TSA Agent about to scan pilot's daughter: "Heads up, got a cutie for you." - <AUTHOR> http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1147497-tso-saying-heads-up-got-cutie-you.html <comment><USER2> I'm not sure this anonymous anecdote advances the debate about airport security in any meaningful way.

<comment><USER3> Anonymous anecdotes and writings have a long history of relevance in US.

<http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/>

<comment><USER4> The Federalist Papers were not anecdotes. They were philosophy. Anecdotes must be true to be of any consequence, so the identity of the author helps to verify the anecdote. Philosophy just has to be correct, which makes the identity of the writer unimportant.

<comment><USER3> Journalism has a long history of using anonymous sources so knowing the source is not a necessary item. In a lot of ways, I don't see as much distinction as you do between anecdotes and philosophy particularly with the writings of people who were talking about governing people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wait... why are we having people do this anyway? Backscatter scans would be perfect if it wasn't for the privacy problem, so why aren't we using image processing software to look for objectionable objects etc instead of people?

<comment><USER6> > _Backscatter scans would be perfect if it wasn't for the privacy problem_

What about the safety problem? A few academics at UCSF drafted an open letter regarding the safety backscatter scanners, available at <http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf>

Reading it firmly shifted my objection from one based on privacy to one based on safety. Therac-25 wasn't _that_ long ago, after all. And, of course, let's not forget shoe fitting fluoroscopes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Even if this anonymous post is completely fictional, I am certain this exact scenario plays out every single day at various US airports. Why would it not?

A simple improvement would be to have separate scanning machines for males and females with a same sex screener.

Also, a collection of x-ray scanner pictures of passengers of all ages and genders should be posted by the security line so everyone in line can make up their own mind if they want to be scanned or would prefer to opt out for manual screening.

<comment><USER8> What if you are gay?

All the hoopla about "same-sex screeners" is so 1950s. The real solution is to dispense with screening procedures which are so invasive that sexualization becomes an issue.

<comment><USER4> The other solution is to lose the irrational fear of others seeing one's body. It would make me uncomfortable too, but that doesn't mean it's rational. The backscatter machines seem like less of an inconvenience than taking off your shoes and putting them back on every time you walk into an airport. If they actually do make things safer and don't cause any health issues, I don't see a problem with them.

<comment><USER8> No, you are missing the point. I have absolutely no problem with nudity. Really: I go to hot springs and cavort naked with random strangers all the time.

There is a much more profound philosophical issue here, and that is that the government should not have the freedom to conduct invasive searches with impunity. This is fundamentally engrained in the constitution, but as is its wont, technology has raced past our existing legal framework. We need to fundamentally re-examine the sort of society in which we wish to live in an age where almost any conceivable sort of search is made trivial.

Where does it end? I contend that, if we simply acquiesce to these scanners and allow them to be installed in every airport, that will be but the tip of the iceberg. You will wake up some day in the near future and find these installed in every courthouse, train station, bus terminal, Federal building in the land. From there it's but a short leap to see them popping up at retail establishments, sporting events, movie theaters, and every other facet of your day-to-day life. Just like that, a privacy which nobody even thought to care about--the ability to conceal things on your person--has vanished into thin air.

Where does it end? By your very logic, if the government had a machine that could read minds, you would be for it. Yet something tells me you would find that completely abhorrent.

Where does it end?

<comment><USER4> Comparing the costs of allowing the government to see me naked and the supposed benefit of allowing the government to see everyone naked before getting on a plane, I think the benefits come out on top. The mind-reading scenario doesn't fare as well. I'd rather let planes occasionally get blown up than require the government to read everyone's mind before getting on planes. However, if the government seeing everyone naked can save a lot of lives, I think it's worth it.

The potential damage from unauthorized weapons or explosives being brought into a courthouse, bus terminal or federal building isn't very high and might not be worth the cost of reduced privacy. Train stations, perhaps, depending on the capacity of the trains and how many people one terrorist could take out. Retail establishments have competition, so even if they thought it would be a good idea (which I'd disagree with), they'd go out of business.

Where does it end? When the costs no longer justify the benefits.

<comment><USER9> If you do the math out, starting from the FDA's own numbers (1/80,000,000 likelihood of deadly cancer per screening) and working it out for the 800,000,000 person-flights taken every year, the "lives saved" benefit doesn't seem to exist, and this is even /before/ I bring up that even if cancer doesn't kill you, it can still be devastating, costing large sums of money an years of your life to only half recover from.

Seriously: hardly anyone is killed by terrorism in this country, and it isn't because of backscatter x-ray machines (obviously, as they didn't exist before). All of the plots that the TSA talks about as success stories were handled by intelligence before they even got to the airport, and most cases of airline-related terrorism in the last 35 years really come down to "reinforced cockpit doors", which we now have.

However, I want to directly address the nudity question, as a lot of people try to separate these concerns: even if there are no health issues, and even though people like you and me may be comfortable in this situation, some people have serious issues from having been violated in the past.

I have never been raped (and I doubt I ever will be: I'm giant, male, and reasonably unattractive), but I can still /try/ to empathize with the idea that some people are going to have been through situations where they had their freedoms and sexual independence stripped away from them by a stranger. The thought of going through that again makes many people freeze up (as opposed to scream), possibly putting them in a situation where they "let" the TSA screeners (who don't wait for an explicit "yes" and often don't even explain what is about to happen) push them to the point of having horrible flashbacks of what happened to them.

I'm going to go farther though: a world where people even can exist in the set "rape victims" (or "terrorist") is a world in which not everyone has pure intentions, and that has to be taken into consideration when analyzing whether we should allow "the government", and by which we all really mean "people who got a job as a TSA screener", to see other people naked. We have to ask the question: what if the screeners don't share the same enlightened view of naked bodies that you and I do?

That someone may be getting off on the idea of screening my (currently very young, but soon only somewhat young) half-niece (half-sister's daughter) because he either gets to a) see her naked (the scans are not limited to same- sex scanners) or b) do an enhanced pat down on her (while they claim same-sex pat downs, the screeners often seem to try to goad travelers into the uncomfortable situation of either thinking they will miss their flight or accept a mismatched screener) sickens me.

(I will point out here that it isn't like "just take the naked picture" is even an option, so it is kind of a strawman argument to begin with: if you are selected for more screening or the AIT "can't get a clear picture" it becomes "enhanced patdown" time, which we have to consider in this situation. When people could easily and issue-lessly opt-out of AIT I was a lot less bothered by the whole thing. It still bothered me due to the risk/reward tradeoff not working out, but the idea that these TSA screeners are now in a situation to do rather invasive "patdown" of people changes the game entirely.)

Once you accept that some people don't share your belief, the incentives are simply broken: if you are the kind of person who gets off in this situation, this is the job you will apply for. As you aren't a terrorist or an obvious "criminal", you will easily clear the background check. Once in this sort of job, manipulating the system so more attractive people, younger people, or maybe people wearing interesting clothing (a skirt you will be able to stick your hands up or someone obviously not wearing a full complement of underwear)--whatever floats their particular boat--is something you can easily make happen.

Remember: there are no statistics kept, no records written, and all decisions seem to be up to the screener in question. We /do not/ allow this sort of unwatched behavior among police officers (a profession that involves a lot more hurdles to enter and has much more risk when you get there): for decades we have required this kind of oversight among their ranks to make certain that they weren't abusing their position of power.

While it makes life really simple to think of governments and companies as large entities that have simple goals and beliefs, the reality of the situation is that we live in a world full of all kinds of people, and some people simply suck. We really need to be careful as we set up the rules of the world in which we live to not /encourage/ these people to suck more, to suck harder, and to suck in ways that get in our way.

Note: I'm not saying everyone sucks, and I'm not saying /most/ people suck, but only that there exist people who do, in fact, suck, and they are going to be the people who are willing to take a seemingly sad/painful job with a low salary whose only perk seems to be getting to have a form of sexual control over an unwilling constituency.

And, before you even go there, we cannot just filter these people well: we've already found a TSA agent who was apparently so bad he is now a convicted child molester). That guy didn't just suck, he was /stupid/: most people taking advantage of this system will stick to what they can get away with inside of the bureaucracy rather than also messing with children at home.

Maybe you still don't care... maybe you think I and anyone in this discussion are still just being uptight: that we should not care that the screener is enjoying it, that we are turning someone else's flaw into our own issue. To that I say: these broken incentives also undermine the benefit. Even if you believe a system is capable of working, if that very system is wasting time getting off it is not protecting the people. Again, /you/ may be enlightened, but it is equally important that the other people in the situation are. These people are now easy targets for terrorists: find one of them, and then use a confident ugly person (maybe me) to smuggle what you need into the airport.

Think about it... even if only one out of a hundred people in the TSA suck, or one in a thousand, maybe just a handful that suck really bad, that is a serious issue: to our freedoms, and even our safety. It isn't the government seeing us (all of us: you, your spouse, and your children) naked, it is "Craig the TSA screener", and it will still just be Craig when he tells you to prepare for your family to prepare for their "enhanced putdowns".

(This was all seriously typed on my iPhone in a coffee shop, and was partially motivated by a question to the OperationGrabAss subreddit regarding "how to respond to someone who thinks nudity should be ok", which is why I went into the number of argument levels that I did).

<comment><USER9> Woah, multiple typos in the last line. :( (I wish HN worked better on an iPhone: the text box is tiny and small. I am going to be writing future comments in Notes and then copy/pasting them over.)

...when he tells your family to prepare for their "enhanced patdowns".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Also relevant: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TCHSGvNwRY>

<comment><USER11> [from the video] "come up with some sort of game with the child"

Isn't that what most child molesters do?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Did anyone else read further into the thread where a fellow has been monitoring the TSA agents using a yeasu vx6r HT and recording the conversations with a digital audio recorder?

He would then burn the inappropriate conversations to CD and send them to the TSA's office.

Live streaming online would be great.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think the thing that bothers me the most about this situation is not the backscatter machine, but the punitive "enhanced pat-down". There has to be more reasonable ways to both ensure flight safety, without resorting to touching genitals.

<comment><USER8> > There has to be more reasonable ways to both ensure flight safety, without > resorting to touching genitals.

Maybe there are not. If the plot were executed correctly, the crotch bomber would have blown up the plane, and it doesn't sound like anything in the X-ray / metal detector system was set up to handle that.

The point is, there is no such thing as "ensuring" flight safety. Along with the benefit of _increased_ flight safety, to each added screening procedure is associated a cost of loss of personal freedom and privacy. The traditional debate has vastly overstated the former, and completely ignored the latter.

People who are up in arms about the groping are calling for a fairer accounting. Terrorism is a very concentrated, visual form of evil, so the knee jerk reaction is that it must be stopped at all costs. Loss of freedom is, by contrast, diffuse and widespread, and people are less apt to become emotional over it. It's inherently difficult to balance the two, and yet it must be done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why can't they use better tech to make the images less objectionable without compromising security?

<comment><USER8> There are many objections; the nature of the images is only one. These procedures are also objectionable philosophically, medically, and ethically. Better tech isn't going to solve any of those problems.</comment></comment>


The Great Apple Keyboard Cover-Up - <AUTHOR> https://ifixit.org/blog/10279/apple-macbook-keyboard-cover-up/ <comment><USER2> The fact that the membrane is still vented (labeled 321 in the diagram) suggests that this will only delay, and not fix the dust ingress problem. Indeed, it could make things worse by creating a tiny pump[1] that draws particles in on each keystroke.

I don't know why they didn't vent from the bottom instead, but that's how completely sealed (i.e. waterproof) keypads are vented.

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

Edit: wow, downvotes? Care to explain...?

<comment><USER3> >> Edit: wow, downvotes? Care to explain...?

> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, > and it makes boring reading.

Don't worry about downvotes, even if you care about the karma points you can at most get to -4 anyway.

<comment><USER4> Concerning points, here's what works for me: I act on the assumtion that I can't take the points with me when (I'm || HM) is dead. So... while I need enough to enable free speech, accumulating internet points is not the reason I participate in this forum.

<comment><USER5> Let's wait for the Black Mirror episode where your internet points will make your Avatar's afterlife more enjoyable.

<comment><USER6> See Tom Scott's Welcome to Life. [0]

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Was the old keyboard engineering so bad? I feel like Apple has been fixing what wasn't broken since about 2010, regarding the MBP at least.

Literally all they needed to do was retina screen, upgrade the internals, and add a few USB-C ports. Was anyone ever legitimately inconvenienced by the thickness of the 2010 MBP? I know I was directly inconvenienced by the loss of MagSafe, ethernet, SD card and USB-A, the loss of the FN key row, and loss of serviceability.

So much so that my 2010 MBP will very likely be my last Apple purchase ever.

<comment><USER8> After using my 2016 MBP for two years, going back to my 2014 MBP just feels wrong.

The keyboard is so much better on the modern ones, so I'd recommend giving it a chance !

<comment><USER9> Wow, your comment was killed within seconds. I'd suggest expanding on your opinion.

<comment><USER10> The 2016 keyboard feels, IMO, way better to type of. In comparison the old MBP feels like a much sloppier machine.

It's size was also the only thing putting me off a personal purchase. Reliability issues aside (I haven't been affected but I assume it's a matter of time) it is a nicer machine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> They fixed the keyboard, increased the max memory to 32GB and stuck to their guns on the touch bar - and that all seems reasonable to me. (I'm far more annoyed by Microsoft removing ESC as the dbox cancel key for errors in Excel than the disappearance of the ESC key)

<comment><USER12> Remapping the "caps lock" key to ESC has worked out really well for me.

<comment><USER13> It makes no sense to remap a home row key to such an infrequently used key. It's much better to remap Caps Lock to Control (by the way, how do you press Control A and Control E and Control L and Control R hundreds of times a day in bash? By reaching to the far away corner located Control? That's absolute madness).

Traditional UNIX keyboards had the control key in the position of where the caps lock key is now. If you remap your keyboard like that, bash and the Emacs shortcuts enabled throughout macOS will suddenly make A LOT of sense. After a few days it will seem be impossible to work in any other keyboard, which is further proof that the remapping is essential for working efficiently in a Unix environment.

I would personally remap the far away control key to act like an Escape key instead.

Sure, if you're a vi user, the caps lock as ESC will seem rational at first, but outside of vi, all other Unix tools work with control key combinations.

<comment><USER14> > Traditional UNIX keyboards had the control key in the position of where the > caps lock key is now

Couterpoint: when I was working at Lucent around 1999, they gave me a Sun workstation with a keyboard that had Esc instead of Caps Lock. There were others that had a Control key there, though.

Edit: I'm searching online and can't find a Sun keyboard with that layout. Now I'm wondering if I misremembered...

<comment><USER13> That's interesting. All the Sun keyboards that I have seen have the control key in the place of the caps lock key. I do know that some had the Esc key closer to the home row (back-tick position, I believe).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is in-line with the the 'under promise and over deliver" mantra I was taught at Apple Retail. Don't make any promises you can't keep, and silently start to fix issues like this.

Apple having a hardware fix for their keyboard disasters in this revision is also inline with their repair program they just issued.

<comment><USER16> > Apple having a hardware fix for their keyboard disasters in this revision is > also inline with their repair program they just issued.

Yes, they _just_ issued a repair program. Until precisely 3 weeks ago Apple refused to acknowledge the issue and forced customers to pay for costly repairs on their own dime. This patent was filed in September 2016. Apple was fucking lying through their teeth for a full 22 months and have been caught in that lie.

Frankly I'm amazed there isn't more outrage at this. How could anyone trust them going forward?

<comment><USER17> > _Yes, they just issued a repair program. Until precisely 3 weeks ago Apple > refused to acknowledge the issue and forced customers to pay for costly > repairs on their own dime. This patent was filed in September 2016. Apple > was fucking lying through their teeth for a full 22 months and have been > caught in that lie._

Do you expect companies to immediately jump to full repair programs the minute the first few users complain?

Especially when people will complain about anything.

Of course they'd wait to see if it's a widespread issue.

<comment><USER16> > Do you expect companies to immediately jump to full repair programs the > minute the first few users complain?

They designed a fix innovative enough to file a patent on, 22 months before they acknowledged the issue. That requires costly engineering time and organizational direction that is not used on a whim. They knew back then that this was a real issue.

<comment><USER17> > _They designed a fix innovative enough to file a patent on, 22 months before > they acknowledged the issue._

They work on changes, ideas, and improvements all the time, and they have 1000s of similar patents for everything, doesn't mean the work that lead to that patent was a response to the specific product issue -- could be just a patent about avoiding dust in keyboards in general (a problem that harks back to the ages).

> _That requires costly engineering time and organizational direction that is > not used on a whim._

Again, you'd be surprised. It just requires the idea, and someone to write it in patent-ease. They have patents for all sorts of ideas and some make it into products while others never see the light of day. They literally use those "on a whim". For Apple filling a patent is peanut money.

[https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/01/24/apple- exploring-s...](https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/01/24/apple-exploring- sensor-system-that-tells-users-when-their-shoes-wear-out)

[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/03/23/apple- pate...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/03/23/apple-patent- reveals-unusual-designs-iphone-laptop-hybrid/)

[http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-weight-lifting- fitness-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-weight-lifting-fitness- sensor-patent-2014-6)

[https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/10/16452402/apple-patent- wa...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/10/16452402/apple-patent-watch-band- automatic-adjustment-biometric)

[https://gizmodo.com/5058161/apple-patent-adds-quicklook- capa...](https://gizmodo.com/5058161/apple-patent-adds-quicklook-capabilities- to-mouse-pointer)

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/09/23/apple- cu...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/09/23/apple-cuts- headphone-jack/#4b8992d6d24d)

[https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-patents-lcd-screen- tha...](https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-patents-lcd-screen-that-plays- nice-with-sunglasses/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm sorry, but are people actually more concerned with the sound of the keyboard than the arrow keys?

It took me a week to get used to the sound. Six months in and I still can't reliably hit the arrow keys. It's as if they're designed to be as difficult as possible.

<comment><USER19> Put a bit of tape on the bottom half of the left and right keys if you need some tactile guidance and have old muscle memory. I do this on all my keyboards (my daily driver is a Microsoft sculpt) and it helps immensely with finding the correct key. Arrow keys in particular are just distant enough from default position to need that extra bit of tactile feedback.

<comment><USER20> On other keyboards, I've used a drop of CA glue (superglue) to add tactile feedback. Much like some keyboards have a bump on two of the home row keys

<comment><USER21> Clear nail polish works too. It's also a good makeshift loctite for tiny screws.

<comment><USER22> Never heard of this. Interesting.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, I worked at an optical lab to pay for college. We'd have customers come in with screws that wouldn't stay in so we'd use clear nail polish. I'm sure for some uses, loctite would be better, but nail polish does very good. We'd also use it on metal temple pieces when someone's facial oils had done a number on it. We'd buff the pieces smooth and coat with clear nail polish. Not a perfect fix, but would get someone who could afford new glasses by for a while longer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> My too-expensive 2015 MBP has a nonfunctional keyboard. I have to type using external keyboards, which is quite "fun". Apple wants $500.

Dragging an old $10 USB keyboard around with you makes you look like you _really_ like mechanical keyboards.

It's been about a year and a half now. I guess you get used to it.

<comment><USER24> There is a service program to replace these keyboards for free. They are even refunding people who paid to get their keyboards fixed before the program launched. This is almost a non-issue at this point if you can use a replacement computer while they fix yours.

<comment><USER25> They don't fix the keyboard. They only "reset" it which means you'll have to bring it in again once it accumulates enough issues to make it worthwhile. My first key failed within one month. Eventually seven keys came off with ny fingers as I typed.

"Non-issue" is comical word choice.

<comment><USER26> In my case, they are sending out to have the top case replaced. Can't speak for others, but they're not just kicking the can down the road.

The Apple genius also told me that the replacement part won't be identical to the original keyboard. We'll see if it's the new 3rd generation butterfly or just a tweaked 2nd gen.

<comment><USER27> That's my big problem with the whole "free" repair. If I send in my computer, what do I get back? Will it have some fix that prevents future problems or will I be SOL in a couple of weeks when one of the keys fails again?

> In my case, they are sending out to have the top case replaced. Can't speak > for others, but they're not just kicking the can down the road.

They built the thing so they have no real option other the replacing the whole top case. The in store repair is blowing air into the keyboard and hoping it fixes it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm curious to know if the membrane improves the feel of the keys. I hate how the butterfly switches feel.

<comment><USER29> Some articles say it feels a bit softer, but I doubt it will make much of a difference.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I'm confused. Are we supposed to be bandwagon mad that Apple took steps to fix their busted keyboard?

<comment><USER31> No, we're supposed to be mad because they still refuse to acknowledge that it was a real problem to begin with.

<comment><USER32> They did announced a repair program, is that not acknowledging the issue?

<comment><USER33> Is their keyboard replacement program valid for the new laptops and how long does it last?

I ask how long because my late 2013 MBP (granted, maxed out top of the line 15 inch) is still running like a complete champ and with how slow cpu/ram is increasing in power these days (mine has 4 cores/16GB ram and now 5 years later, you can only get 6 cores and 32GB of ram) I would expect a top of the line laptop to last a decade before recycling.

Laptop keyboards are not something you can easily/cheaply replace because if they fail, it totally screws over the "laptop" feature since now you need to pay to replace the entire keyboard or get an external one.

So no, laptop keyboards should have even higher standards for reliability these days and I haven't seen any commitment for these new ones.

<comment><USER34> > Laptop keyboards are not something you can easily/cheaply replace because if > they fail, it totally screws over the "laptop" feature since now you need to > pay to replace the entire keyboard or get an external one.

There are many laptops with easily replaceable keyboards, this is just typical Apple being Apple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Reading the comment under TFA it seems macbook keyboards have no water resistance? Seems a bit weird for such an expensive device.

<comment><USER36> Oh god. Forget about keyboards. I once watched a droplet of water so small that it had to have been affected more by subtle air currents than by gravity hit the edge of the trackpad on a pre-force-touch model and then vanish inside the gap, say around 2011, at which point the trackpad promptly stopped working properly for several days (phantom touches, cursor jumping, dead zones). Be careful out there with the expensive toys, eh?

<comment><USER37> OMG, this reminds me of when I wrecked my MBA after getting out of the shower!

A drop of water managed to break the power button such that is was constantly being pressed if no other key was pressed, causing hard shutdowns. BUT - if I used a tooth pick to stick one of the unused F-keys I could continue using the computer, with the downside that certain key combinations stopped working (mostly shift combos).

Until I figured out the toothpick fix coding was like a Lost episode in high speed, where all was lost if I forgot to press the button within the allotted timespan.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I am not sure what they did, but not only on my new 2016 laptop keyboard felt worse, it also broke around half a year in service (shift key just refused to work. Good think there's two of them, but majorly annoying still). I temporarily went back to a 2013 one and my first thought was "man, the old keyboard feels so much nicer"...

</comment><comment><USER39> I wonder if the keyboard replacement program Apple announced recently[1] for affected keyboards is replacing them with this newer design?

[1] [https://www.apple.com/support/keyboard-service-program- for-m...](https://www.apple.com/support/keyboard-service-program-for-macbook- and-macbook-pro/)

</comment><comment><USER40> Apple cast away Steve Jobs and then came begging for him to come back. He did and steered the company from the verge of collapse to a massive worldwide success. Since SJ passed away, Apple is getting worse each year. I guess this might be Jobs' spirit fading away and people thinking they could do better than him. Clearly, they fall short.

</comment><comment><USER41> <Apple has a patent for this exact tech designed to "prevent and/or alleviate contaminant ingress.">

This is a pretty sad day that sonething like this can be patented..

Anything wrapped in a cover can "prevent and/or alleviate contaminant ingress"

Does any patent office in the world really think nobody has thought of this before?

<comment><USER42> The patent [0] does seem a bit more extensive than just wrap it in a membrane. It discusses using venting/gas pressure (from depressing the key) to expel debris, for instance.

[0] [http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20180068808&IDK...](http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20180068808&IDKey=&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fpdfaiw.uspto.gov%2F)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What to do with a huge dedicated server? - <AUTHOR> Hey everyone. A few months ago I won a dedicated auction of a dedicated server but it's so powerful that I don't know what to do with it.
I allocated myself a KVM VPS inside of it with 16GB RAM, all cores (16) and 200GB Disk (Dedi has 420GB of RAID10 SAS drives) and unmetered 100mbit. I only use about 20% of that VPS.
I don't have spare IPs so I cannot create more VPSs unless I pay extra.
What would you do? <comment><USER2> Please help find a cure - folding@home - or similar.

[https://folding.stanford.edu/](https://folding.stanford.edu/)</comment>


How to build a mobile app for Force.com using jQM and push notifications - <AUTHOR> http://trigger.io/cross-platform-application-development-blog/2012/07/18/how-to-build-a-mobile-app-for-force-com-using-jquery-mobile-and-push-notifications/

<comment><USER2> Ok, trigger.io using Parse for push notifications is pretty awesome, but jQuery Mobile is just terrible. Seriously. Save yourself a lot of headache and use something like Kendo Mobile instead. It costs money, but saves a lot of time and headache working around jQuery Mobile's MANY, MANY problems.

Also, has anyone had any luck using Parse.com push notifications on PhoneGap/Cordova?</comment>


A set of sketchy style components for Android - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/m-zylab/SketchyComponent <comment><AUTHOR> SketchyComponent is a set of _sketchy style_ components. We provide basic drawables, shapes and some icons. It is easy for you to create sketchy style apps with SketchyComponent.</comment>


Show HN: Open science, easy collaboration, free data and code sharing - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzlBh6JR_wA

<comment><USER2> Disclaimer: This is a video teaser for Authorea</comment>


Wuala: Secure Cloud Storage - <AUTHOR> http://www.wuala.com/en/about/ I am evaluating this cloud service since yesterday, and it looks promising so far. Since data are not stored un-encrypted on the company servers, it means that there is not a web access to files, but I am not missing this feature that much. Real-time syncing works fine, although it seems to be a bit slower comparing to Dropbox. <comment><USER3> Seriously? Wuala is a service run by LaCie. LaCie is owned by Seagate, an American corporation. It doesn't matter where the servers are, because all the important decisions will be made in Cupertino, California.

[http://www.lacie.com/us/company/news/news.htm?id=10722](http://www.lacie.com/us/company/news/news.htm?id=10722)

Now, client-side encryption is a much more interesting aspect of their service, but is it worth the trouble if Wuala's clunky client takes 100 times longer than Dropbox to sync a file between two devices? Ditto for SpiderOak, JungleDisk, and every other backup/sync solution that I've used so far that boasts client-side encryption. And it wasn't due to Dropbox's deduplication, either. Some of them just talked lazily with the server for several minutes before they even started to upload/download any files.

<comment><USER4> Why not just store a TrueCrypt volume(s) in Dropbox?

<comment><USER5> This is assuming the Government doesn't force Dropbox to install a keylogger on their client to get users TrueCrypt passphrases and possibly keyfiles.

<comment><USER6> If Dropbox bundled a keylogger with the Dropbox client, I'm pretty sure it would eventually attract some attention...

<comment><USER7> Who's to say they can't be convinced to push a one-off update to your account/machine. Perhaps a transitory one, to help cover their tracks?

The underlying problem is that you're trusting closed client software from a third-party. Once that is running on your system, arguably it's game over as far as what Dropbox or its like can and can't do to you.

(If you trust them, ok. But when documents state that "they're next", many of us start to wonder. And again, this isn't just access to a server. Through their client software, this is access to your machine, that you've already granted.

Admittedly, I'm describing the typical Dropbox user scenario and not where the client is manually applying -- or not -- each update, and somehow supposedly gaining insight into the capabilities of each update/version before doing so. And I'm also ignoring various forms of restricting the access of the Dropbox client, although if they really want you, they and parties using them would have extensive resources to apply to breaking out of such constraints.)

<comment> mike-cardwell [https://grepular.com/Protecting_Your_GNU_Linux_System_from_D...](https://grepular.com/Protecting_Your_GNU_Linux_System_from_Dropbox)

<comment><USER8> Very interesting and useful, not just for securing DropBox either.

FYI this article suggests to use encfs for an encrypted folder in your dropbox, this comment [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5855465](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5855465) suggests that this might not be a wise choice, so you might want to (re)consider that part.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> """Do you plan to open the source code?

Currently not. Opening the source code of Wuala would consume quite some time and effort, and commitment to maintain it. If you are a software engineer and would like to see how Wuala works, feel free to apply for a job at Wuala."""

ಠ_ಠ So.. an alternative, but not the solution we need.

<comment><USER10> And what would having the source code change?

Unless you host the data yourself, if you don't trust Wuala there is no guarantee the binaries you use are built from the source code you have.

<comment><USER11> You can see the client code and confirm that it actually encrypts all of the data and use your own copy rather than their binaries.

Technically if the client is not sending not encrypted data and encrypts without a foul, then nothing they can do on the server-side can cause leaking your data.

<comment><USER10> Just two ideas on top of my head:

Through auto updates you can make sure that you get the backdoored version or you can have an exploit within the software to allow "silent" remote updates (good luck finding that).

So well... Either you do it end to end, or you trust the third party.

<comment><USER12> Nobody sane wants software to auto-update, especially not security-relevant software. This is in particular true if you reviewed the source code of the software at one point in time.

Furthermore, for the software to be able to even auto-update, it would have to be able to change its own binary. I don't know how this particular piece of software works, but it is possible to run FUSE 'drivers' as a user on Linux, with the binary safely sitting in /usr/bin, hence removing any possibility to auto-update (if you don't do shady tricks like placing an 'updated' binary somewhere and changing the user's PATH – and even that could – in theory – be avoided by mounting all user-writeable things noexec).

<comment><USER13> From [http://www.wuala.com/en/download/linux](http://www.wuala.com/en/download/linux):

> The package installs Wuala and registers our repository for further updates.

This is even more harmful that it sounds, as someone who has repo access (be it some evil staff member or, more possibly, inturder) may push not only malicious Wuala build, but any package with higher version number than in other repos (say, a linux-image-999.999 with a bundled rootkit) and if user was incautious it will be installed on system update.

<comment><USER12> That is not really auto-update (only if you enabled it system-wide) – and after reviewing the source code, which is necessary anyhow to make sure it is actually 'secure', you would then remove the file in /etc/apt/sources.list.d and be happy :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I used Wuala for couple of years, when it was free and allowed earning a much larger quota by sharing own drive space to host other user's data. I used it to keep around 100GB of my personal data. Used to be good while it lasted. Encrypted, distributed, redundant. Then LaCie bought it and turned it into a Dropbox clone. Now I use AeroFS, also tried TorrentSync. Both a roughly equal. I just felt lazy changing from already running and tuned AeroFS to anything else. If you have 24x7 homeserver at home it is very hard to justify paying for storage at dropbox or skydrive or google. I built my homeserver on the latest Atom, so it is frugal (~10W) and completely silent (no fan, SSD). It's dualcore 2.1GHz and has enough grunt for simultaneous NAS, torrents, and plays 1080p mkv to the attached TV. No place for Wuala in this arrangement anymore.

<comment><USER15> It's still free, I don't pay a dime.

<comment><USER14> how much storage you've got there?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Hello there, Gianluca from Wuala here.

First, this is how Wuala works: You as an user place a file in the client. The file gets encrypted (including using your password and username) and then gets uploaded and split into different pieces. We are currently using AES-256 for encryption (and RSA 2048 fpr signature and key exchange when sharing a folder and SHA-256 for integrity checks). The password does NOT get transmitted and there is nothing like a master key or similar. That means in worst ever case if someone would have access to our servers somehow, they'd get a piece of encrypted data which is not readable and not decryptable (not even for us as the provider.

Secondly, some people tend to confuse security with anonymity. Wuala is secure, but how about anonymity? We have your email address, your username and we know how much storage space you have. As you see, that is not anonymous, but has nothing to do with the security of your files.

Are we planning to open source the code? Eventually yes, but as we already stated, this takes a lot of time and effort. Oh and yes, we are nice guys. Not because we're Swiss, but in general :)

<comment><USER17> Are you planning on allowing camera upload? I can't get people using your product without it...

<comment><USER16> we are planning camera upload yes :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> So honest question, but how is having your data stored in Switzerland (where Wuala is based) any different than having it in the US? Or is it just the promise of local encryption that makes it safer?

Some purported info about data protection for Switzerland:

[http://www.dataprotection.ch/en/disclosing-personal- data.asp](http://www.dataprotection.ch/en/disclosing-personal-data.asp)

> _Restrictions on disclosure

The DPA does not permit the disclosure of sensitive data or personality profiles to third parties without lawful justification. The consent of the data subject can constitute a lawful justification. Breach of this prohibition is an offence if knowledge of the sensitive data has been gathered in the course of a professional activity requiring knowledge of such data and can be punished by a fine of up to CHF 10'000.--. If the fine is not paid, it can be replaced by imprisonment for up to 3 months._

And Wuala's own policy: [http://www.wuala.com/en/about/privacy](http://www.wuala.com/en/about/privacy)

> _6\. Disclosure to third parties

Basically, your data is not transmitted to third parties. However, LaCie may release personal data if the law requires it to do so or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to comply with any laws or respond to a court order, subpoena, or search warrant or to protect LaCie's rights and interests. Furthermore, you expressly agree that LaCie can disclose personal data to identified third parties (e.g. owners of intellectual property rights) and/or government enforcement bodies in order to enforce the General terms and conditions, particularly in case of founded indications that the laws or the rights of a user or of third parties, particularly copyrights, other industrial property rights or personal rights, have been violated , insofar as such is necessary._

<comment><USER19> Due to the manner in which data is client-side encrypted (password-based keys, password not stored on their servers), they can hand your (encrypted) data to any government with no ability to decrypt it. Now, depending on the outcome of some cases before US Courts right now, you might be compelled to provide the password to unencrypt the data. It's also worth noting that the password-based asymmetric encryption schemes are less secure than the arbitrary key based ones, but still it's better than nothing. In my case, I'm sold by the fact that they provide more free storage than Dropbox and have a much better Linux client (based on a FUSE plugin, a much nicer architecture in general).

<comment><USER20> As it's closed source isn't it entirely possible that the client keeps copies of the keys that are accessible on demand from the server end (I guess that counts as a backdoor of sorts).

<comment><USER21> Open source is an incomplete defense against this - I don't know of a way of proving what software is running on a remote host.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I recently tried replacing Dropbox with Wuala because of privacy concerns. I failed, and in the process realized how successful Dropbox has been in creating an awesome user experience!

I'm still looking for a locally encrypted Dropbox-alternative. So if any of you are making one, please speak up :)

(Edit) I should specify that it was the user experience that made me give up on Wuala, and any proper Dropbox alternative would need to offer at least decent user experience. Looking forward to trying the alternatives you are suggesting :)

<comment><USER23> On my "somebody should create this, and I might eventually" list is an open source, P2P, optionally server-backed, encrypted Dropbox replacement.

Bittorrent's Sync almost gets there, but isn't open source. I haven't really looked at it, but ownCloud might do what I want.

<comment><USER24> The ownCloud sync client for OS X pins one cpu core to 100% usage on my fairly new i7 mbp, which effectively drains the battery quite quickly if you don't notice.

Then it also seems to do a full scan of teh entire folder each time it sync's, if you then have for example your iPhoto library (usually a few GBs) there, the sync process will consume lots of CPU and tend to be out of date across devices.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Sounds cool! I've been looking for a trustable Dropbox alternative so I don't have to manually encrypt the contents all the time. I'll download and try it out real q-

> Make sure Java [...] is installed.

:C

<comment><USER26> I'm surprised that there isn't a "cloud encryption" software available yet. It shouldn't be a complex project to encrypt & rename -> upload // download -> decrypt & rename. You could store the original file names in the cloud in an encrypted sqlite database or something.

<comment><USER27> Here you go: [https://www.boxcryptor.com/en/boxcryptor- classic](https://www.boxcryptor.com/en/boxcryptor-classic)

It's an offline application that runs on your computer that is transparent to your actions. You just use the drive BC mounts instead of where Dropbox tells you to use, the rest automatic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> It's from Lacie, so no thank you. I bought a Lacie drive and proceeded to copy all my stuff onto it. Before I could get comfortable with it (so within the first six months of purchase) and before I backed up my stuff, the drive failed. I contacted Lacie about it and they proceeded to try and sell me a service whereby they'd recover my data for €300. That would've brought my total spend on the drive up to around £400. I begged and pleaded with them, pointed out how unsavoury such a business practice was and all to no avail. The drive has just been sitting down since with the data unrecovered. Personal memories, music, films and professional data too. I've tried to recover the data but that didn't work and I honestly feel ripped off. As a result, I've vowed to never do business with Lacie again and to warn everyone of how unscrupulous they are. Beware of Lacie and their subsidiaries.

<comment><USER29> Well, they should have replaced the drive if it failed within 6 months. But expecting them to go to the lengths of recovering your data for free is a bit hopeful.

<comment><USER28> Hopeful yes, but no one expects a drive failure before even half of the warranty has expired surely?

<comment><USER30> The whole point of backups is that you should never expect a single hard drive to stay alive, no matter how young it is. Lots of hard drives with defects die early. For your own sanity, it is best to think of any data you have only one physical copy of as data that may not be there tomorrow. Personally I don't get comfortable until my most important data exists in two physical locations, so fire is not a risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Or use BitTorrent Sync instead. I'm quite pleased with it and moved all my data off Dropbox.

[http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html](http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html)

<comment><USER32> Not Open Source either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Company may be in Europe, servers might be in Europe, you might be in Europe. Nothing guarantees you that your data won't be routed through US where it can be tapped into. That's the primary issue for me with the whole PRISM scandal.

<comment><USER34> Data is encrypted client-side before being sent so I believe this is a non- issue.

<comment><USER33> Data being encrypted doesn't mean it can't be archived in that Utah data center. What capabilities they have there and what they do with it, we don't know. Substantial decryption breakthrough was hinted at in several reports, but what it is exactly - we have no idea.

<comment><USER35> >> Substantial decryption breakthrough was hinted at in several reports, but what it is exactly - we have no idea.

Could you provide a link to those hints, please?

<comment><USER33> This is the first one that comes to my mind: [http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/al...](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/)

 _But "this is more than just a data center," says one senior intelligence official who until recently was involved with the program. The mammoth Bluffdale center will have another important and far more secret role that until now has gone unrevealed. It is also critical, he says, for breaking codes. And code-breaking is crucial, because much of the data that the center will handle—financial information, stock transactions, business deals, foreign military and diplomatic secrets, legal documents, confidential personal communications—will be heavily encrypted. According to another top official also involved with the program, the NSA made an enormous breakthrough several years ago in its ability to cryptanalyze, or break, unfathomably complex encryption systems employed by not only governments around the world but also many average computer users in the US. The upshot, according to this official: "Everybody's a target; everybody with communication is a target."_

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Not to be cynic, but what prevents those guys from putting a backdoor as well? Yeah, sure, Swiss guys are good. Are they?

In the end, IMHO, the only software which can be trusted is the FOSS. From this perspective Dropbox is good: the client is open source. Of course nothing is encrypted in there.

<comment><USER37> Dropbox's client is not open source by any stretch of the imagination.

<comment><USER36> [https://www.dropbox.com/help/247/en](https://www.dropbox.com/help/247/en)

On the first I was like "ops, said bullshit"... but actually it seems like it's GPL.

<comment><USER37> That is only nautilus-dropbox (file manager integration) and the installer. Dropbox itself is distributed as a binary blob.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I've been using this since the very early alpha status. It's a really nice storage solution with a very sophisticated technology too.

For anyone curious about the technology behind here is an early tech talk from one of the founders. It may be a little bit outdated now but still interesting: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xKZ4KGkQY8](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xKZ4KGkQY8)

</comment><comment><USER39> Despite thorough researches and testing, I have never been able to find a good alternative to Dropbox in term of seamless synchronisation of my files, and accessibility across all the platforms I use.

To secure my data, I just use BoxCryptor. It creates an encrypted volume within my Dropbox. It is free for non commercial use.

<comment><USER40> Have a look at BitTorrent Sync: [http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html](http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html)

One advantage is that there's no third-party storage of data involved.

<comment><USER39> Thank you, will have a look.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Wuala is great, but the short summary is a bit misleading. There is a real risk of government agencies forcing LaCie to push you a client update that removes encryption, in an older version of their T&C / product info, this was mentioned explicitly.

<comment><USER42> I also don't buy the whole premise of US government - bad, EU governments - good.

When push comes to shove, governments everywhere will have no qualms about invading people's privacies en masse.

Human nature is the same everywhere. Power corrupts everywhere.

<comment><USER43> Switzerland is a non-EU country. Switzerland has a long tradition of civil liberties, rights and participation. This results in regular legally binding referendums on the one side and tax evasions from civilians of other countries on the other.

<comment><USER36> The fact that they have been "good guys" until now doesn't say anything about the fact that they will be "good guys" forever.

<comment><USER43> This applies to good guys all over the world since ever. Btw, I did not state anywhere that I consider Switzerland as being the good guys. Applying qualities of character to a state is misleading IMHO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Wuala is terrible. It is constantly eating up 30% of cpu when idling. Sometimes it doesn't sync at all for a few days. There is a "Use LAN" feature, but it doesn't work.

</comment><comment><USER45> The problem here is: the people who has data (Wuala) also determine how the files are encrypted.

No box is ever unbreakable, however, the chance of breaking it is much bigger if you have the locksmith holding on to the box.

I've talked a little bit about this in my humble blog post not too long ago about a simplistic view of security in the cloud: [http://vuongnguyen.com/personal-business-cloud- security.html](http://vuongnguyen.com/personal-business-cloud-security.html).

-V.

</comment><comment><USER46> There released an interesting paper regarding their key managment for multiple users, when they were a reserach project at the ETH.

Cryptree: A folder tree structure for cryptographic file systems - [http://boga.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/res/Docs/wuala- cryptree...](http://boga.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/res/Docs/wuala-cryptree.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER35> I'm not a security expert neither do I understand cryptography hence the question: I assume they are not using the original password to encrypt data. They are generating a symmetric encryption key and encrypt it with the original password, storing it along with the encrypted data on their servers. The question is how secure the encryption on symmetric key? What if it is easily brutfocable?

</comment><comment><USER47> We've been recommending this as an alternative to Dropbox where I work (in the UK) for a few years now, for exactly the reasons given in the title text. Yes, its a shame its Java-based, but they do have clients for Windows, Mac, Linux iOS and Android.

(No, I'm not connected to Wuala in any way, I don't even use the service myself, but as an alternative to Dropbox I think its a good one.)

</comment><comment><USER48> Regardless of the service's value I found the security explanation on this page ([https://www.wuala.com/en/learn/technology](https://www.wuala.com/en/learn/technology)) to be a great example of clear communication about the differences between client-side encryption, SSL security, etc.

</comment><comment><USER49> For what it's worth, what you need is:

\-- a company with no connections to the United States. Ideally, it should be privately owned by a foreign individual known for strong privacy views and who has promised never to sell.

\-- local encryption

\-- open source ("trust but verify")

\-- actually works

Wuala, from the comments here, meets only one of those four requirements.

<comment><USER50> Uh, just one? The way I count it's 2.5 out of 4.

It's a Swiss company, owned by LaCie (French) which is again owned by Seagate (US). So I would say that's half a point.

Data is en-/decrypted locally. There's a reason they don't have a web interface, but require you to use the client.

It's indeed not open source. Would be nice if it was.

And it actually does work. There's room for improvement (isn't there always?), but in my experience it's working well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Another alternative is hubiC. It's run by OVH, perhaps one of the most "techno-geek" companies in Europe that you can find… I don't see them feeding content to governments without any reason.

In fact, they opened a DC in Canada and not the U.S. and one can guess why.

<comment><USER52> _In fact, they opened a DC in Canada and not the U.S. and one can guess why._

Because it's culturally closer, I'd guess. OVH is a French company, and their Canadian data center is just outside of Montreal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> It requires Java?

<comment><USER54> Yes, just installed and then immediately uninstalled after I got the 'install java' prompt :(

It's not Wuala's fault, but forcing me to put java back on my desktop is a big hurdle. It's going to take an absolutely _amazing_ piece of software to make me deal with that horrendous bug-ridden security hole again.

<comment><USER55> I don't trust the Java sandbox to protect me while running arbitrary code. So I don't use the Java browser plugin.

But I don't see how the desktop runtime is a security hole (you're running binaries you trust outside a sandbox) and I very much doubt it's any more buggy than your average Python, Ruby, Node.js, etc. runtime. Or, for that matter, your average native library.

<comment><USER54> Can you (easily) install one without the other? I know I can go around my browsers and disable the plugins after an install, but then I'm going to have to do the same thing each time there's a java security update and the runtime gets upgraded. Not to mention Oracle's crappy habits of bundling toolbars & other crud along with each security patch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> workhere-io There's also Jottacloud ([http://www.jottacloud.com/](http://www.jottacloud.com/)), a Norwegian Dropbox alternative.

<comment><USER56> Interesting. Anyone got any experience with Jottacloud they wouldn't mind sharing?

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> rsync.net. Zurich, Hong Kong. Warrant Canary[1].

Straight up unix filesystem (ZFS) so you can point duplicity[2] (or anything else) at it.

If you need something like dropbox, we are NOT for you.

We have special rates for HN folks. Email us.

[1] [http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt](http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt)

[2] [http://duplicity.nongnu.org/](http://duplicity.nongnu.org/)

</comment><comment><USER58> Problem with Wuala is that you can't access your data when you are offline, unlike DropBox, which stores an unencrypted version on your harddisk.

</comment><comment><USER59> How about Dropbox + TrueCrypt + Automount? Files are decrypted in memory, files you need to share you can keep in unencrypted format.

<comment><USER25> I've been doing this with a small volume (1 MiB), but it always kept me wondering how much traffic a minor change in an encrypted volume causes - <USER2> a single bit flip should drastically change the container if the encryption is good. I wouldn't want to upload for an hour each time I see a typo in my files.

<comment><USER60> No. From the truecrypt FAQ [0]:

> The ciphertext block size used by TrueCrypt is 16 bytes (i.e., 128 bits).

Meaning one bitflip should only sync 16 bytes since dropbox only transmits deltas. Of course this now depends on dropbox' delta sync implementation.

From a quick google search [1]:

> For what it's worth, Dropbox claims to create hashes on every 4MB of each > file. That way, if you change a contiguous 2MB of a 100MB file, it will > likely only need to upload 4MB (or 8MB if you cross into a second 4MB block) > to re-sync the file.

So worst case if a bitflip happens to change a truecrypt block that doesn't align with dropbox' chunks you're looking at around 8MiB. That's still quite an amout for a bitflip but i think it's feasible with todays connection speeds.

[0] [http://www.truecrypt.org/faq](http://www.truecrypt.org/faq)

[1] [http://serverfault.com/questions/52861/how-does-dropbox- vers...](http://serverfault.com/questions/52861/how-does-dropbox-version- upload-large-files)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Floodgate is opening up just like when Google shutdown it's reader. Let's see who will be the winner.

</comment><comment><USER62> EncFS + Dropbox

Although this won't help if you get a rootkit in an update, since the source is closed.

</comment><comment><USER63> Yeah, i'm sure the French would never have access to the servers in their country...

</comment><comment><USER64> another dropbox alternative [https://github.com/haiwen/seafile](https://github.com/haiwen/seafile) on you own servers

</comment><comment><USER62> What about EncFS (or some other encryption) + Bittorrent Sync?

</comment><comment><USER65> How does this compare to Tarsnap?

</comment><comment><USER66> Way to be opportunistic!

</comment><comment><USER67> 5GB Free. Awesome!</comment>


Nobody. Understands. Punctuation. - <AUTHOR> http://stilldrinking.org/nobody-understands-punctuation <comment><USER3> > An Oxford comma is not a flip switch in an author's voice, it's a decision > made in the moment to maintain the flow of the idea.

I am more than happy to truly believe this premise (and if you read some of the things I write, and how I use punctuation, I hope the reader will agree ;P), and can come up with situations where the extra comma "breaks the rythm" and cases where it "makes the sentence".

> Momentum, syncopation, rhythm and pattern make a sentence flow, because > writers are trying to transfer the voices in their heads into yours.

However, I simply can't bring myself to read this without speaking "rythm, and pattern": the sentence is expertly crafted and frankly sounds amazing; but, if I accept the author's premise that he really and truly carefully decided to not put a comma there because he didnt want me to pause, the sentence sounds horrible: in fact, this sentence sounds pretty un-lyrical to me unless I also add a pause--yes, not one but two added commas--after "pattern", at which point I would say it sounds downright _powerful_ ; I could, alternatively, appreciate a smaller pause between "momentum" and "syncopation", which would form a grouping that I think _almost_ sounds even better? (though which I have a difficult time "performing"), but then we have to give up the first comma as well: "momentum/syncopation, rythm and pattern, are"... I really would love to hear the author read this sentence of the article out loud.

<comment><USER4> Without the commas, it sounds to me like the author is excited and animated about his topic, tumbling forward. I imagine him gesticulating wildly. I guess you were imagining more of a measured pronouncement, with paused emphasis to cause us to carefully consider each element. As he says, the punctuation imparts different styles.

I think the tumbling-forward interpretation works better with the list having four elements. They're meant to be a cumulative item, making his point as much by the number of different elements as by the meaning of each individual one. This style works better when it gives the impression of rushing.

<comment><USER5> I've read that sentence a few times now both imposing and not imposing the imaginary comma in my head and it still sounds like either a mistake or a particularly weird choice of rhythm.

Without an oxford comma, a four letter list sounds like "This...that...c and d do that!" \-- which in turn sounds like naming two things, then making a completely different sentence about the final two things. People don't talk that way out loud when they mean to include the first two items in the list.

<comment><USER6> The pace of the sentence is accelerating, launching into the remainder of the sentence.

Momentum - 3 syllables

Syncopation - 4 syllables

Rhythm and pattern - 5 syllables

<comment><USER7> That's true, but that's also why it doesn't work. Think about the stress patterns that actually constitute rhythm:

      momENtum, SYNcoPATion, RHYthm and PATtern
      ___--___  ---__---___  ---___ ___ ---____

Nonomatapoeia, I fear.

<comment><USER6> I 'hear' only one stress in each.

moMENtum [beat] syncoPATion [beat] rhythm-and-PATtern [no beat so continues straight on]

And all three patterns, including the beat, take the same time, with the remainder of the sentence continuing at the same speed as PATtern.

<comment><USER8> [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rhythm](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rhythm): /ˈɹɪ.ð(ə)m/

[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pattern](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pattern): /ˈpat(ə)n/ or /ˈpædəɹn/

<comment><USER6> I do have an English (UK) accent if that helps. But of course it's not unusual to stress different syllables when reading poetry or prose for effect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I found this in the source of the page.

<!-- So this guy we just interviewed at my current job wrote this little script to see if a product update for some company had come out. Every 10 seconds the script urllib'ed the page, checked the length of the html - literally len(html) - against the length it was last time it checked. He wrote a blog post about this script. A freaking blog post. He also described himself as "something of a child prodigy" despite, in another post, saying he couldn't calculate the area of a slice of pizza because "area of a triangle with a curved edge is beyond my Google-less math skills." Seriously dude? I haven't taken geomtry in 20 years, and pi*r^2/8 seems pretty freaking obvious.

The script also called a ruby script to send him a tweet which another script was probably monitoring to text his phone so he could screenshot the text and post to facebook via instagram.

I think the "millenials" \- who should be referred to as generation byte - <USER2> undeserved flak, as all generations do, for being younger and prettier and living in a different world.

But this kid calling himself a prodigy is a clear indication of way too many gold stars handed out for adequacy, so to ensure that no such abominable script ever does anything besides bomb somebody's twitter account, this comment shows up exactly 50% of the time, and I encourage others to do the same. \-->

Found my new favorite blogger; s'cept for PG.

<comment><USER10> If that's what made him your favorite, you really need to read his earlier post that really blew up in popularity. It's a great read. [http://stilldrinking.org/programming- sucks](http://stilldrinking.org/programming-sucks)

<comment><USER11> That just made my Sunday night. Another perk is it seems friendly enough to show non-programmers, but I dont think they will appreciate it as much.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I understand punctuation fine, and I think the author is wrong. While commas in general are not governed by hard rules, the "Oxford comma" is an extremely specific use of the comma: to separate the listing of 3 or more equal items. There's nothing artistic about it; it's exactly the sort of situation that simply needs to be consistent to be readable.

No offense to the author, who might be reading this, but it's possible to be too proud of your writing history and cleverness. Many people have had English teachers they loved, and any good writer has had a moment where they realized, or were told, to throw out the rules.

It's essential to note that these moments always come in high school or college or later, when kids already have more than a decade of writing instruction under their belts. No one tells a second-grader to throw out all the rules.

Because you're not actually supposed to throw them out. It's just a teaching technique to break through bad writing habits.

<comment><USER13> On a tangent about consistency, I find it amusing when journalists slave themselves to the rules and create silly sentences. The one I'm thinking of is the convention that numbers under 10 are spelled out, and numbers 10 or higher are put in numeral form. Some journalists abandon consistency to stick to the 'rules': "the policy is predicted to have payoffs in eight to 12 years". I think I've even seen it in hyphenated form, too.

<comment><USER14> The real reason for not using numerals is that in most typesets, and even how we learn to write them, they look like capital letters. This causes the reader to draw unnecessary attention to the numbers themselves in the same way which ALL CAPS might. "The five of us went skiing," vs. "the 5 of us went skiing" \-- the number of skiers isn't interesting, the activity is the important part of that sentence and the number is secondary information.

The author of the article is right that writing is both a skill and an art form. The skilled writer can alter the way a sentence is understood by their choice of punctuation, but abandoning the rules should only be done when the author understands the consequences of breaking those rules; using explicit choices to guide the user to deeper understanding of the intended meaning.

"The policy is predicted to have payoffs in 8 to 12 years," "the policy is predicted to have payoffs in eight to 12 years," or "the policy is predicted to have payoffs in eight to twelve years." If I were writing that sentence, I would probably go with the first style as I believe it is the best for conveying what is important to the reader. All three say the same thing, but mixing the spelt and numeral forms is the most distracting and least legible.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Most of the time, you can use the Oxford comma, the non-Oxford comma or any other kind of comma, and it just doesn't make any difference.

But sometimes you need it. Here's an example:

"There are two hard problems in Computer Science: naming things, cache expiration, and off-by-one errors."

Take out the comma and you ruin the joke - at least to my ears:

"There are two hard problems in Computer Science: naming things, cache expiration and off-by-one errors."

<comment><USER16> A panda walks into a café. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and proceeds to fire it at the other patrons.

"Why?" asks the confused, surviving waiter amidst the carnage, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"Well, I'm a panda," he says. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry in the manual and, sure enough, finds an explanation. "Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

<comment><USER17> This isn't actually a case of the Oxford comma, though--it's just incorrect.

<comment><USER18> *points to the fourth sentence

The joke.

<comment><USER19> Still not an Oxford comma.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I was never taught about the Oxford Comma (I'm not a native speaker), but trained myself to use it consistently after seeing this [http://jaced.com/blogpix/2013/washingtonlincolnoxford.jpg](http://jaced.com/blogpix/2013/washingtonlincolnoxford.jpg).

This has made me rethink though - he makes a great point that writing is about transferring the voices in my head into the readers', so I'll keep that in mind for any creative writing.

Heck, not just creative writing, I can think of more than one occasion where I put an Oxford Comma in a press release even though it read better to me without.

Thanks for sharing!

<comment><USER21> Consider though:

        To my mother, Ayn Rand, and God [1]

Is the writer's mother Ayn Rand?

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_comma#Creating_ambiguity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_comma#Creating_ambiguity)

<comment><USER22> Any use of commas in a list for something other than separating items, regardless of Oxford comma, makes for ambiguous sentences. That one is just written to make the Oxford comma a culprit. Try:

        To my mother, Ayn Rand, Jimmy, Bobbie and Sue.

<comment><USER23> > Any use of commas in a list for something other than separating items, > regardless of Oxford comma, makes for ambiguous sentences.

I've always felt that the use of parentheses for grouping is under-explored:

        To ((my mother (Ayn Rand)) and God).

Of course, this conflicts with the well ingrained tendency to subconsciously delete parentheticals, but, while pipe-dreaming, one could imagine different marks:

        To {{my mother {Ayn Rand}} and God}.

I'm actually serious about my belief that this sort of thing is logically sensible, but recognise its practical drawbacks ((a) everyone likes the visual appearance of Lisp, right? and (b) everyone speaks Esperanto or Lojban because of its logical primacy, right?).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Loved his points about how you can hear punctuation in speech:

"Morgan Freeman is liberal with the commas, and Jon Stewart is a master of parentheses. Lewis Black made a career out of the exclamation point while Dennis Leary barely uses any punctuation at all."

Overall, a great Sunday morning read.

<comment><USER25> it's a good point, but isn't that the point of punctuation?

<comment><USER5> A period is a good point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> > An Oxford comma is not a flip switch in an author's voice, it's a decision > made in the moment to maintain the flow of the idea.

This is simply a run-on, not a use of an Oxford comma as I understand it. And these bother me a lot.

"An oxford comma is not a flip switch in an author's voice"

is a grammatically complete sentence. So is

"it's a decision made in the moment to maintain the flow of the idea."

Separate them by a strong punctuation mark. If you want the rhythm of a comma, separate them by a semi-colon in preference to a stop. Semi-colons are made for this.

<comment><USER27> Several people in this thread are claiming that punctuation is used to convey information about how to pronounce the sentence.

You're saying (and I tend to agree with you) that written punctuation is about meaning, and not about where a speaker would pause to take a breath.

Can these two be kludged into a unified meaning? "Write better so that your written words sound good when spoken"?

<comment><USER26> I'm saying that punctuation has already solved this problem with the semi- colon. If you have two sentences where the second follows the other so closely that there is barely a breath in between, use a semi-colon rather than a stop. You convey both meaning and flow at the same time, and you keep the grammaticasters happy.

<comment><USER28> Ah, I love semicolons -- but they're not always as aesthetic as commas (and vice-versa). I find this is mostly a question of overall style and context (the more pretentious the text, the more out of place the semicolon; unless you're aspiring to be a pretentious (post-)modern text -- then the semicolon wins).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The problem is that many people have horrible rhythm when speaking, too. Telling them to just transfer that on the page results in horrible punctuation.

</comment><comment><USER30> Only tangentially related, but it's the weekend, so what the hell, enjoy:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_i1xk07o4g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_i1xk07o4g)

<comment><USER31> Knew it before I even clicked the link. They've gone a bit downhill since their first album, but the first (on which this song appears) is a classic.

<comment><USER32> Are you kidding me? I can pick 3 songs off of Modern Vamps that are better then the whole first album combined. I would admit Contra is a little bit of a hit and miss album, but not incredibly more so then the first one. I mean, who actually listens to I Stand Corrected? Or M79? And Contra gave us Giving Up The Gun, which is probably the second best VW song _ever_.

(The three songs by the way, if there was any doubt, would be "Hannah Hunt", "Diane Young" and "Hudson" or "Step" depending on taste)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is really nice to have footnotes just next to the line there are called from[0].

I rarely stumble upon a web page that actually improves on the paper format but this one does.

[0] There must be a better way to phrase this.

<comment><USER34> Except they're invisible if you have JS disabled, as I do for normal browsing.

<comment><USER35> A similar effect can be achieved using just CSS: float the marginal note left or right, set the width and apply (negative) horizontal margins to move it outside the main text block, and if required use relative positioning to shift it up so the baselines of the body text and the marginal note align.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Punctuation is about rhythm. Writing is about communication. And I start sentences with "and" all the time.

I hardly know my grammar rules and I don't care. But I do care about making sure that writing is clear.

That's the basic rule I've applied to the hundreds of books that I've edited. Oxford comma. Huh?

</comment><comment><USER37> This article makes me think about a question to which I still haven't found an answer:

For me (I'm not a native english speaker by the way), when reading out loud a text, all commas are "translated" by a pause. But there are some sentences for which I don't understand why a comma is used, as I wouldn't pause at the comma when saying these sentences out loud.

For example:

> The problem is that many people have horrible rhythm when speaking, too.

or

> Thank you, John.

In both these sentences, when reading them out loud, I wouldn't pause where there is a comma. And I actually never heard someone pause at these commas.

So am I mistaken in thinking that commas should always be orally translated by pauses? Or do you pause at the comma when saying these sentences?

<comment><USER38> It's a safe bet that any rule regarding English grammar that includes the word "always" is either a) mistaken, or b) so obvious that you probably wouldn't be questioning it in the first place.

Commas began life as indicators of pause, but in modern English they are indicators of clause -- that is, they indicate grammatical structure. The places where we don't normally use pauses to indicate structure in spoken English (but still use commas in written English) are where you're noticing the discrepancy. Specifically, it's a common practice that you should use a comma to separate an adverb (like "too") from the rest of the sentence when it's being used to modify the sentence as a whole. This isn't a struct rule, and some people prefer a style of omitting such commas.

<comment><USER37> Thank you for your explanation, I was not aware of the "comma to separate an adverb" rule in written English.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Half the time when I hear Barack Obama speak, I imagine his speechwriter typing out ", and this nation cannot afford that<period><tab><tab><tab>So I have been..." For every damn sentence.

</comment><comment><USER40> If you have an hour and this topic really interests you, I'd recommend David Foster Wallace's essay "Authority and American Usage" \- [http://wilson.med.harvard.edu/nb204/AuthorityAndAmericanUsag...](http://wilson.med.harvard.edu/nb204/AuthorityAndAmericanUsage.pdf).

He covers (very fairly and entertainingly, IMO) the major divide between linguistic prescriptivists and descriptivists, and why both camps have a point.

</comment><comment><USER41> Footnote number 2 is absolutely priceless.

<comment><USER42> Footnote number two made me think this guy is awfully self-righteous and obnoxious, and the weird defense of his beloved English teacher made me kind of uncomfortable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Is it just me, or does this guy sound a little like James Mickens, the hilarious Microsoft blogger? [http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2013/12/24/10484...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2013/12/24/10484402.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER44> The English teacher beginning his lesson with "So." reminded me of this piece:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/us/22iht- currents.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/us/22iht-currents.html)

(SO this is about the word "so.")

</comment><comment><USER45> > Momentum, syncopation, rhythm and pattern make a sentence flow, because > writers are trying to transfer the voices in their heads into yours.

Had to read this several times because the horrible punctuation made the sentence unreadable without thinking.

</comment><comment><USER46> > Punctuation started with periods that told the speaker when to take a breath

A great book that looks at how punctuation characters date back to ancient greek writing and how it was used to show how text should be read is Shady Characters: Ampersands, Interrobangs and other Typographical Curiosities:

[http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EAA6QHC/](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EAA6QHC/)

Edit: You can read the first chapter in the preview with pictures of the ancient texts

</comment><comment><USER47> Ouch. Fairly nicely written piece about punctuation, and generally nicely formatted with justification, properly indented paragraphs, use of em dashes, and so on; and then it uses straight quotes everywhere. While I'm generally used to straight quotes everywhere on the web, the additional standard set by the rest of the typesetting and the topic meant that their omission here was that much more glaring.

<comment><USER48> The piece also asserted that "word" and "whirred" are "pronounced exactly the same".

They aren't. The first consonant is different; IPA [w] vs. IPA [hw].

<comment><USER49> In a good number of English dialects [w] and [hw] have collapsed together.

<comment><USER50> Yep, to the point of /hw/ being considered comical by many speakers.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_wh#Wine...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_wh#Wine.E2.80.93whine_merger)

Edit: I just want to point out that despite what the map in the linked article says, the merger is complete in most of the urban areas in the Southeast as well. You'll usually only hear /hw/ in rural areas.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> _In this case, em dashes are doing something similar to a pair of commas, which can also denote side info but they do it more casually, and parentheses._

"and parentheses" what? And they are also like em dashes?

Edit: Thank you for the explanation folks. For whatever reason I found the use of commas to denote the aside very difficult to parse. I think maybe it's because of the first comma after "In this case."

<comment><USER51> try:

> In this case, em dashes are doing something similar to a pair of commas > (which can also denote side info but they do it more casually) and > parentheses.

The commas after "pair of commas" are the parenthetical commas he is describing

<comment><USER52> I would have shown the example with em dashes instead of parentheses as that was the point of the sentence.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I enjoyed this essay immensely. I'm a bit of a pedant and a language geek (I have a collection of favourite archaisms!) but my favourite saying about our language is:

"English is a juggernaut truck: it goes on regardless"

I find it useful to say that to myself when I encounter some of the net's more egregious assaults on the language. It's not an assault, it's the language doing what it does.

<comment><USER54> Have you published your list? I, for one, would like to peruse it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> As with most art forms, the key is to learn the rules and then how to break them. Caring about minutiae like Oxford commas matters to people who know the rules including many who don't know when to break them, but pedants who cling to rules beyond their point of uselessness don't make the rules not worth understanding.

</comment><comment><USER56> Nobody understands typography either. The sin of the article is setting text justified without hyphenation.

</comment><comment><USER57> > and give the teachers a few things to decorate with smiley faces and Xs

This little snippet made it pretty clear to me that the vast majority of my teachers weren't educating, but ticking check-boxes on whether I had fulfilled X,Y, and Z requirements.

</comment><comment><USER58> This was a joy to read. I highly recommend reading it out loud to someone. Try the techniques the author mentioned, and laugh out loud when he uses one of the techniques ironically.

A wonderfully written piece of art. And excellently communicated, too.

</comment><comment><USER59> I support the use of the Oxford comma because I love my parents, Cher and the Pope.

</comment><comment><USER60> On semicolon, this is a good read :[http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon)

</comment><comment><USER61> Sure, the oxford comma is not important unless it is disambiguating. But let's go meta and ask, Why do you care so much that people care? It's not like great or even good writers are getting hung up on whether or not to use the oxford comma. It's not like people loose jobs over the oxford comma.

Everyone with half a brain knows those rules are guidelines. Just like how you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition at. This post is the long form, literary version of feeding the trolls.

</comment><comment><USER62> Did I miss a joke right at the end, or was the whole essay demeaned by getting could and couldn't wrong in the final sentence?

<comment><USER63> I think you did miss a joke, or at least didn't parse the sentence correctly (which probably negates his point in and of itself).

After a bit of clean up, it reads "If Yoda could make his point clear, nobody should give a shit about Oxford commas."

<comment><USER62> Ah! I was parsing it as something like "If Yoda could give a shit about Oxford commas, you shouldn't either." Which then lead to thinking it should have said 'couldn't' instead.

Cheers

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Punctuation abuse in Apple ad copy, actually the worst ever.

</comment><comment><USER65> Ahhh English... The odd ghoti language.

</comment><comment><USER66> !

</comment><comment><USER67> Stopped reading after footnote 2.

<comment><USER68> I did too. Couldn't figure out why that was even in there. It seemed so ludicrously out of place but so intentional.

<comment><USER57> It reinforced the point of the whole essay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> In every case where you have to decide between two options and both have advantages and disadvantages you should go with the popular one. In the case of the Oxford comma this means following what most of the world (including the publishing world) does and avoid it. The grammar of many languages forbids the Oxford comma, so there's no reason to keep this controversy going on with no real purpose.</comment>


What Colors Mean in Different Cultures [Infographic] - <AUTHOR> http://visual.ly/what-colors-mean-different-cultures

<comment><USER2> That visualization is not very readable. It's neat looking, but kind of horrible. A regular2d grid with countries across the top and meanings down the side would be wat easier to read, especially you wouldn't have to look up what the letters/number mean.

</comment><comment><USER3> fascinating. i can't find any subject that includes both red and blue. and the most consistent seems to be "truce" (white).

most varied seems to be 4 colours - death, happiness, intelligence (all muted!), love, respect, wisdom. perhaps those are simply the most popular/general/global concepts and so have more entries?</comment>


KlearGear.com Purchase Terms Include Non-Disparagement Clause - <AUTHOR>

If you leave negative feedback anywhere regarding your purchase, Klear Gear reserves the right to charge you $3,500.00 USD.
See "Non-Disparagement" Section
http://www.kleargear.com/termsofuse1.html
KlearGear did this to somebody who ordered something, never received the order, then left negative feedback.  The debt was sold to a collection agency, who then put the debt on their credit report.  The couple sued KG for what they did, and won a $306k judgement in their favor.
http://consumerist.com/2014/06/26/kleargear-com-ordered-to-pay-306k-to-couple-who-wrote-negative-review/ <comment><USER2> Wow, I wasn't familiar with the site before seeing this, but I would never even consider purchasing a product from them no matter what the discount/price was. This shows blatant disregard for their customers and sends a loud message that all they care about is their image. Ironically this clause degrades their image more than any negative consumer review could.</comment>


A16z investing in George Hotz's comma.ai - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@cdixon/comma-ai-e62eea5fa8d2#.absjipvdq <comment><USER2> Hotz is clearly talented, but it's hard to believe that autonomous highway driving is an example of being able to complete anything more difficult. On a side note, i love the tagline put on comma.ai, "ghostriding for the masses".</comment>


Jonathan Blow "Making Game Programming Less Terrible" Talk [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWv_vUgbmug <comment><USER2> Any time someone complains about software startup times, I'm reminded of Blender, which starts in a fraction of a second on my old 1st-generation i5 with a cold cache. That should be the baseline: If a program is less complex than Blender, there is no excuse for taking more than 1 second to launch.</comment>


Ask HN: What would be the curriculum to become an engineer? - <AUTHOR> Because I am a self-taught programmer, I feel I lack in several areas that are required to become a good engineer. What are the topics you feel are required in order become a good engineer? <comment><USER2> This depends on what type of engineer you want to become. Network, Systems, Civil, Nanotech, Computer, Financial, Nuclear, Chemical, Neural, Combat, War/Military, Weather, Weapons, Building, Aerospace, Telecom, Embedded, Logistics, Data Science, Artificial Intelligence, Federal Emergency, etc. As all of them involve programming now, which was not the case 20 to 30 years ago. Some are harder than others and some are not obtainable without certain long term commitments being conducted (some military and civilian engineering fields).

There are a few paths to gaining the required expertise to be seen as an engineer by other engineers in the field. Self-taught which is normally the hardest path as it is not as guided as others, but normally gives you the most time to dive deep into the books. Though, for some you really have to have hands on experience to become the best of the best which is normally what the academic mixed with real work offers (co-ops, internships, etc.). You can also look into an apprenticeship if it exists within your field or work with a highly respected engineer with 20+ years of experience to be your mentor. You can also do the 100% academic route, but that may get expensive and you may not get the bleeding edge real-life work experience unless you can get into a good co-op/internship at a private/public company working in the field of your interest.

</comment><comment><USER3> Assuming you mean _software_ engineer ...

Hardware: understand CPUs, including caching, pipelining, RISC/CISC/ucode/uops, multi-core, on-chip networks, etc; GPUs; FPGAs; memory, and memory bandwidth; storage; PCIe bus; Ethernet. In all of this, your goal is to understand how it works in enough detail to reason about the performance of what you write, and to make decisions about platforms.

Learn a variety of languages to a basic fluency. Maybe 5 or 6: at least one assembly (Macro-11, Z80, x86, 68k, MIPS, ARM, doesn't matter -- pick one); C, some of Java/C#, LISP, Forth, Haskell, Python, Go, Rust, Erlang. There are two goals here: to train your brain to think at a level above any specific language to analyse the problem and come up with different ways to solve it; and to expose yourself to different language styles so that you can make a good choice based on the trade-offs between capabilities and popularity (~= ability to hire devs and maintain the product).

Real computer science. Learn enough about data structures, algorithms, parsing, complexity analysis, and formal methods, that you can apply this knowledge on those occasions that you need it. 95% or more of your professional life you won't be thinking about this stuff (largely because you'll be using libraries and languages where others have done it for you). But sometimes it's crucial to a design, to solving a problem, or to making the right implementation choices. No need to go overboard here, but enough knowledge is really helpful.

Software engineering: team work, design, development methodologies, estimation, and project management. Whether you end up working solo, in small groups, or in a big team, you need to understand how the daily practise of software engineering works.

Debugging computer systems is a craft. It can be learnt and it can be taught. It's not dissimilar to the process of analysis used during implementation, but during debugging you need to be able to work backwards from a symptom to its cause. It's mostly a way of thinking that you need to learn, but a good grounding in the tools (debugger, profiler, static analysis, tracing, packet capture, etc) is necessary too.

One area that I think is under-appreciated, but makes for a truly excellent engineer, is the ability to take the customer's point of view. Understand their problem, not from a programmer's point of view, but as an issue for their business. Being able to genuinely understand the requirements makes the design process vastly simpler, and much more likely to deliver a good solution. This means understanding how their business works, revenues, costs, competitive aspects, cultural aspects, etc, etc.

And finally, tools. Learn your toolset, and continue to evolve it. Go beyond just the IDE -- learn how to monitor the low-level performance (dtrace, perf, dstat, VTune, etc), understand shared libraries (ldd, nm, otool), compilers and static analysis; valgrind, Purify; git, hg, svn; diff and patch; tcpdump, netstat, nc; the better you can analyse and understand the OS, the hardware, the network, the better your systems can be.

None of this needs college. The formal computer science bit might be worth doing a few online courses. The rest is just as well done by yourself or in a small group, learning as you work or tinker.</comment>


The 'Netflix for planes' offers unlimited air travel for a monthly fee - <AUTHOR> http://bgr.com/2016/02/02/netflix-for-plans-onego/ <comment><USER2> "The two most important points are that you have to book at least seven days in advance, and can have at most four one-way reservations active at any point. By my math, that means you'll get at most 16 one-way tickets booked per month. At most." [0]

[0] [http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2016/02/03/unlimited-...](http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2016/02/03/unlimited- flying-onego/)

</comment><comment><USER3> "Netflix for planes" is just confusing. I literally read the title and thought this was about movie rental on aircraft... Then found the article incredibly confusing....

Honestly the title would be clearer as:

"OneGo to offer almost unlimited air travel within the US for a monthly fee."

As to the service: Seems incredibly niche. Inter-US flights are pretty inexpensive, and this doesn't seem like it breaks even unless you fly an unusual number of times in a given period (roughly 8 per month by my count, give or take).

</comment><comment><USER4> I got real excited about this until I read this part:

"OneGo offers unlimited travel within the United states via all major U.S. airlines."</comment>


Show HN: "Crafting Interpreters" chap 10: functions and closures - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Your link is empty ..

<comment><AUTHOR> Oops. :( Let me try that again:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14900342](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14900342)</comment></comment>


Hjson, the Human JSON - <AUTHOR> http://hjson.org/

<comment><AUTHOR> This looks nice, but I've always thought of YAML as Human JSON, and thus suitable for config files, test cases, or most any other cross platform thing where humans may need to read or edit data files.</comment>