comment><USER4> Machine Learning Artificial Intelligence Self Driving Augmented Reality Blockchain Startup as a Service...

Can I call 'bingo' yet?

<comment><USER5> Not quite. You forgot Social Geolocation RESTful API Cloud Scalable Container Sharing Economy Flash Sale.

<comment><USER6> Cryptocurrency Fibers based Hybrid Deep Learning maps for High-Performance Regressions that are Realtime Socket powered by Scalable Event Queue design rewritten in Rust.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I guess I should have introduced my crowning achievement instead... a random HN Tech Buzzword Title generator ;).

Seriously, though. thank you for taking a look at the project and let me know if you have any questions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> TL;DR: A repl that uses Docker and executing code in Function-as-a-service way</comment>


A JavaScript x86 Linux port (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://bellard.org/jslinux/index.html <comment><USER2> That was kind of cool at the time, but if you're interested in the Linux part then [http://s-macke.github.io/jor1k/](http://s-macke.github.io/jor1k/) is much more sophisticated.

<comment> s-macke As the developer of jor1k I agree. You should also mention [https://github.com/copy/v86](https://github.com/copy/v86) , which is constantly developed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Should bear 2011 in the headline.

<comment><USER4> Yep, I got all excited until I saw the domain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> From last time around:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2555349](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2555349)</comment>


Ask HN: finding a more quantitative/researchish job? - <AUTHOR>

Anyone have suggestions on finding a quantitative job (as opposed to a mostly software engineering job)? I've had software engineering jobs or internships in the past, and I've definitely enjoyed (some of) them, but I want to try something new and more in tune with my math/AI interests.
I've been facing two problems, though: 1. I have the knowledge (I have a math degree from a top college, and studied statistics and machine learning as well), but it's only a bachelor's degree, and I don't have any previous industry experience in a research position.
2. All the places I try for either automatically stick me into a software position, or say they'll have me work on research projects, but end up sticking me in a pure software position anyways. (For example, when I interviewed at my current job, I told them I wanted to work on research, and my manager said definitely... But he ended up having me work on UI, and when I told him I wanted to work on something more quantitative after my first project, he told me my "coding skills are too valuable"...)
Any suggestions? <comment><USER2> Apply for a job at a hedge fund. Our best and brightest are all quants.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's exactly what I did -- I'm currently at a hedge fund (the place that said they'd put me on quantitative stuff/research, but ended putting me on UI).

Maybe I just got unlucky? =\ I did interview at another hedge fund too, though, and throughout my interviews stressed that I was interested in quant positions. But when I spoke to the hiring manager at the end of the day, he told me they'd brought me in for the interviews for a software position. (Even though I'd also indicated my quant interest when I applied.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> send me your resume. my email is in my profile.

<comment><USER4> _my email is in my profile._

The email field isn't publicly visible.

<comment><USER3> oh, I should've checked. Try email@example.com</comment></comment></comment>


Plan your digital afterlife - <AUTHOR> https://planneddeparture.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Leave your digital legacy to people you love and trust.Be in control and let your loved ones know what should be done.Reduce emotional stress and financial burden of people you will leave behind Safe and secure way of managing your digital estate and social media will.

</comment><comment><USER2> I got an SSL Connection Error from Chrome on Mac OS Mavericks</comment>


How We Handled User Auth with React Native - <AUTHOR> http://code.hireart.com/2016/03/22/react-native-user-login-and-fb-login/ <comment><USER2> It seemed much easier to do Facebook auth in RN vs in Objective C, IIRC. We had this up and running in less than a day.</comment>


This is the first footage of Larry Page's 'flying car' - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/24/15406208/larry-page-flying-car-kitty-hawk-flyer-prototype <comment><USER2> Not sure about the merits (or novelty) of that flying thing, but the video strikes me as astonishingly tone deaf.

No wonder the comments to the NYT article (on the NYT website) were so vitriolic.</comment>