Report: Apple building a Kindle competitor - <AUTHOR> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/05/04/report-apple-building-kindle-competitor

<comment><USER2> The manufacturer the article refers to, PlasticLogic, presented a prototype at DEMO 08.

Video: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOWQvrgdZRE>

Pics: [http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicPreviewsElect...](http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicPreviewsElectronicReadingDevice.jpg) [http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicElectronicRea...](http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicElectronicReadingDevice.jpg) [http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicElectronicRea...](http://www.plasticlogic.com/assets/PlasticLogicElectronicReadingDevice2.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER3> I predict you'll see a convergence here similar to Smartphones and GPS. Only it will be netbooks and ebook readers. Look up the LCD design company Pixel Qi.

<comment><USER4> What Apple and Steve Jobs get that eInk, Sony Reader, and Amazon/Kindle didn't, is that _interactivity_ is key! When you enable fast, responsive interactive search and navigation, you increase the value of information by an order of magnitude. Apple's new device is going to be multi-touch, and it will own!

Apple will introduce the device at a higher price point than netbooks and the Kindle. This will enable them to partner with Amazon, and it will also fit Apple's usual strategy of high margins for premium design, integration, and usability.

<comment><USER5> Hopefully Apple won't forget that battery life is also key.

<comment><USER4> Read up on Pixel Qi. Their technology gives you 5X power efficiency, but preserves interactivity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well, if so why did they let the awesome Amazon Kindle App onto the App Store? If they had any serious competitive plans they would not have given such crucial foothold to Amazon on their dear walled garden. Apple is quite shameless about leveraging its control over the platforms it owns. Something just doesn't add up here.

<comment><USER4> You have it the wrong way around. That's not Amazon getting a foothold to Apple. That's Apple's foothold to Amazon! The Apple netbook/reader will undoubtedly be able to install the Amazon app, or do something equivalent.

<comment><USER6> That might be true but I can't see Apple developing a device to sell primarily from someone else's marketplace. They are leaving a huge portions of the profits on the table.

Granted Amazon has a stellar relationship with publishers, and Apple would want to take advantage of this. But we're talking about a company that started its own retail wing when everyone was fleeing from retail like it was the plague, just because it wanted to control the full customer experience. They would not give an inch if they had skin in the ebook game.

<comment><USER4> Do they really want to be in the eBook game, or are eBooks just a way to sell lots and lots of stylish $600 Apple hardware?

An Apple touchpad device would also be a planner, a media viewer, a household remote control, a communication device, a gaming device, and a platform for running App Store apps. (1) eBooks would only be a small fraction of what it would be about, as opposed to music on iPods, which are more-or-less about music.

(1) - The iPhone is all these things as well, but form-factor is significant. There are times when you want more screen real-estate and can do with less portability.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I feel confident saying it's only a matter of time before the newspapers from Harry Potter become reality.

<comment><USER4> They've been possible since animated gifs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It is not a "kindle" competitor, it is a full-fledged computer, a tablet, an iPad if you wish, in all colors, in all its beauty, in all its power.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you earn your money online? - <AUTHOR> I will be graduating out of High School this year and I want to take a year or two off, earn and save as much as I can, and go to a better college than I can afford now. I am currently searching for ways to maximize my income. I have been learning to program but the online freelance market seems like it is saturated and it is impossible to score a job on sites like upwork or freelancer  without any previous work or customer reviews( which I can understand since if I were to hire a stranger on the internet, I too would want to make sure that they can do what they say they can do). But anyway, since I am looking for options, what are some of the ways by which you generate a revenue online? <comment><USER2> Online money making is not easy and you'll have to consistently search for new ideas and skills. Here is my list: 1)Writing blogs/content: search for blogs in your interest area and offer them ideas and content, having a good Quora profile or personal blog will reflect quality. 2)Search for "who is hiring" in HN and other related forums and directly mail them if that work can be done remotely at discounted cost. 3) Dropshiiping: Learn digital marketing. Explore Shopify, AliExpress, oberlo and printful. Dropping is not easy but a has a lot of potential if you can get repeat customers and a general intelligence towards digital marketing. 4) Explore indiehackers.com and see how people like us are cracking this stuff.

Incase you need help in getting resources for these do let me know.

<comment><USER3> Hey. Can you share resosurces on how to get started with 3?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Anyone using directories (DMOZ, Yahoo) any more? - <AUTHOR>

Just been thinking about directories like DMOZ, the open directory project, and Yahoo directory and realised I haven't used any of them in years other than to see if one of my sites is listed.<p>Are any of you using directories, and if so, what for? <comment><USER2> SEO and that is about all that matters

</comment><comment><USER3> Have not been using for years.</comment>


Show HN: I self-published a book on Ansible - <AUTHOR> https://servercheck.in/blog/6-lessons-learned-self-publishing-my-first-book <comment><AUTHOR> The writing process took nearly two years, and today I finally finished the first edition of Ansible for DevOps. In some of the blog posts linked from the titular link, I run through sales numbers, motivational factors, and my experience publishing on LeanPub.

I've already had more success selling this book than I'd ever hoped, and now I'm excited to see how it does in wider distribution (especially on Amazon in paperback form—many readers were asking for that!).

Feel free to ask any questions about self-publication here. I've only self- pubbed one book at this point, but I feel fairly comfortable with the process and would love to share anything about it to help others get started!</comment>


Demon Core - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_core <comment><USER2> I like this comment from Metafilter ([https://www.metafilter.com/159810/Blue- flash#6535495](https://www.metafilter.com/159810/Blue-flash#6535495)):

> This is a good occasion to ask yourself: am I including "now wedge a > screwdriver in there" as part of some important work that I do? Shouldn't I > use my screwdrivers only for driving screws, one might ask, and not for, > say, keeping this plutonium assembly from going critical?

<comment><USER3> There are lots of reasonable uses for flathead screwdrivers other than driving screws, though! Random examples:

* Many clips (dryer faceplate, window sash, ...) are designed to be pried open with a screwdriver.

* When repairing a popped drywall nail, a screwdriver is a good tool for removing the joint compound under the nail.

* When you buy a lock it usually comes with a rounded faceplate. To swap the faceplate, they'll tell you to use a screwdriver to pry it off.

A flathead screwdriver is a good tool for general light prying, not just for putting in slotted screws. This heuristic has a lot of false positives.

<comment><USER4> [https://imgur.com/a/5Vc487x](https://imgur.com/a/5Vc487x)

<comment><USER5> This is just SnapOn's attempt to get you to buy a 50$ 12" prybar. Also to stop you from sending your screwdrivers back on the truck every week.

But who cares, they're replaced for free and delivered :)

<comment><USER6> Or buy four or five Pittsburgh ones from Harbor Freight.

Those have a lifetime warranty now too.

I would love to have SnapOn stuff, if I were made of money or found it second- hand, but it's just stupid expensive new, especially for stuff that tends to get abused.

<comment><USER5> Some of the Harbor Freight stuff is great. For wrenches and ratchets that get pushed to the limit though I'll exclusively use one of the more pricey brands just out of fear of slamming my knuckles after a tool snaps. Its one of my biggest fears working on anything even after having it happen with minimal damage enough times. For everything else I'll use whatever is closest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> i was fascinated with the criticality accident that claimed Slotin's life when i first learned about it. in particular, there was a schematic made up after the accident estimating everyone's distance to the apparatus and how much radiation they may have been exposed to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#/media/File:Sloti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#/media/File:Slotin_criticality_map.png)

there was a second sketch made from that drawing which i also found fascinating. it doesn't add any additional information or analytical ability, but is just a sort of interesting and slightly dark translation of a rote schematic diagram into an artistic rendering of the event: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#/media/File:Sloti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#/media/File:Slotin_criticality_drawing.jpg)

I searched around for awhile trying to find the purpose and/or author of that second sketch but to no avail. however i did use it as the cover for an EP i released. please enjoy!

[https://open.spotify.com/artist/37U37SYaXf1varqMgmpHkc?si=zE...](https://open.spotify.com/artist/37U37SYaXf1varqMgmpHkc?si=zEBqJ0GqTG6jOEqb9tI- Nw)

</comment><comment><USER8> There's a guy who is making a cartoon about the demon core.

[https://youtu.be/Eyl3WQCttQ8](https://youtu.be/Eyl3WQCttQ8)

</comment><comment><USER9> Tickling the dragons tail seems very appropriate. I'd be sweating bullets manaually adjusting a nuke core with a screw driver.

<comment><USER10> Not to advocate risky behavior, but this doesn't surprise me at all. Experience increases the perception of safety at a rate faster than actual safety. Every place I've worked where you _could_ put yourself, expensive equipment or customer satisfaction in danger to make something easier for yourself people would do it. Deploying straight to prod, doing surgery on live databases, soldering on equipment plugged into mains, servicing a UPS without disconnecting 48V worth of lead acid batteries (that was one HELL of an arc weld).

The corners people will cut never cease to amaze me.

<comment><USER11> > soldering on equipment plugged into mains

o_O!!!!!!!

I've cut a _LOT_ of corners, but that one is just insane...

<comment><USER12> Someone hooked the washer and dryer into the mains at my Grandma's house. It was interesting seeing my Dad go from confused to realization to angry without having caused the transition. Getting that fixed was an exercise in careful. As Dad is fond of saying "I'm amazed you thought of it and appalled you actually did it."

<comment><USER13> Funnily enough that's a normal practice in the UK/Ireland. In all the places I've lived, washer and dryer are plugged straight into a regular outlet (sometimes with an extension cord if it can't be reached).

Makes me wonder, why not make a 110v washing machine and save the trouble of having both 110v and 220v at home?

<comment><USER14> Most (all?) washing machines are 120V. Electric dryers rarely are, because they need a lot more power. I had a small washer/dryer combo unit years ago that used 120V, and it took about four hours to dry a load that was about half the size of a normal dryer's capacity.

Running both voltages into a house isn't much of a burden. Residential electricity in the US is two-phase. A 120V circuit pulls from one phase, with the various circuits in your house divided between them to even out the load. A 240V circuit just connects to both phases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The scene is fictionalized in the movie Fat Man and Little Boy with John Cusack performing the role of Slotin under a different name.

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

<comment><USER16> Came here to say this. At the time I saw this in the early 90s, it really disturbed me-an awful way to go for such a mundane act.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Related from 2016: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11749742](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11749742)

</comment><comment><USER18> I'm wondering, even if everything had gone right and the dome had not been dropped to cause the core to go critical -- surely being in close contact with even a _non-critical_ nuclear weapon core is not safe??

What's the amount of radiation that thing gave off simply from decay, in a non-critical state?

<comment><USER19> > What's the amount of radiation that thing gave off simply from decay, in a > non-critical state?

Not much. U-235 has a 700M year half-life. Pu-239's is 24,000 years.

You're more at risk from ingesting/inhaling bits of it.

<comment><USER10> >You're more at risk from ingesting/inhaling bits of it.

This is the vaaaast majority of the risk profile for radioactive anything.

The half life doesn't really tell you the whole story, Pu-239 mostly decays into alpha particles which is what makes it "safe", it's still not good for you, and very bad if ingested, but externally alpha radiation doesn't really penetrate deep enough into the body to be a big problem.

<comment><USER20> To put it another way - from an "immediate risk" point of view, the largest danger from critical-capable amount of fissile material is the prompt radiation emitted during a criticality: the pulse of neutrons, gamma and x-rays thrown off during that period the unit is sustaining a chain reaction.

For relatively brief power excursions like this one (which Slotin himself stopped by removing the reflector), the prompt burst was well over a lethal level but the radiation dose-rate from fission product decay even a tiny time later would not be immediately hazardous.

For those looking to learn more, Los Alamos has a great writeup of every publicly-known incident (in the US, USSR, and elsewhere) that details just how many times similar incidents happened: [https://www.orau.org/ptp/Library/accidents/la-13638.pdf](https://www.orau.org/ptp/Library/accidents/la-13638.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Alex Wellerstein, author of the NYer article, has a bit more info on his blog ([http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/05/23/the-blue- flash/](http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/05/23/the-blue-flash/)), including an answer to the question of what happened to the core. (It was melted down into the overall plutonium stockpile, apparently.)

</comment><comment><USER22> Didn't know this! Really interesting

</comment><comment><USER23> Before I clicked, I was _convinced_ the article was going to be about some GLaDOS core that I've forgotten.

</comment><comment><USER24> How ironic, that a bomb core would kill. Truly,

</comment><comment><USER25> The authority on the subject: [https://youtu.be/lJXwRdbbQ50](https://youtu.be/lJXwRdbbQ50)

<comment><USER26> Why "authority"?</comment></comment>


3D Printed Gun Magazine Shows Off Deadly High-Capacity 'Wiki Weapon' - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/07/video-of-3d-printed-gun-magazine-shows-off-deadly-high-capacity-wiki-weapon/

<comment><USER2> A magazine is essentially a box, with a spring in the bottom. It's really not the hard part of weapons manufacturing. And, the spring can't even be 3-d printed currently.

<comment><USER3> While this is true, it allows you to circumvent any ban on high cap mags. And I'm sure that is the point.

<comment><USER4> Take two magazines. Use a plasma cutter and then weld them together.

See: [http://www.defensereview.com/wp- content/uploads/2011/01/High...](http://www.defensereview.com/wp- content/uploads/2011/01/Higher_Capacity_55-Round_and_75-Round_AR-15_5.56mm_Rifle_Magazines_1.jpg)

Another option is to get a redi-mag. Essentially it holds two magazines right next to each other and switches between them if one jams.

See: <http://www.redi-mag.com>

Limits on guns don't really stop anyone who is slightly determined.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> That isn't a high-capacity magazine, it is a standard capacity magazine.

<comment><USER6> Welcome to techcrunch where the facts are made up and points of accuracy don't matter

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> A firearm entirely made of plastic doesn't seem practical, you really need metal and we've had CNC metal-working lathes since the 60s.

Why haven't people started making their own firearms? Probably its much cheaper to just buy a gun. Although people seem to make excellent knockoffs in Afganistan.

<comment><USER8> If its all plastic you can walk through metal detectors. As for afghanistan their knockoffs they buy in Pakistan gun markets are pretty good considering they are entirely made from scrap metal. Well, used to be before the gun markets were shut down by the taliban. You'd think they want to keep it open to buy weapons guess they are more worriied with angry villagers getting weapons and runninng them out of town

<comment><USER9> No offense... you can't walk a bullet through a metal detector.

Unless you're getting into caseless ammunition, which has never been popular.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Good lord, could the title be a little more editorialized?

</comment><comment><USER11> Easy, ban the bullets.

<comment><USER12> Because those can't be made "at home" either: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handloading>

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> 3D printing is no doubt awesome, but this video is a scary reminder of how dangerous cool toys could be in the hands of wrong people. If you can print a magazine, I assume eventually you'd be able to print a weapon that can withstand at least one-time use. That means no one needs to buy guns anymore, they just need to print them. Not the most comforting thought.

<comment><USER9> I don't really see the issue- you can already make weapons relatively easily, look at this guy who made an AK out of an old shovel.

[http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/build- yourself/17...](http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/build- yourself/179192-diy-shovel-ak-photo-tsunami-warning.html)

Heres a basic concept of a .410 shotgun in a flashlight. (something that could be made at home with drill press and a few other things.)

<http://hackedgadgets.com/2007/03/09/shotgun-flashlight/>

\---

Honestly, a hi capacity magazine is the least of your worries...</comment></comment>


This Man Wants To Control the Internet  - <AUTHOR> http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/this-man-wants-to-control-the-internet

<comment><USER2> The closest analogy I can think of for what is mentioned on article page 3 is that of using rsync to create a redundant stream of your data, then streaming it as a rapid-fire set of udp packets. Set up some feedback loops to control the sending rate but as long as the percentage of lost packets is below some threshold the receiving end can still unpack everything.

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting topic, interesting researcher, lots of new information, but there's a lot of bogus here too.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I don't get why this stuff is considered so revolutionary. It's like no one involved ever studied tcp/ip.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nice article. Discover Magazine also seems to be a great place to find things to read.

Anyone have recommendations for other websites that have good articles (aside fron News.YC)?</comment>


Innovative Game Concept (Done in Canvas/JS)   - <AUTHOR> http://www.krisjet.com/littlebigmansion/

<comment><USER2> This is the kind of game that would shine as an iOS game. I love the concept and would gladly pay for the game, but the browser is just such a bad gaming platform…

</comment><comment><USER3> Feels like a Ludum Dare entry. You should enter LD26!

</comment><comment><USER4> Is the concept to get me stuck in the first second? Because it's working, I can't get past the crates, and clicking does nothing!

<comment><USER5> Clicking does do things. I got to level 3 very quickly. Keep trying!

<comment><USER4> Yeah, turns out you have to click on something first, then something else to swap them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm getting to the "rain level", but after that, there seem to be graphical glitches (can't see my characters, and the boxes are all black and sometimes disappear).

<comment><USER7> Same problem here, I like the concept though.

If it helps, got this in Firefox's Error Console: Error: Permission denied to access property 'toString' Followed by: Warning: Error in parsing value for 'image-rendering'. Declaration dropped. Source File: <http://www.krisjet.com/littlebigmansion/> Line: 0

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I would remove the testing code, for instance pressing C caused it to crash for me.

Also, it took me a second to figure out a few things, (I ended up looking at the source to figure out how to drop the key) and the boss battle was weird.

Overall I'd say the game mechanic works and is fun, and I'd like to see the game fleshed out.

</comment><comment><USER9> funny game, maybe add some optional hints, as it's not really obvous what one should do at first.

</comment><comment><USER10> It's down for me, am I the only?

<comment><USER11> Appears down for me as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Surprisingly nice. But definitely needs to do something about UI - took me quite some time to figure out WTF to do with mouse. Also it's not clear that you can swap doors. So, yeah, UI.

</comment><comment><USER13> Great concept, but the game itself could be better on iOS/Android.

<comment><USER14> Afaik he's working on the iOS version, using Ejecta ( <http://impactjs.com/ejecta> ). The game itself is made with Impact ( <http://impactjs.com/> ) btw. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> There's a small bug with the closets, sometimes your in but can't get out because you are the wrong size. That is odd.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is a lot of fun. Well executed!

</comment><comment><USER17> Very cool!

</comment><comment><USER18> how is this innovative? It's like 2D pixelart Portal...

</comment><comment><USER19> Fun 15 minutes to beat all levels. (Using FF 18.0 here with no probs)</comment>


"One of the reasons I left Google was ... "collect and monetize information"." - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/berendjanwever/status/775366191078641664 <comment><USER2> This is the reason why I insist on rooting every new phone I get and then installing Xposed/XPrivacy (alternatively, I would install Cyanogenmod and use Privacy Guard). It is stunning how often Play looks for location access and how many things break when its ability to snoop on one's location is restricted. Fortunately, the HERE mapping app serves as a reasonable substitute.

A more general rant on Play: it has served as the biggest bug on most of my recent devices. I have a Nexus 7 2013 that was undergoing chronic power drain. I dumped the Google version of the OS and installed Cyanogenmod with no Google Apps - power drain solved. I now install most apps using F-Droid or APKPure. My Sony (rooted) avoids this problem by having a built-in deep sleep mode that keeps the Play activity down. Sad, just sad.

</comment><comment><USER3> The title doesn't do the story justice: Your location is being tracked 24/7 on Android.

<comment><AUTHOR> That was deliberate. Background: I think "SkyLined" was formerly a security researcher at Google.</comment></comment>


China's CCTV network took just 7 minutes to capture BBC reporter (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/13/china-cctv-bbc-reporter/ <comment><USER2> The interesting part is not the story itself, but that they chose to demo it to the BBC. Marketing at its best, they want everyone to be fully aware of their capabilities. Wouldn't be surprised if they were overstated, so as to keep citizens in check. The BBC willingly plays along and does not even question the capabilities either way.

<comment><USER3> You have to understand that Chinese prefer security over freedom. They support this kind of measures since majority of them probably won't be bothered by it their whole lives, as their typical response: if you don't illegal things, what's to fear for.

And the state media has been touting for years that China is the safest country on earth that "you can buy skewers at midnight", that America is the example of a failed society.

They mostly likely are sincerely and proudly presenting this as a superiority over the tumultuous west.

<comment><USER4> I don't know, hongkongers seem to prefer freedom.

<comment><USER5> Only the minority that are protesting.

<comment><USER6> "minority"

<comment><USER7> This doesn't help the discussion. Also, anything less than half is a minority.

<comment><USER6> Not everyone participates, some are scared probably.

The hongkongers are protesting, so in Hong Kong your minority is 100% of the residents.

Your statement is deceptive

<comment><USER7> Are you saying that every Hong Kong resident would choose to protest if not scared?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > For ordinary people we will only extract their data when they need our help.

> When they don't need help, we won't gather their data and it remains only in > our big database.

In the same sentence:

"We won't gather their data"

and

"The data that we gather remains in a database".

<comment><USER9> It's a common dialectic pattern in law enforcement circles world-wide that data at rest that is never touched is data that doesn't exist.

That angle is based on the idea that this data "may as well not exist" but it ignores the many issues with indiscriminate data collection: the data might leak, or management might change and invent undesirable "new" purposes for old data - which, within this theory, then begins to exist retroactively.

<comment><USER10> Or, rather, the automated systems that store and process the data will increasingly do analysis as well, with humans only viewing the data when prompted to by the system. Technically "the police" can be said not to access the data. In reality it's even worse than if they did, because the automated system , if it works as intended, is much more efficient than humans.

IOW: If it's a violation of civil rights for humans to process some data, then leaving that job to software is just automating civil rights violations.

<comment><USER9> Right, but I think that's already the next step: the theory of "we're not looking so we don't collect" predates efficient automated large-scale analysis.

It makes sense to me to fight both schemes, but they have different impact, different risk and might need different approaches.

<comment><USER10> It seems to me law enforcement talks about data collection and analysis as if automated tools didn't have privacy impacts. They often seem to deliberately focus on whether or not a human has access to some specific information, which IMO obfuscates the issue. They're not very willing to acknowledge that there _are_ two schemes, as you call them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's not just about this, but given all that is happening in the space of facial recognition, I think it would be really valuable for researchers to start looking at it like they would weapons research. Almost entirely nefarious applications.

After WW2 the University of Tokyo banned weapons research from happening in its research labs. I think we can be drawing more lines on research like this and take a stand against a lot of this.

<comment><USER12> Facial recognition itself isn't the problem. Arresting good people based on bad laws is the problem.

<comment><USER13> Technology itself is always amoral. Even splitting the atom can be used to achieve wonderful and horrific outcomes.

So of course "facial recognition" per say is not the problem. But in this particular example, we see how facial recognition combined with a couple hundred million surveillance cameras funneled into a massive government data processing pipeline can be extremely effectively used for persistent tracking and nearly instant geolocation of "suspects".

I'm pretty sure we've seen how this movie ends. There's a reason we don't implant GPS trackers into babies at birth just because they might get lost one day.

Maybe China will use this technology to build a veritable Eden free from crime and lost puppies. Or maybe they are closing the grip on a dystopian nightmare. I think you have to be pretty naive to think it's not looking startlingly like the latter.

<comment><USER14> > There's a reason we don't implant GPS trackers into babies at birth just > because they might get lost one day.

What reason are you thinking? I wouldn't support it myself, but I don't usually represent public opinion.

GPS didn't really burst into the public imagination before 2007 and the iPhone; in a sense the technology is only about a decade old or so in the public sphere. Prior to 2000 the US government's official position was something like "this is a military technology".

As the cost of sensors and radio chips goes down, we might reach the point where we _do_ put a GPS sensor on everybody. Law enforcement would love it and on the small scale it would probably save lives and reduce crime.

<comment><USER15> >As the cost of sensors and radio chips goes down, we might reach the point where we do put a GPS sensor on everybody. Law enforcement would love it and on the small scale it would probably save lives and reduce crime.

GPS chips are already cheap enough (single digit dollars), that it's an issue of policy\public perception, not cost

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is entirely unsurprising. Facial recognition for personalized (in public!) advertising is already a big market, and oh, various US localities are using facial recognition. This is, of course, on top of other tracking methods like ALPR and vehicle recognition, credit cards, cell phones, and so on.

It is no longer possible to be "off the grid". And that's quite scary when you realize that every single adult has committed many crimes (however minor) in their life.

<comment><USER17> Let's just hope that other countries won't implement the 'social credit' system like China did that for example bans you from travelling for committing even like you say minor offenses

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The fact that he's probably the only non-Chinese in the vicinity helps.

</comment><comment><USER18> This article is 2 years old, but quite relevant to current situation.

Deep learning and computer vision has progressed quite a bit in the past 2 years, mainly due to incremental algorithmic advances / improved engineering. Unlike fundamental advances, these can be scaled up with increased investments in a more predictable way.

Face++, the unicorn company mentioned in this article, is actually the product division owned by Megvii, a machine learning startup based in mainland China. They are planning to IPO soon (see: [https://reut.rs/2L7zzGn](https://reut.rs/2L7zzGn) ) to raise more funds from overseas investors (hence IPO'ing in Hong Kong).

There's some irony when a China-based computer vision startup working on facial recognition technology used in Xinjiang is filing for IPO in Hong Kong, rather than in mainland China.

</comment><comment><USER19> Well, there is the fact that he's a white dude. And makes no attempt to alter his appearance. And, I gather, started from a known location.

<comment><USER20> The local government is incentivised to catch the reporter quickly to showcase their capabilities.

The reporter is incentivised to be caught quickly to make a more compelling story.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> This tech works, and the only reason we don't have this in the US is because of our cultural and political aversion to mass surveillance.

I'm genuinely curious of what this leads to in China, because this tech is easy enough to deploy if you're willing and politically able. What I'm cynical about is that I don't think China is competent enough to safeguard the data it collects, or forever keep it out of the "wrong hands" like the last guy in the video claims.

It's hard enough for US government agencies to protect data that should be privileged (police often run illegitimate checks on license plates), I can't imagine China can prevent its various factions from abusing this power.

It'd be ironic, but the incompetencies of their bureaucracy could actually lead to their own downfall by way of this technology (their mass surveillance apparatus) somehow getting coopted by dissidents. There's a misconception that China somehow has an iron grip over its people because it's authoritarian, but if that were true they'd have weeded out corruption.

</comment><comment><USER22> The demonstrators in Hong Kong are very aware of this technology. I hope the masks and the umbrellas they use are effective but I doubt it

<comment><USER23> Gait analysis (how a person moves around) is definitely also used these days, so the masks may make it a tad more difficult, but certainly not impossible.

You know how you can tell that a person walking in the distance is your friend, even though you can't see their face at that distance? Yeah, so can algorithms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I believe the problem is not so much about finding and flagging criminals, but treating the reasons criminals act like that.

These cameras do not explain how they got there. Who profits from it? Whoever likes the situation that put criminals in that place.

Then there's no need to treat poverty anymore because they'll be dying in a corner as intended, instead of stealing food.

<comment><USER25> The answer is almost always economics.

Unfortunately, in modern society, or really since the human condition has existed, we address symptoms and short-term fixes not root cause analysis and long term fixes.

Criminals don't usually want to be criminals, but sometimes that life is alternatively better. For instance, cartels in Mexico or mafias in general sometimes offer a better quality of life and protection that regular citizens don't get, so it is an attracting force.

We could fight cartels with guns and enforcers, leading to ramped up violence all around and making a health issue a dangerous violent criminal one that decreases harm reduction and increases addiction, production issues and safety issues.

Or to get at the root cause, we could fight cartels by ending the drug war taking away their massive hundreds of billions of annual black market funds, which gives them power of nation states over decades, and shift that to the legal market to help regulate and make recreational/health uses safer with harm reduction and addition support, as well as providing economic plans to give people a positive legal market choice.

Unfortunately we choose wrong largely because of propaganda by the military and prison industrial complexes and the incessant pressing haphazard decisions to blame, fight and go to war with the human condition when health/medical/personal freedom matters are criminalized.

We go to war on everything as a solution to peace and quality of life... surveillance state comes from that same corrupted/short-term thinking place.

The surveillance state has been going on for decades now in all major countries, there probably isn't much actual detective or investigative work even being done anymore, nor a case by case analysis for justification of these methods, just massive privacy breaches and lots of data noise. Smart criminals and corporate espionage will learn how to use that lack of investigative skill and manipulate the surveillance data, or gain access to it to it and dominate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Not defending surveillance at all. But I want to mention that China's CCTV network is an important part of the legal improvement on self-defense.

From ancient time, the law in most dynasties strongly discourages self-defense because it's unjudgeable most of the cases. And it also could be a tool of murdering. Modern China pretty much inherited this tradition. Although the self-defense is defined in the law just like most countries, in practice it's way too strict almost like non-existence for tens of years.

Until last year, a famous case[0] causes massive debate across the country, and finally justified as self-defense. The main reason behind this is the massive surveillance network makes legal apartments confident enough to judge.

[0]: [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201809/03/WS5b8c877ea310add14...](http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201809/03/WS5b8c877ea310add14f38926c.html)

</comment><comment><USER27> (2017)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, sorry it's a bit old, but I came across it in some of my reading today regarding the San Francisco attempt to ban facial recognition software with an ordinance passed back in in May and didn't see it had ever been shared. Thought it was worth passing along. Cheers, just food for thought.

[https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-san- francis...](https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-san-francisco- facial-recognition-ban-20190516-story.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> > China has the largest monitoring system in the world. There are some 170 > million CCTV cameras across the country

I wonder how this compares to the UK per capita considering how massive China is.

<comment><USER29> I suggest that it's pointless to compare entire countries, since stats would vary by region wildly (at least, in China). Here is a recent comparison by city: [https://www.comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/the-worlds-most- surv...](https://www.comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/the-worlds-most-surveilled- cities/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Is the kind of facial recognition only bad if wielded by a nefarious government?

Partly I think that huge DNA databases, biometric databases and millions and millions of cameras would be wonderful for catching criminals. On the other hand, the opportunities for abuse are too many to number. Has anyone written anything interesting on where/how to draw the line?

<comment><USER31> >Has anyone written anything interesting on where/how to draw the line?

I think the book titled '1984' touched on this subject a little

<comment><USER30> No, thats a nerfarious government.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Jesus... This is a very representative example of what happens when technology is not used in a democratic way, and when it is. It can be abused as much as it could be used for the public benefit

<comment><USER33> CCTV doesn't help in democratic countries where crimes rates have been plumeting for the last decade. They do create a lot of dissidents though and rightly so in my opinion.

If I would be in reach of a public surveillance camera, I would certainly try to sabotage it. Maybe roast the sensor because I happen to have a bright flashlight in my pocket. Damn, I guess I have become a criminal now...

<comment><USER34> > CCTV doesn't help in democratic countries

A trivial search shows otherwise:

1.in the UK where the Russian operatives were caught in Salisbury trying to murder a real-life dissident

2\. in the UK, where the police have dedicated units of 'super-recognisers' that review CCTV footage and solved many a crime.

[1] [https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7182071/cctv-russian-spy- poiso...](https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7182071/cctv-russian-spy-poisoning- suspects-travel-london-salisbury/) [2] [https://www.theguardian.com/uk- news/2018/nov/11/super-recogn...](https://www.theguardian.com/uk- news/2018/nov/11/super-recognisers-police-the-people-who-never-forget-a-face) [2]

<comment><USER33> Compare UK crime statistics with countries that do not employ it and you have empirical evidence that says otherwise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> As people in Hong Kong have shown, it's as easy to tear all this shit down as it is to put it up.

<comment><USER36> Not really. At this point the HK government doesn't care to go after the people tearing "all this shit down", but it wouldn't be hard. Protestors have the fantasy that they are invincible, because they know nothing is actually going to happen.

<comment><USER37> Agreed - up to some breaking point at least. As long as they can reliably put hundreds of thousands of protesters in the streets, they are almost invincible.

China can handle thousands. Tens of thousands becomes a real problem. More than that and it's impossible without serious damage.

HK would never be governable again after a bloody crackdown of that scale. It would either descend into hell and come out worth nothing, or it could spread into the mainland.

Both are unlikely events - I think China is simply waiting it out and ramping up the pressure. Visuals of army training and troop transports are having the desired effect.

I think the likely next steps would be to cut services and if that doesn't work some rationing/price inflation of food and water. Start making the poor resent the rich, and ramp up the propaganda.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Dystopian nightmare.

<comment><USER39> Need to rewatch Person of Interest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> You need to see this in the proper social context. Yes, it's technology and seems like a new phenomenon ("dystopia"!), but that already existed and not much has changed. What if I told you that the local security bureau there always had all the information about people's whereabouts? If you were burglarized, you called one of them up and the thieves were caught. China never worked the way that most people understand.</comment>


Illusion tricks you into thinking these celebrities are downright hideous - <AUTHOR> http://io9.com/5911860/illusion-tricks-you-into-thinking-these-celebrities-are-downright-hideous <comment><USER2> The other linked illusion - ([http://io9.com/5906432/an-optical-illusion-that- explains-the...](http://io9.com/5906432/an-optical-illusion-that-explains-the- origins-of-imaginary-monsters)) - is neat. It (The Troxler Effect) explains why those of us who don't block ads tend not to even see them.

I use optical illusions as a gimmick when I talk to doctors. I do service user involvement with mental health stuff. Clinicians talk about "accepting the reality of the patient experience", but sometimes that concept is quite weak. Showing someone an optical illusion (the grey grid and green bar[1] is great for this) and asking them what colour they see - and then proving that they are wrong - is powerful illustration of how strong the mind can be.

[1] ([http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Gre...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Grey_square_optical_illusion.PNG/220px- Grey_square_optical_illusion.PNG))

</comment><comment><USER3> I saw this before but in the context of "average" faces instead of celebrities.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM6lGNhPujE>

Both videos (with and without celebs) were pretty trippy.

Maybe it is just me but I don't really see the effect on Halle Berry, Kevin Bacon or Hugh Laurie... they all seems to look pretty much the same to me with or without the face flashing.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for that, I can see it there, they look like monsters. In the celebrity one I didn't see it at all. The one you link to the faces seem to stay aligned better and more consistent dimensions than with the celebrity version. That may be why it worked better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Perhaps this is how some caricature artist's eyes work.

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't visit gawker media sites, could someone post whatever they copied/aggregated? I guess it is a youtube video?

<comment><USER7> well.

Youtube: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT9i99D_9gI>

Journal: <http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=p6968>

Thompson: <http://mbthompson.com/research/>

Tangen: <http://www.psy.uq.edu.au/directory/index.html?id=1111>

<comment><USER6> Thanks a lot!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Those looks _weirdly_ similar to what caricaturists draw.

<comment><AUTHOR> Many years ago I came across a simple graphics program that created caricatures. Details are vague, but it involved plotting the key aspects of a "normal" generic face on in some sort of grid-space, then plotting a more typical (or "interesting" face).

The program then exaggerated the differences between the two. It was fairly basic code, but remarkably effective.

<comment><USER9> that's awesome, I'd love it if you found a link to that :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> I have a feeling it's on a C=64 floppy in my closet :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is one _damn_ freaky optical illusion.

<comment><USER10> And surprisingly unelaborate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> If humans have hard-wiring for facial recognition, then likely a lag between the processing of the facial system and the refresh of other optic-visual processing nodes.

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

The rods in the eye responding more quickly than the cones is a more simple example which you can see by quickly darting your eyes back and forth in a darkened room while looking towards a red-LED clock.

</comment><comment><USER12> This is really weird—it even works when you cover one side with your hand.

<comment><USER13> did not believe you. NOW I'm freaked out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why does this effect happen on the computer but not in real life? That is, when a friend (or celebrity) is approaching me in my peripheral vision, why don't I see grotesque person for an instant?

<comment><USER15> Because usually your friend isn't having their face rapidly swapped out with other faces causing your persistence of vision to perceive average blends.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> It would be interesting to get a caricaturists take on this if this is how they see people before they draw them. Also, if they knew of this optical illusion before it was published.

</comment><comment><USER12> How does this work?

<comment><USER17> Due to the fact that you are seeing the faces in your peripheral vision for a brief moment, you don't have time to absorb all the detail of the face so your brain fills in the gaps based on memory. Your brain takes shortcuts so the results of 'filling in the gaps' are far from accurate.

<comment><USER18> That's why you don't even need the second image for this effect. The effect goes away if you focus on the actual image instead (using the mouse pointer as reference point)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Wow. That is truly weird.

</comment><comment><USER20> Really cool, but I don't really see its relevancy here on Hacker News...

<comment><USER2> nik61 (with a dead comment) is right.

I'll quote their post.

> _Paul Graham's indications for the content of Hacker News:_ > _What to > Submit_ > _On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That > includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a > sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual > curiosity._ > _Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, > unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of > pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV > news, it's probably off-topic._

This article is interesting, and it also contains a link to the original paper which is more than many article do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Creepy!</comment>


Hire by Google: Applicant tracking system and recruiting software (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://hire.google.com <comment><USER2> We're using it as our applicant tracking system.

My feeling is this is a separate team as it's in the end hosted on hire.withgoogle.com. Probably the team got acquired and it was initially run as an experiment. Anyway, this is just an assumption.

The tool is quite good and the price is not that high compared to others. It's like an add-on on top of G Suite compared to the built-in apps, but has pretty tight integration with GMail and Calendar.

You can configure it quite a bit and the only thing that seems to be inherited from Google own hiring practices is the interview scheduling where X number of people would do back-to-back interviews with the candidate. But this could also be worked around if not needed.

One thing which is a weak spot is the careers iframe you can embed. They also provide a JSON feed so you can render yourself, but the built-in rendering is so basic they basically force you not to use it.

Overall, we're pretty happy with it for the couple of months we've used it and it certainly is neither a blocker or an enabler of bad hiring practices as mentioned in some of the other comments.

<comment><USER3> > My feeling is this is a separate team as it's in the end hosted on > hire.withgoogle.com. Probably the team got acquired and it was initially run > as an experiment. Anyway, this is just an assumption.

You're correct, it was a startup they acquired - [https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bebop](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bebop)

<comment><USER4> Wow, so that's how Diane Greene ended up at Google? (she's now CEO of Google Cloud).

<comment><USER5> She also sits in Alphabet's Board of Directors: [https://abc.xyz/investor/other/board.html](https://abc.xyz/investor/other/board.html)

IIRC, she's been there since 2012. Her role in Google [Cloud] came much after.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wanted to purchase subscription to Google Hire. I literally had the credit card in my hand. But there was no way to pay. Not even a way to sign up for a free trial right away. I called them several times, no response.

More than a month later, someone finally responded. The person sounded like he is doing me a favor by getting back. In the meantime I started using another ATS that worked well for us. The salesperson response was effectively, "duh ... we are Google".

I see they have the pricing online now: [https://hire.google.com/request- demo/](https://hire.google.com/request-demo/). But still no way to pay or sign up for a trial right away.

<comment><USER7> I signed up to see what it looks like. I immediately received this email

      Thank you so much for your interest in Hire by Google. Here's [0] a short
      video demo to see Hire in action. For more in-depth info on Hire features,
      check out our YouTube channel [1].
      You can also sign up for a live Hire demo webinar here. [2]

      An annual license for Hire is just $100/month for companies
      with less than 25 employees, and $200/month for companies with
      26-50 employees.

      If you're ready to move forward, just reply to this email and I'll be
      happy to send you an order form to add Hire to your G Suite account.
      Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions.

      Looking forward to hearing from you soon!

      PS - If you are larger than 50 employees let me know and we can provide a quote.

[0] [https://info.hire.bebop.co/Introduction-to- Hire.html](https://info.hire.bebop.co/Introduction-to-Hire.html)

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs0N4b7N8wLY6_4ZHar70Cg/vid...](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs0N4b7N8wLY6_4ZHar70Cg/videos)

[2] [https://info.hire.bebop.co/HireWebinarSeries.html](https://info.hire.bebop.co/HireWebinarSeries.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> So much FUD about Google collecting "data" in this thread, from people who think data is just automatically equivalent to heaps of money.

This is a paid software product for businesses, which makes Google money and has a strict data usage policy saying "G Suite customers own their data, not Google. The data that G Suite organizations and users put into our systems is theirs, and we do not scan it for advertisements nor sell it to third parties."

[https://gsuite.google.com/learn-more/security/security- white...](https://gsuite.google.com/learn-more/security/security- whitepaper/page-6.html)

Disclaimer: I do work at El Goog, but not on this product. I just find the vague wolf-crying annoying.

<comment><USER9> What about scanning it not for advertising? Like, say, ML training (as speculated elsewhere in this thread)? Seems like that statement could've been much stronger if Google actually meant that.

<comment><USER8> Seriously, the page I've linked to is 2 paragraphs, just read it.

It explicitly states that data IS used for ML training, to provide useful features to the customers:

"Google indexes customer data to provide beneficial services, such as spam filtering, virus detection, spellcheck and the ability to search for emails and files within an individual account."

Individual customer agreements may have more specifications on top, but I don't think any rational company in the world would ask for email without spam filtering because of some abstract fear of machine learning or "scanning" of data.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Other posters seem to have concerns about google siphoning data from this product. I wouldn't be especially worried about that.

A much bigger concern for me would be that this product is not and will never be core to google's business. Will it be around a year from now? Will be around but utterly neglected as whatever opaque process inside google causes it to lose interest in yet another project?

I'd rather buy recruiting software from a company in the recruiting software business.

<comment><USER11> >A much bigger concern for me would be that this product is not and will never be core to google's business.

I think it depends. Is this an internal tool they decided to monetize? If they're dogfooding it's much less likely they'll cancel it

<comment><USER12> > If they're dogfooding it's much less likely they'll cancel it

I think it's just as likely. Another team will create a different product doing the same thing in a different way and they will now dogfood that new one.

<comment><USER13> .... umm, no.

If anything they will just change it up and disappoint people who liked it just the way it was.

As they are doing with GMail.

They _did_ create "Inbox" to do the same thing as GMail (email) in a different way... But they're killing Inbox and just making changes to GMail.

<comment><USER14> ...which kind of pisses me off because I use Inbox.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is the product that evolved from the Bebop acquisition (Diane Greene's company that was acquired to bring her in to lead Google Cloud).

Crunchbase: [https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bebop#section- overvi...](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bebop#section-overview)

Previous HN discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10839646](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10839646)

</comment><comment><USER16> What's next? Google CRM? Google ERP? Similar story to Microsoft' invoicing system that had been rolled out a while back. The smaller players will most likely get pushed out (even if their product is better but offers less horizontally), sometimes while paying for computing power on the platform that is competing with them.

</comment><comment><USER17> Since when are Google's hiring practices good? As many of us experienced, the process is dismal and extremely disrespectful with the candidates. They get away with it because of their fame.

      * Bad scheduling of phone interviews
      * No answers for long swaths of time
      * 1 liner rejection emails
      * Terrible matching of skills vs jobs
        (e.g. offering entry level SRE to experienced people)
      * Cookie-cutter interviews

Now, what makes me wonder is why are they making this system? What's in it for Google? And good luck expecting them to keep it up for more than a couple of years.

<comment><USER18> > What's in it for Google?

Control and data? Perhaps they have something dystopian in mind?

Edit: It is also another reason to hide from Google.

<comment><USER19> > Perhaps they have something dystopian in mind?

Oh come on. We've all conceded the days of "Don't be evil" are long gone but Google's type of evil hasn't quite shifted to that of cackling supervillain. It's an evil bred from arrogance, naivety and self-interest - not from an active intent to corrupt society.

<comment><USER20> In other words: It's the same kind of evil as all real evil, not the kind of evil that is purely fictional. Your point being?

<comment><USER19> I think you're making the same point as me in that case. It was morningcoffee that had James Bond supervillains in mind.

<comment><USER20> IC--I read them more as "something that _is_ dystopian" rather than "something that is _intended_ to be dystopian".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Google is in publicly collected health care data. Google is in surveillance via location service. Google is browser tracking.

Presumably if you want to apply for a job with a company that uses Google Hire you won't be opt out of Google processing your personal data.

It's the candidate "discovery" feature that worries me the most. Howlong before Google offersto prefilter candidates it thinks are bad eggs based on the profile it's building on you?

<comment><USER22> Which in turn would naturally include anybody Google has chosen to blacklist from their services for whatever opaque reason. Google's vision of the future seems to have changed fairly starkly in recent years and in a very bad way. Hopefully this is yet another Google service flop because the alternative is edging rapidly towards dystopia.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> So when is it shutting down?

<comment><USER24> This is a GSuite product, so most likely it's not going away for a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> This seems to be around since 2017. What am I missing?

</comment><comment><USER26> So far Google is not sure about good talent other companies hire. Now with this system, they can use AI/ML to steal the potential job quitter earlier than he is hired by the competitor.

Well done guys!

<comment><USER27> Please read this: [https://gsuite.google.com/learn-more/security/security- white...](https://gsuite.google.com/learn-more/security/security- whitepaper/page-6.html)

<comment><USER26> Read above. No where I mentioned about Ads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm wondering when the Google brand is going to go down in reputation.

It seems to me that the majority still sees them as a badge of engineering excellence and firmly believe that people working there are way above average. I don't think that's the case anymore despite the huge amount of associated koolaid.

This product is a typical example of Google using their brand name to get a product out that otherwise nobody would even look at.

<comment><USER29> If they get interview scheduling integrations right they are already better than 99% of everything else out there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> They used to not even offer a demo, and on the phone they were pretty glib about paying for a year to try it out. The fatal flaw was that since it's not part of an HRMS system it's not integrated into the whole employee lifecycle, so other solutions made more sense. We went with BambooHR which also has ATS along with everything else you need and was pretty cheap.

</comment><comment><USER31> Is all your data private or google using all the data. It doesn't seem explicit on the feature page.

</comment><comment><USER32> This is a negative business model and should be subject to anti-trust. It's another ruse to hoover up more data by Google. How are software companies going to compete with a google subsidized alternative?

Tomorrow google could attack other software verticals with their vampire data collection business model with negative dystopian externalities for society, businesses and their employees.

Who is going to pay for all the software employees made redundant by these kinds of business models? This is a kind of dumping which is illegal in most economic systems.

<comment><USER33> You consider selling software for a monthly fee (with the price starting at $100/month) to be a negative business model? Just how much do you think the price should have been to not count as "subsidized"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> The pricing is wrong. It is based on the size of the company. It should be based on the number of candidates/resumes in pipeline.

</comment><comment> shady-lady a testimonial from that page:

> Scheduling interviews used to take a long time, but now it takes just a few > clicks

The software must be pretty basic if that's a featured quote. What were the deciding factors for who they reach out to for these quotes? If that's one of the better answers, my respect for HR people has sunk to a new low.

</comment><comment><USER35> I'm looking for the counterpart: An offer/application/headhunter/company tracking system

</comment><comment><USER36> Given that there are dominating ATS products like Lever, Greenhouse, etc, this will likely just quietly shut-down in a few years.

</comment><comment><USER37> We need to break up Google ASAP.

</comment><comment><USER38> The Google Applicant tracking system is most hostile toward deaf job applicants, EVAH!

<comment><USER8> How so?

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Ah yes, yet another applicant tracking system that will likely not solve any of the problems the other ones have had. Especially since I presume this has been an internal tool for some time.

<comment><USER16> It doesn't matter if it is good or bad. It matters that vendor locking potential becomes greater.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> how did this make it onto HN? for some privacy bashing?

srsly, why is this interesting in the slightest?

</comment><comment><USER41> A candidate's CV contains all sorts of personal data, their detailed work and academic history, their contact details and work eligibility, maybe their date of birth, address and personal interests. And it's being served up to Google on a silver plate by this service! This is obviously a blatant attempt to enrich their (shadow) profiles on people.

<comment><USER42> They failed miserably in the social networking domain, still trying their best to collect complete detailed self-declared personal profiles.</comment></comment>


Join the Dropbox Notes beta - <AUTHOR> https://www.dropbox.com/notes

<comment><USER2> I read "Dropbox Notes" and instantly thought "awesome! I can finally ditch Evernote". Then I open the link and they talk about "a new way for teams to write together". Firstly, can we please focus on the consumer? Secondly, can we please focus on the UI? Thirdly, I'd just like a github-style UI for personal note taking that is consistent across my browser, phone, tablet and computers. That would be great; introduce language highlighting and it'd be awesome. I'd pay more than my Dropbox fee for that.

<comment><USER3> Why not use Google Keep?

<comment><USER4> I can only answer for myself here, but the reason I choose Evernote over GKeep is:

Evernote is a company making money with their core product — which happens to be Evernote, the note taking service. I pay for Premium because it's a great service that works well for me, and the money I spend on them helps keeping the company afloat.

Google Keep is a product that's not making any money. It's an experiment for Google, the same way Google Wave was. I can't pay for it. While I honestly admire their willingness to ditch experiments that aren't fruitful, it also doesn't make me want to start relying on it because it might be taken out behind the shed in 6 months time.

Well, that and the fact that the Evernote ecosystem is _huge_ — a big plus.

<comment><USER5> It is a shame Evernote does not support free OS-es.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I hope they do something more innovative than the other guys. Like bringing this collaborative notes feature onto the desktop vs another browser based notes sharing site.

I use Dropbox on my computer as thought it's native to my OS.

When I open a browser then I go into the other world (the internet) where I have many choices. Keeping it tightly integrated with my OS would give Dropbox an advantage over the other guy that chose the easy way out.

</comment><comment><USER7> I've been using this in beta since early march, if anyone has any specific questions I'm happy to field them.

Personal findings so far:

\- Keyboard shortcuts are unparalleled compared to any other note taking app I've used (both desktop & web). Not needing to use a mouse to move around chunks of notes is highly productive.

\- Safari seems to lose sync more often than Chrome.

\- The design is really, really white. It took me a few days for it to stop hurting my eyes after tabbing to it from my IDE.

<comment><USER8> What keyboard shortcuts does it have?

<comment><USER7> Full list here (on OS X): [http://i.imgur.com/pdbHhZx.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/pdbHhZx.jpg)

Of particular note is the ability to move around lines of highlighted text using option + keyboard arrows.

At first I thought it was just a neat feature, but now I pull my hair out every time I use a text editor without it.

<comment><USER9> Doesn't OneNote have its fair share of keyboard shortcuts?

[https://support.office.com/article/65dc79fa- de36-4ca0-9a6e-d...](https://support.office.com/article/65dc79fa- de36-4ca0-9a6e-dfe7f3452ff8)

<comment><USER7> Quite the list! To clarify on my parent comment - by unparalleled I mean in usefulness for writing notes, spec and lists of actionable items for teams. Not just sheer quantity of shortcuts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is this basically a newer version of Hackpad? (I believe Dropbox acquired them)

<comment><USER11> Looks like it. And Hackpad is now open source: [https://github.com/hackpad](https://github.com/hackpad)

edit: Looks like it's not quite there yet, but soon! [https://twitter.com/bryanlanders/status/586235797571002368/p...](https://twitter.com/bryanlanders/status/586235797571002368/photo/1)

<comment><USER5> How an empty repo can have 100+ stars? [https://github.com/hackpad/hackpad](https://github.com/hackpad/hackpad)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I was in on the beta for this and I just couldn't figure out what to use it for. We use Google Docs, Trello, Confluence and Basecamp. I can't see where it fits with any of those. Interested to see where this goes.

</comment><comment><USER13> Awesome, been looking for a drive replacement for writing short documents.

</comment><comment><USER14> I really hope I'll be able to throw out my Simplenote with this :)

</comment><comment><USER15> This is something cool which I been hoping for.

</comment><comment><USER16> The name is not very creative since Box came up with Box notes a while ago. Not sure why they didn't try a different name instead.

</comment><comment><USER17> Seems like a weak attempt to compete with Google Drive.

<comment><USER18> Comparing to Google Docs isn't the point. (Although it would be good if it compares well.) This is really aimed at people who have already integrated Dropbox into their workflow -- enterprise customers, mostly.

<comment><USER19> Unless notes sits on your OS and doesn't require you to boot up your browser and log into Dropbox then, yes they are competing with google docs. I work with an organization that has dropbox set up for around 140 employees and most of them don't use it beyond the desktop integration, why would they?

<comment><USER18> In my experience, the most common way to share files is by creating sharable links at dropbox.com. In fact I think that might be the ONLY way that I'm aware of.

<comment><USER20> You can share entire directories, like a network drive.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to lose $8k worth of Bitcoin in 15 minutes with Verizon and Coinbase.com - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@CodyBrown/how-to-lose-8k-worth-of-bitcoin-in-15-minutes-with-verizon-and-coinbase-com-ba75fb8d0bac <comment><USER2> Before opening: Phone was ported somewhere, SMS was hijacked for two-factor... and I was right.</comment>


Google and LG creates VR AMOLED 120 Hz at 5500 x 3000 - <AUTHOR> https://www.blurbusters.com/google-and-lg-creates-vr-amoled-120-hz-at-5500x3000/ <comment><USER2> I'm looking forward to the next generation of VR headsets immensly. A lot of people have been quick to jump on the "VR is already dead" train, but having picked one up during Christmas this year, it's obvious how much potential is there.

There are a few things that need to be accomplished before widespread adoption:

\- Removal of wires. It restricts movement too much and removes immersion. The new HTC headset is a step toward this.

\- Higher resolution screens. VR AMOLEDs like this are a step in the right direction.

\- Prices for GPUs need to go down, and/or a few more years are needed for average computers to be able to render high frame-rates without breaking the bank.

\- Headsets need to be lighter and smaller.

\- Removal of sensor placement the room. This will be harder to do, but cameras/sensors built on the headsets themselves could potentially accomplish this.

The way I see it, we're in the iPhone 1 stage of VR right now. Imagine the iPhone X version: lighter, smaller, higher resolution, more colors, higher frame-rate, less hassle. These are all inevitabilities, and at that point it will become much easier to adopt the technology. We're also missing a true "killer app" that will get people to purchase a headset JUST for that. I think it will take some sort of truly massive MMO the likes of WoW to accomplish that.

The future is definitely exciting in this field. I hope hardware vendors don't give up and can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

<comment><USER3> > average computers to be able to render high frame-rates without breaking the > bank

High res stereo at 120Hz is never going to have to same graphics as the latest high budget big game release. Current GPUs are already very powerful, but if people have the expectations of getting the same graphics when they use VR they are going to be very frustrated.

<comment><USER4> I'm all for it if it means that AAA games will finally step off the photorealism treadmill and admit that pushing polygon counts is not a substitute for art direction. I'll take a Fortnite look over a PUBG look any day.

<comment><USER5> you can say this, but if you look at the most popular mods on skyrim they tend to make the game look more photorealistic, not less. the general trend for video game consumers is towards realism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The specs sound impressive and would truely make VR much more complelling (I have an oculus rift and the resolution is noticable even on low spec games). On the other hand I would wait until actual units are out there but it doesn't seem that outlandish that Google and LG would be unable to pull this off.

I assume this is targeted to the gaming market because at those specs unless you sell it at a loss the MSRP is going to be at least $500. I wonder if this signals Google entring into the VR arena as a publisher to compete with Oculus. I know that also VR is used for Advertisements and they have engagement for properly setup ads for VR as 5 minutes or more so maybe they will be pushing on that front. From what I have seen from Google their VR has mostly been focused on mobile so them focusing on the high end market is really interesting.

<comment><USER7> > their VR has mostly been focused on mobile so them focusing on the high end > market is really interesting

The one consistent thing about Google's VR/AR strategy so far is that it's extremely inconsistent. Different groups within Google are taking a lot of shots on different technologies and form factors with different partners. Some examples include Google Glass (built by Google X, now revived as Glass X for Enterprise) which was supposed to be picked up by Tony Fadell of Nest who then ended up leaving Google altogether, Google Cardboard (a side project by 2 smart Google France engineers for a conference), Google Dream w/ Daydream View, Google Tango (built by ATAP group and shut down after announcement of ARCore), and now ARCore w/ Asus and LG.

There is no discernible Google VR/AR strategy other than - let's see what bubbles up from different dev groups and, when needed, react to market forces (ARCore was a direct reaction to Apple's ARKit). IMO until Google really "focuses" on VR/AR with a dedicated group and strategy this new tech will remain a sideshow without much traction.

<comment><USER8> >There is no discernible Google VR/AR strategy other than - let's see what bubbles up from different dev groups and, when needed, react to market forces.

Clay Bavor's presentation at Google I/O[1] and SID Display Week[2] seems to outline their strategy concerning AR/VR pretty well.

>Some examples include Google Glass

Released in 2013 and pivoted to enterprise use. Now under the control of the Google hardware division.

>Tony Fadell of Nest who then ended up leaving Google altogether

Yes, he did leave Google, but only after being assigned to the roof.

>Google Cardboard (a side project by 2 smart Google France engineers for a conference)

A low cost VR solution developed in 2014 by two Googlers during their 20% innovation time off. I believe it's also the most widely used VR solution in the world.

[1][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tto90e-DfeM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tto90e-DfeM)

[2][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlADpD1fvuA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlADpD1fvuA)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Everyone says that a powerful GPU is needed to drive this thing, but I don't think that's a must. Careful art direction based on current hardware limitations can produce nice-looking virtual worlds — not photorealistic, but still immersive and fun. Nintendo pulls this thing consistently.

<comment><USER10> You also don't need to render at full resolution.

A significant benefit of higher res VR displays is not being able to physically see the pixels / screen door effect of the screen. You still get this benefit by rendering at a lower resolution and upscaling to the display resolution. Certainly you will be able to see 'render pixels', but that's a much less significant problem and just reduces the realism of the scene.

<comment><USER11> If you add eye/focus tracking you can selectively render the part in focus in a higher resolution and use lower resolution for peripheral vision. The end result is that you are rendering at exactly the bandwidth that the human eye can handle, which is optimal and probably not that high. Going forwards, this is IMHO where the real optimization gains are.

<comment><USER12> That's a really interesting idea, but can you imagine how incredibly annoying it would be if there were any level of latency? Seems like even a few 10s of milliseconds of latency would make that rather horrible. Especially considering how fast your eyes can dart around a screen, could we even do that today?

<comment><USER13> I dunno. There are a lot of flaws in your visual perception as it is (blind spot, nose hiding, differences in light/dark/color sensitivity based on location in FOV, etc).

The brain corrects for things like that automatically. Might work just as well here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> For the people worrying about GPU usage, it also says "Foveated driving logic for VR and AR applications was implemented".

<comment><USER15> I had to google foveated driving logic: It means tracking the user's eye movements and only rendering the most central area to the eye in high- definition.

Source: [https://www.roadtovr.com/google-shares-new-research- foveated...](https://www.roadtovr.com/google-shares-new-research-foveated- rendering-techniques/)

<comment><USER16> Is this foveated as in Field-Of-View-ated?

<comment><USER17> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis)

<comment><USER16> thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does anyone have the GPUs to drive this tech though? I've been thinking lately that the main reason why the 2015-2016 hype about VR completely flamed out is that, on top of the ~$500 headset, you needed a new ~$1500 gaming PC to do anything with it. As a result, not enough consumers got on board to kickstart the virtuous cycle of more consumers -> more spending dollars -> more content developers -> more attractive content -> more consumers. The kind of GPU you'll need to drive a 5500x3000 display at 120 Hz certainly isn't going to help with that.

<comment><USER19> Not just GPU but display bandwidth too, 5500x3000x120Hz requires a monstrous 59.40 Gbps according to this calculator: [https://k.kramerav.com/support/bwcalculator.asp](https://k.kramerav.com/support/bwcalculator.asp)

For that you'd need multiple displayport cables.

<comment> Tuna-Fish The assumption is that the system would use foveated rendering to keep bandwidth demands down.

<comment><USER20> Thunderbolt 3 runs at 40Gbps, so it wouldn't require very much foveated rendering to get the bandwidth to that spec.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Gaming today is big. So big I dont think anyone forsee this coming. And VR is going to push this into another level.

I would have loved Apple to capture on this, as they stand to be the company that makes software and hardware well integrated. The problem is Apple has never gave a damn about gaming. They say they do, but they dont. And It isn't their priority, it isn't in their DNA. ( I bet none of the VPs are gamers of any sort ).

Nintendo could be another fit. But they are always lacking in Hardware and VR is very much hardware limited.

</comment><comment><USER22> Everyone is talking about gaming but these are the kinds of resolutions you need for monitor replacement and more business related tasks.

</comment><comment><USER23> Fantastic. I've heard that to truly remove the awkwardness of VR, the refresh rates need to go as high as possible. 240hz would be better, and I've heard it argued that 1024hz is optimal.

Also, with high enough resolutions, you don't need anti-aliasing. This is pretty close to 8K, which is probably around the time that anti-aliasing stops mattering.

<comment><USER24> I've never found the framerate of my Rift to be a problem however I'd gladly trade it for something with better resolution and improved contrast and brigtness.

That being said my high-end gaming PC (using a GTX1080) struggles to maintain native framerate in demanding games without reprojection on the Rift, I can't imagine what kind of futuristic computer you'll need to drive 5500x3000@120Hz in VR. Let's hope the cryptocurrency mining gold rush will have subdued by then.

<comment><USER25> Foveated rendering should help a lot, but you'll still definitely need a powerful one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The specs are nice but I wonder if it can work well on games with current high end computers. If they really release it I will most likely buy it though.

I think that this kind of headset is meaningful for both VR power users and developers but Google and Facebook should focus on non gaming content to attract a wider audience.

Facebook is in the odd position where they could make a WebVR social killer app over night but they won't because they really badly want to become the Apple of VR with their Oculus Store. I think that they will regret this strategy in the future. That or they will have to cash billions out once more to acquire a company that found out what to do with this tech.

</comment><comment><USER27> Now we just need a decade or two until consumer computing power can actually power it.

<comment><USER28> Isn't it a very scalable problem? Just put more processors to GPU.

<comment><USER29> Right but "consumer" implies a price point, which is not very scalable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> At this point, I'd be more concerned with improving the optics: lenses that don't smudge and don't have the Fresnel lens flaring, or perhaps even with a wider field of view.

<comment><USER31> this has impact in lenses as well, because with high enough resolution you could emulate lenses on the screen.

<comment><USER32> You can't "emulate lenses on a screen" unless it's a lightfield display (which it's not).

With higher resolution you could correct for more lens distortion, but you still need lenses, and you won't be able to fix lens flare on fresnel lenses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> From a GPU perspective this is going to require some powerful hardware to drive. If you look at the 3D game benchmarks for the geforce1080 vs the 1080ti (and slightly overclocked, more expensive versions of the 1080ti), the only video card that will actually deliver close to a consistent 60 Hz at 3840x2160 on a _SINGLE DISPLAY_ is a 1080ti. Now multiply that by two screens, and a resolution per screen that is considerably higher than standard 4K.

</comment><comment><USER34> As a home user who has a passing interest in VR. I would throw down a bunch of cash to get something like a STAR VR setup for watching TV/movies.

Something that can give immediate immersion when put on, scaled down, lightweight/comfortable, portable and can last around 5 hours would be a great first step.

[0]: [https://www.starvr.com](https://www.starvr.com)

</comment><comment><USER35> We've been working with Google to create content that can harness these new specs:

[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLL- lmlkrmJalNqp7Q_dLA...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLL- lmlkrmJalNqp7Q_dLAzQNjBqZk2FA4)

</comment><comment><USER36> That's pretty impressive. The current generation of VR is too pixelated. Hopefully this will fix that. Now only the GPU needs to keep up. Note 60 GHz link on the Vive Pro.

<comment><USER15> I'm afraid that we'd need to see the performance jump that came with the latest generation of nVidia cards many times to be able to get there. Even a single 2160p 144Hz monitor is hard to satisfy unless we are talking about an SLI configuration, which is extremely costly given the high demand caused by people after easy money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I am wondering why all VR device is designed like a glass. Isn't it more comfortable to the user if we design it like a helmet?

<comment><USER38> No helmets are heavy and get hot and sweaty very fast.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Think Google is going to need to develop some custom silicon to drive this level of resolution and not going to be easy.

<comment><USER8> It would seem they've already developed it.

 _A custom high bandwidth driver IC was fabricated. Foveated driving logic for VR and AR applications was implemented._

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> To be clear, is this per-eye? It's got to be, right?

A single 4.3 inch isn't big enough for VR, right?

<comment> Tuna-Fish The size of the screen isn't very relevant, because for proper use there needs to be a lot of lenses between the screen and your eyes, and they can use those lenses to magnify the screen to whatever field of view they want. Mostly a smaller screen just makes the headset smaller.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I want this so bad</comment>


New cabinet may signal Britain's retreat as a Western power - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/07/14/new-cabinet-may-signal-britains-retreat-as-a-western-power/ <comment><USER2> The article pretty neatly avoids any considerations of Britain's history. When she was at the height of her leadership of the West (Victorian period) she had a similar attitude of being detached from mainland Europe. Disraeli (PM) even called Britain a primarily Asiatic power

The article also blurs Western values with "American foreign policy". Engaging with powers we don't see eye to eye with in non-military ways should be seen as expressing western values.

</comment><comment><USER3> Warning: Article behind Data-Slurp-Wall©</comment>


Show HN - My Latest Side Project: WODWatcher - <AUTHOR> https://www.wodwatcher.com

<comment><AUTHOR> I was tired of having to check my feed reader multiple times per day to see if the coaches had posted the workout of the day at my crossfit gym. This frustration, coupled with the desire to learn about Heroku and Twilio, led to a fun project. It'll be interesting to see where it goes from here.</comment>