Lockitron: Keyless entry using your phone - <AUTHOR> https://lockitron.com/preorder <comment><USER3> We use Lockitron on our offices and it has saved us a lot of trouble. Empirically people are a lot less likely to forget their phone than to forget keys, presumably because you use your phone for so many other things whereas most keys do nothing but get you into a single building.

<comment><USER4> "Empirically people are a lot less likely to forget their phone than to forget keys,"

That also varies on whether you drive a car or take public transportation.

If you drive, leaving your house requires taking your keys and it becomes a habit. Same with leaving work. If you drove there you need your keys to leave.

A good way around forgetting keys also is a realtor style lockbox either on the door or hidden with a spare key.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, I forget my phone way more than I forget keys, because I need the keys to open (NFC/HID) the door to the garage and to use the car. I use a deadbolt so I can't lock myself out of the apartment, but also can't go into the garage without keys, and I ~never go out the front door. I end up leaving my phone docked in my car about 10% of the time by accident, though.

The key (heh) to not forgetting anything, though, is to have a consistent set of pockets for things -- I always keep keys+knife, flashlight, wallet+cash, iphone in specific pockets. The only times I get screwed up is when I wear clothing without the right layout of pockets.

<comment><USER6> Totally agreed on the pocket layout - don't know what i'd do without my cargo pants/shorts - must be an engineer thing... <http://xkcd.com/806/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wow, I'm amazed that they got wifi to work in the lock itself, vs. using a low-power thing like Zigbee to a base station with AC power.

Also, BT 4.0 LE is perfect for this -- since there's no NFC in the iPhone 5, I suspect BT 4.0 LE will end up taking the place of NFC for a lot of "heavier duty" NFC applications -- not that the Bluetooth protocol is great or elegant, but it's a lot easier to work with than NFC, and now BT 4.0 LE exists on both major smartphone platforms.

All my earlier criticism of not having a local ACL and local RF communication to the lock, vs. going to/from the Internet, is now resolved.

The only thing they're missing is a BT 4.0 LE dongle (which I've seen on Kickstarter called "hone" [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/690528216/hone- for-iphon...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/690528216/hone-for- iphone-4s-never-lose-your-keys-again) \-- you could put that on your keyring and use it as an expensive HID proxcard replacement. Same thing works for electronic leash.

Now all they need to do is support 5-10 locksets in some kind of private/small business network (vs. putting in a HID access control system), for 0-99 users, and they'll be really innovative. Managing a single door with 0-5 people is comparatively easy; managing an office with turnover is a lot harder, and businesses would happily pay $1-2k for a system to cover their doors and employees with a nice LDAP/AD/FB/etc. interface.

Since you can upload your own firmware, it would be entirely possible for a customer to build this.

</comment><comment><USER7> relies on

      your phone working
      2.4 Ghz
      your internet connection
      your power
      their datacenter
      their website software

to avoid carrying a key?

anyone in the area could easily ddos off your wireless more or less permanently by spamming disconnect.

doesn't seem like a very good risk/reward ratio to me.

whats the problem with a more traditional (read local) keyless approach? door too thick?

<comment><USER8> > relies on

> (...)

> their datacenter

> their website software

This is a thing I find increasingly bewildering/disturbing about new hacks like that. Why do we route signals around the whole world to communicate two devices that are few meters apart? Also, having to go through third party's computer infrastructure sounds like a huge waste of resources. Bluetooth, NFC or WLANs are the tools we should be using.

<comment><USER9> (I think the traditional wording of the phrase is a tad harsh, but..) I think it is a case of _"When you_ really _love your hammer, everything looks like a nail."_

<comment><USER10> I like analogies that aren't _necessarily_ dismissive.

How about _If you're a carpenter, you tend to make things out of wood."_

You can make a lot of stuff out of wood, if you're good. You need relatively few general purpose tools. It's not always the best, but in many cases it's good enough. The first Apple had a wooden body. Early cars too.

Technology is giving us a lot of stuff which we call "tools" but we might also call "materials." Like physical tools and materials, they all take time to learn and much longer to understand well. Sometimes we use chisels & planks when welding pipes or casting iron would be better because we have a woodworking setup in the garage.

<comment><USER9> Good call. The feel of that analogy is closer to what I had in mind.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've been using a MiCasa Verde[1], alongside the compatible KwikSet Deadbolts[2], an android app called Automator to accomplish the same thing. It's actually a little pricier but you get:

a. Remote entry -- unlock your door from afar. b. A nice home automation system (mine's expanded to control lights and thermostat now) c. Keypad and key-entry as backups

I love it. Being able to remotely lock and unlock your doors is super handy, whether it be for guests, contractors or what not. But what's really handy? Never worrying about locking yourself out of your house again.

If I could just get rid of my car key, I'd be thrilled.

[1]<http://micasaverde.com/> [2]<http://amzn.to/QGn2Im>

<comment><USER11> The integration with other things is a big deal fwiw. I'm currently playing with NFC and doing things like "when I tap my phone on my night stand, make sure all the doors are locked and turn off all the lights except for the bedroom"

We're headed towards the Internet of Things but right now they're all sort of talking with their own software. A house with the Nest thermometer and the Lockitron lock won't be able to execute on the scenario I described above -- and if you're a homeowner you may want to think more long term than investing in one-off solutions for every latest thing a chip goes in to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Unikey[1] on Shark Tank last season blew me away, I couldn't wait to see it in action, and be available. This looks like an easier installation process than that, but Unikey has some big names attached to it (Black & Decker). Can't wait to see this tech take off, good luck guys!

[1] <http://www.unikeytech.com/>

</comment><comment><USER13> Why not use a lock with a keycode instead? I don't see a single scenario where Lockitron works better.

[http://consumer.schlage.com/Products/Pages/category- landing....](http://consumer.schlage.com/Products/Pages/category- landing.aspx?category=Electronic+Keypad+Locks)

<comment><USER14> For me, it'd be about guest access. Sure, you could give out your codes, and then change them later, but that's a pain (with the Schlage products at least).

<comment><USER13> FWIW, I find it simple enough to add/remove codes as needed. I can see how punching ~15 buttons can be a pain, but I don't find it so.

<comment><USER15> I think the main benefit here is that it works with your existing lock, so it could work on apartments, dorm rooms, office doors, etc. Those key code deadlocks have always existed, but never very popular.

<comment><USER16> In the US, maybe. Here in Seoul it's everywhere. Practically all apartment units come with them pre-installed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> As a renter - the fact that it will now clip onto my existing lock is huge.

</comment><comment><USER18> So, do people who use something like this just never lock your bottom handle lock? I live in a busy city and lock both to keep my place secure. I'm not sure I would like just being able to lock the deadbolt but not the handle lock.

<comment><USER14> Having taken a lock picking course, I can say that one lock is approximately the same security as two - even after 15 minutes of instruction, with the right tools I could unlock most any standard house lock in moments.

Home door locks are a deterrent more than anything else, so I'd opt for convenience.

<comment><USER19> This is not true everywhere. For example here in Sweden the second lock is usually a lever tumbler lock or some variant thereof. Way harder to pick than pin tumbler locks. What matters is the type of lock, not the number of locks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Looks like a really cool product, but as a note to the marketing department: the product itself looks just a little bit too much like an iPhone. I got confused for a moment, and thought the device _was_ an iPhone with a picture of the deadbolt on it. There's probably a way to make the materials somewhat clearer that the Lockitron is the big square bit, and not the C-shaped mounting adapter.

<comment><USER21> Are you kidding me? The only similarity to an iPhone is the rectangular shape.

<comment><USER22> Isn't that close enough for getting a court order to ban sales?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Right now, the website is down or perhaps cloudflare is having issues.

I did get a look and was going to make a comment (which I wanted to verify) that the site in no way shows that the company had built another product (at least not from a quick look).

Now I can't even get a look at the site. This isn't 1996. Why are people having so many issues with delivering simple reliability to a 1 page website?

<comment><AUTHOR> This is their second product. The original Lockitron came out in 2011 or so. I know many people who installed them in their offices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I installed a punch code deadbolt on our front door. It has been a life- changing experience. I need neither phone nor keys and never worry about being locked out. I just have to replace the batteries every couple years.

One of the biggest improvements, not offered by the Lockitron, is the lack of needing to fumble in your pockets for anything. If you've got a handful of groceries, it's much easier to shift a bag or two to get a hand free and punch the code than it is to go digging in your pockets.

<comment><USER24> > _One of the biggest improvements, not offered by the Lockitron, is the lack > of needing to fumble in your pockets for anything_

Did you watch the full video? This version of Lockitron has proximity-based keyless entry like some cars do. No need to reach into your pockets or punch in a code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Cool and interesting idea, but for obvious reasons* I have some slight reluctance with using a service like this for my home. For less valuable targets though -- like a conference room or shared workspace -- this is a really clever solution to sharing keys.

*I hate it when people say that so I'll expand. Simply put, I'm worried about it getting hacked. For instance, could you gain access to someone's wifi and then flash a new image (which includes a rogue key) onto the device?

<comment><USER26> Your threat model seems a bit out of whack. Picking your conventional lock has a much better cost/benefit ratio for a thief.

<comment><USER27> Breaking a window is actually a far more effective (and common) method of entry for thieves than bothering to pick a lock.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> _> We won't charge your card until your Lockitron is ready_

Interesting.. so you don't even need the money for the first production run, pure crowd-hype marketing. Also very ballsy of YC to sidestep kickstarter like this.. although i suppose 1000 pre-sales isn't huge.

As for the product, some nice feature improvements over v1.0, although i'm not a fan of the new plasticy design-- i would not want to see that thing on my door unless I had to, for any price.

<comment><USER29> i think this is quite smart. it's not just the hype, but similar to app.net, it's guaranteeing there is a minimum threshold of demand.

what do you mean by 'ballsy to sidestep kickstarter.' has kickstarter become some kind of sole-arbiter of product development? FWIW, if this style of e-commerce continues, someone should develop the API for this/app.net type of sales instead of each building the billing system from scratch.

<comment><USER28> Kickstarter is definitely the existing sole-arbiter of crowd sourcing funding. They have brought massive crowds to YC companies so i think it is a significant move to walk away from that to save 5%.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> We used Lockitron at the Cloudkick office. Super convenient, as it let anyone at the office buzz a guest/delivery through our outer door without leaving their desk. Also awesome: the ability to give visitors temporary access without having to keep track of making keys, ensuring they're returned, blah blah blah. Lockitron eliminated the dumb, day-to-day-headache-type-stuff involved in getting people in and out of our space.

</comment><comment><USER31> Kudos to the team. This looks fantastic, and I love that it's a v2 product! Preordering now.

It could be more clear that the lockitron does two very interesting things, I had to watch the video to figure them out:

\- knock detection via microphone so you know someone is at the door (awesome)

\- auto-unlock based on nearby phone presence (presumably bluetooth) so you can just walk into your house.

If it works like it's supposed to, this is seriously great.

</comment><comment><USER32> I'd be fine with keyless entry over the web if it only worked when I have in my pocket something it also must detect in order to open.

And when I actually do want to open it remotely, I get a call with a code I can enter. In other words, some sort of 2 step authentication.

And I want to be notified by the app every time that door opens if I am not using the app right then to open it.

</comment><comment><USER33> Is this a neat idea? Sure. But it's nowhere near $150 worth of value. (And, based on their "limited time" copy, it's likely going to rise to a more egregious price in the future.) I'm actually dumbstruck that they've sold 2500 of these. Admittedly, not having leave your couch to lock up or being able to check the status of your locks remotely is by all means a nice offering, but for the price, it's just not worth it.

Incidentally, this is also just a workaround. It's a hack. It's likely not to work in all homes or with all locks.

Moreover, this thing will likely look out of place and fairly undesirable on most doors, especially on older buildings.

An actual installable lock would be incredibly more compelling due to the fact that it will be less bulky and intrusive.

<comment><USER34> I think this is a great idea, and would be really useful for any place where you need to give a lot of people access to the building. If you're renting your home out through Airbnb, being able to give people temp access to your home would be really convenient and also safer than giving them a physical key that they can copy. If you're renting out an apartment or office, lockitron will save the landlord from having to rekey the building after each tenant. The $150 cost is easily recouped if you consider the cost of getting new locks. When I'm expecting the maid to come over to my house, I would love to give them remote access if I'm not home. I'd expect the look of the lock to change substantially with updates, but the conveniences it brings is pretty amazing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Great idea. However, I can't help but think that if Lockitron gains meaningful adoption, the various organized-crime groups operating on the web will try to hack the company's backend retrieve lock usage and location data or even gain the ability remotely to open customer locks. (Criminals already pay for stolen credit card information on the web; they would readily pay for lock usage and location data too. How valuable would it be for thieves to know when other people in their own city leave their homes?)

I would want to understand how Lockitron might use and secure my lock-usage, location, and other personal information before using the device and service to lock anything important, like my office or my house.

<comment><USER21> Credit cards can be used by any thief, hacking tools cannot. A Lockitron hack tool would likely be more in the realm of Metasploit. I'm not saying there won't be hackers/thieves who could do it, just comparing to stolen credit cards is silly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> It's pretty obvious that more and more things are converging to the phone. We've already seen how modern smartphones have markets like the point-and- shoot camera and portable music player. It makes sense to carry around one device that does as much as possible. And I love the extension of the smartphone into these home automation areas (though I realize locks have a significantly greater market than just that). What troubles me right now is the fracturing, but that's inevitable in emerging markets. It would just be nice to have a really great product line that I could use to unlock deadbolts, open my garage door, automate my lights, control switches / outlets, program my thermostat, etc.

</comment><comment><USER37> When I saw that this thing fits over my existing deadbolt two things came to mind and in this order:

1\. Wow, that device must have a lot of torque as many deadbolts, mine for example, actually requires some effort to turn, either to lock or unlock. This resistance is caused mainly by the springiness of the weather stripping which pushes back against the door when it is closed.

2\. Sometimes, when sunlight falls upon—and heats—the door I need to push or pull slightly on the door in order to turn the deadbolt at all. The door is not dimensionally stable and deadbolt alignment changes. This makes me think that the system would not be reliable. I know my door and deadbolt are not unique in this regard.

</comment><comment><USER38> Ahhh crap. I have been building this exact thing in my garage as we speak.

Too slow! Well played, Lockitron.

<comment><USER39> There is always room for one more on the market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I cannot drive to work if I forget my keys. However, I have following idea. A cell phone case with an imbedded radio frequency chip that communicates with your key chain. The purpose of the device is to alert you if get too far away from your phone. This two way radio will not only help you locate your phone, but you can use it to locate your keys as well. You will be able to preset an approximate range boundary which will cause the case/keys to beep when they are too far apart. If you are close to the phone but can not see it, you can make the phone beep by pressing a button.

</comment><comment><USER41> Really nice product can't wait to see it in production. One insignificant caveat: I don't like the interface on the phone to lock unlock. Why use two images, the lock and unlock padlock when one image would suffice.

</comment><comment><USER42> It all sounded good until the "SMS" part. SMS messages are not encrypted and it is possible to sniff them (albeit it is not the simplest thing to do, but it is possible). Of course no one will have your actual house address, unless they cross reference your cell phone number with Facebook!

Granted the risk there seems small, basically limited to people without a smart phone who are also in the market for a smart gadget like this.

It is good to see that this is disabled by default, but it seems like a really unnecessary security hole.

</comment><comment><USER43> We use lockitron at the Tigerlabs co-working space in Princeton. It's awesome! The provisioning, the ease of use, and the reliability are amazing. The team has done a great job of focusing on, and absolutely nailing the future-of- locks scenario. We've been happily using Lockitron 1 -- Lockitron 2 appears to eliminate the 'base station' and the custom lock, and now works with your existing lock. All Airbnb's and Co-working spaces need this. ;)

<comment><USER44> Does the 4-AA batteries actually last a full year? I'm not sure how those batteries can maintain a steady wifi connection and survive for a full year. The lowest power wifi chips I know still draw 40mA in RX mode.

<comment><USER45> Continuously connected? No. We'd last about two weeks.

We poll infrequently during off hours and more frequently when people are likely to be coming and going. Knocking also wakes it up.

Bluetooth 4.0 gets us the rest of the way. It's instant for iPhone 4s and 5 users and we should have rudimentary support for the Android devices with BT4 by March.

<comment><USER44> So what happens when a packet is sent when you're in sleep mode? Does the device have to renegotiate the connection when waking up?

What if you sold a separate device that plugged in the wall and had a constant wifi connection, then used BT4 for communicating with the lock powered by 4xAA? Then you wouldn't even need wifi on the lock.

Also, why an arduino mega? Are you using that many I/O pins or is it because your code needs the 256KB of flash?

<comment><USER46> I don't think they are using an Arduino Mega. They are using the same processor that an Arduino uses which is the Atmel ATmega, which is a very common processor for microcontrollers.

<comment><USER44> I'm guessing you're not accustomed to the arduino parlance. Everyone knows arduino uses an atmel atmega uC, but when you say "arduino mega" it means something specific. I have around 5 different models of atmega chips at home that I use with the arduino.

In the video they said they were using a mega, and you can tell from the picture that the atmel chip is a surface mount similar to the 2560. All the arduino chips use some kind of atmega variant, but the arduino mega refers to the atmega1280 or the atmega2560. The most common arduino chip is the atmega328p.

The atmega series is fairly broad. The arduinos only use a subset of the atmega series. "mega" is probably a bit confusing, but if you say "arduino mega" it only refers to one or two specific chips -- the old "arduino mega" used the atmega1280 while the newer model uses the atmega2560.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> So what happens when your lock requires holding the door with pressure to have the bolt slide freely? Does it just not lock, or does it tell you it won't lock?

</comment><comment><USER48> I made this point in another comment, but here it is again:

This product can be about much more than solving the problem of forgetting your keys. People with limited dexterity (such as my father, a quadriplegic) would love a product like this. When leaving the house, he would be able to make a few taps on an iPad to lock things up. Right now we don't use a lock because it's behind a garage door, but this would allow us much more flexibility.

</comment><comment><USER49> Is this their official launch? The company I've worked for has had one for a while...

Regardless, I'm a fan. The fact that granting and revoking access is so trivial meant that when I was an intern I still had full ability to come and go regardless of the presence of a fulltimer (contrasting with other internships, where hesitance to give interns keys meant if I showed up too early I had to sit on my butt till someone arrived to let me in).

</comment><comment><USER50> I love the idea, but, now, when I loose my phone I will be cashless, unable to call someone for help, and locked out of my home.

I also hope they salt their password hashes.

</comment><comment><USER51> We use Lockitron at the 500startups offices. It worked well most of the time. The few times it didn't work was very annoying and I had to rely on someone else to open the door for me (from the inside). As long as you have a secondary option for opening the door, it's a great product.

<comment><USER52> _" As long as you have a secondary option for opening the door, it's a great product."_

I can't tell if that is sarcasm?

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> This looks really cool.

One issue with the video around 0:40... Lockitron really needs to buy their hardware engineers some eye protection and magnification devices. You should never solder up close like that without eye protection. What they show in the video probably violates OSHA guidelines.

</comment><comment><USER54> Kudos to the team. This is not a solution for everyone, but there are places (Airbnb, shared access, renter, maybe hotel) where this concept could be invaluable. Even if not for my main door I could use it on the side door to allow multiple access for my family and kids.

</comment><comment><USER17> Lockitron guys: I would love a similar device for my garage door! Perhaps even integrated into one since most front door deadbolts are going to be within range of a garage door opener. It could support standard Genie/Liftmaster and get 80% of the market.

</comment><comment><USER55> Haha this reminded me of our fb hackathon project. wrote about it here a while back: [http://designcodelearn.com/2012/06/01/i-was-the-worst- coder-...](http://designcodelearn.com/2012/06/01/i-was-the-worst-coder-in-the- room/)

</comment><comment><USER56> Lockitron even mentions that AirBnB is a great fit + they are both YC companies. Why isn't there a partnership already established between the two companies? Lockitron should be contacting all of AirBnB's most rented property owners to buy the lock.

</comment><comment><USER57> This looks great. Would love to see a version that has a camera on the front of lockitron so I can see who is at my front door. It sounds incredibly lazy, but being able to open the app and see who is at my front door would prove useful.

<comment><USER56> since there is a knock sensor, maybe have a usb camera hooked up to the lock and the camera looking out of the peephole or aimed at the entrance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Our company developed a product where you can enter a place just by calling a specific number. If your number is on the registered number's database it will unlock the door...

Don't know why they don't do it like that instead of having to send a text...

<comment><USER59> How do you deal with caller ID spoofing?

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Hey, I just backed Lockitron, question:

Will Sense work with multiple phones at a time?

</comment><comment><USER14> Looks great, but I'm reticent to replace my mortise-style door lock. Maybe future versions will support this type of lock? Other than sizing considerations, I don't see why not.

</comment><comment><USER61> We use Lockitron on the Firebase office door. I highly recommend it. Giving access to new employees is a couple of clicks, rather than making & tracking a new physical key.

</comment><comment><USER62> We used the alpha version of Lockitron for over a year at Blockboard's office. Once it was set up everything ran smoothly. We loved it. The final version looks even slicker.

</comment><comment><USER63> wasn't there a shark tank where something similar was pitched? Thought he said he had patents protecting the idea, who knows what that covered

[http://today.ucf.edu/ucf-engineering-alum- lands-500000-deal-...](http://today.ucf.edu/ucf-engineering-alum- lands-500000-deal-on-shark-tank-finale/)

[http://abc.go.com/watch/shark- tank/SH559076/VD55203511/week-...](http://abc.go.com/watch/shark- tank/SH559076/VD55203511/week-15)

</comment><comment><USER64> We have one of these for our office too, and it works great :-). My only problem is that I want one for my apartment too, so I can stop carrying keys altogether.

</comment><comment><USER65> Personally, I would really like to see this attacked by TOOL and Schuyler Towne to see how vulnerable it is.

I love the idea of this device, but I also love seeing locks defeated.

</comment><comment><USER39> What happens if the iPhone runs out of battery? The site says it still works if you have "lost power", but I assume this means in the household?

<comment><USER66> I assume you could still use a key. Nothing seems to be covering the deadbolt lock on the outside of the door. I have the same problem with two-factor authentication though, I guess you'll just always need a backup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Today if I loose my keys, I call a locksmith with my phone and pay him with my credit card.

A year from now if my phone runs out of battery, I am homeless. :)

</comment><comment><USER68> We're using lockitron at the apartments we stay in San Francisco. It works like a charm. Thinking about getting one for back home :)

</comment><comment><USER69> Neat idea, but what makes this worth 150 bucks?

<comment><USER70> If you've never lost your house keys twice ($75 per visit for a locksmith) then it's not worth it. However, you could give multiple people access to the door this way, which would be cheaper/easier than making copies of keys.

Also, with normal keys if you lose one you have to replace the cylinder and all the keys if you're worried about someone using the lost key. This would prevent that expense.

I will say, though: if $150 is the _discount_ price, i'm afraid to learn what the regular price is. Businesses seem like the only place this becomes cost effective.

<comment><USER69> Ah, that makes sense to me.

I hadn't thought about the multiple people access problem since I've never needed more than one set of guest keys at a time, and the offices I've worked in were all big enough to use keycards.

Come to think of it, the market for 'Needs to give multiple people rotating revocable access' is a great fit for AirBnB type services.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Kickstarter project, without the kickstarter! It's kickstarter-lite. umm - <USER2> the value of Kickstarter just go down? ;)

<comment><USER72> I believe this is ACTUALLY a preorder, rather than an investment that includes a "prize" if they actually succeed.

<comment><USER45> It's so we know how many to make. We won't charge anyone's card until they are ready to ship.

<comment><USER5> I'd seriously consider doing kickstarter too -- once you've got 250-500 preorders outside kickstarter, and popularity on HN, you should be in a great position to have an "overfunded" kickstarter. Yes, they take a cut, but the exposure from kickstarter is probably worth it -- just bump prices 10% if you must.

I know I buy a lot of gadgets I might not otherwise know about due to seeing them in my activity feed on kickstarter.

Seemed to work well for Pebble...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> I usually hate these gimmicks, but my god, this is extremely well done. Really need to consider it...

</comment><comment><USER74> The best part about this entire thing is that you can use it on top of an existing lock. Genius.

</comment><comment><USER75> Sadly most doors in Germany have a normal key access installed on the inside as well :/

<comment><USER76> Those have become less popular in the US with rising fire-safety awareness, I think. (They are likely to trap inhabitants in the event of a fire.)

Given that the device claims to work with almost any deadbolt, and therefore can't be too picky about shape, my guess is it wouldn't be hard to adapt it for your lock. (Just permanently install a key with some handle attached to it for the device to grip.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> patent issue, anyone?

[http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/22/after-surviving-the- shark-t...](http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/22/after-surviving-the-shark-tank- unikey-technologies-raises-1-1m-in-equity-funding/)

</comment><comment><USER78> I'm trying to figure out what _real_ business problem this solves. Help

</comment><comment><USER79> Anyone else notice one of the engineers does not blink in the video?

</comment><comment><USER80> Looks neat. Don't think it'll work with my deadbolt though :(

<comment><USER25> Here's the supported lock types: <https://lockitron.com/help/compatibility>

It looks like this is compatible with through-hole deadbolts, but not rim deadbolts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> We have one of these for our office. It's great.

</comment><comment><USER82> I'd like something like this for my car.

</comment><comment><USER83> How long do the batteries last?

</comment><comment><USER84> Lockitron user here. Love it!

</comment><comment><USER85> Was this a YC company?

</comment><comment><USER86> ripe for airbnb acquisition.

</comment><comment><USER87> Nice one (idea): in my pockets, I've still an iphone, a bunch of keys, credit cards and a pass card for the office...</comment>


Kraftwagen: Everything in code, multiple deploy targets and more… with Drupal - <AUTHOR> http://kraftwagen.org <comment><USER2> Congratulations with the release Rolf! This will make our Drupal-work a lot easier :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Looking forward to the release party!

</comment><comment><USER4> Is it true that the release party (see the link) has free beer and pizza? Awesome!

<comment><USER2> Yups.. I can confirm that :)</comment></comment>


What's new in IndexedDB 2.0? - <AUTHOR> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2016/10/whats-new-in-indexeddb-2-0/ <comment><USER2> I still feel that the api is a lot more complicated than it has any right to be. WebSQL for example was nifty little thing that worked just fine as far as me as a dev is concerned. I realize there must have been considerable issues with it from implementation POV but IDB seems so much worse (to me at least).

<comment><USER3> It wasn't so much of an implementation issue as it was politics around the spec that killed it: As WebSQL basically happened by just exposing a SQLite runtime to JS, there was never a clear spec of what WebSQL should support (no - "it just supports all that SQLite supports" is not good enough).

And even if somebody went in and specified all of SQLite's features, then there would still be the issue that any accepted web standard needs two independent implementations, meaning that one of the browsers would have had to clean-room reimplement SQLite.

And finally, there would be the question of what to do as SQLite involved. What would browsers do as SQLite gains features or changes behaviour? Keep the old version of SQLite around for JS? Freeze the whole browser on the old version of SQLite?

I agree though that WebSQL was much more convenient and useful than IndexedDB.

<comment><USER4> IIRC, the idea was making IndexedDB low-level, giving way to the library authors to create something easier to use.

I'm not sure if that ever happened.

<comment><USER5> PouchDB[1] sits on top of IndexDB (or WebSQL and other methods) and exposes a CouchDB-like interface.

[1] [https://pouchdb.com/](https://pouchdb.com/)

<comment><USER6> But that's yet another dependency to load that is not written in C++/C, not good enough.

<comment><USER7> It's client side JS, why would it be written in C++/C?

<comment><USER6> Neither WebSQL or IndexedDB are written in Javascript themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The announcement made me check caniuse for IndexedDB support, and it turns out that Safari 10 finally has non-broken IndexedDB:

[http://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb](http://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb)

[https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/Gen...](https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_10_0.html)

[https://github.com/localForage/localForage/issues/604#issuec...](https://github.com/localForage/localForage/issues/604#issuecomment-247335607)

[https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26](https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26)

<comment><USER9> Despite what some claim, Safari 10's IndexedDB is still quite broken, except possibly for some trivial cases (like if you only use one object store, or you don't use indexes): [https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/545ylm/psa_inde...](https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/545ylm/psa_indexeddb_on_safari_10_is_still_shitty/)

<comment><USER8> Good to know, thanks for sharing!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> If any of you are serious about using IndexedDB, please consider:

[https://github.com/google/lovefield](https://github.com/google/lovefield)

Explanation here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1AUIq8GA1k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1AUIq8GA1k)

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm currently working on a Angular2 cache management, similar to Redis, wrapper for IDB and these features will help quite a bit with a few of the lower performance operations in my API.

</comment><comment><USER12> What happens if you access the database simultaneously from different browser tabs? Also, is there some eventing mechanism to push messages through the database between tabs?

<comment><USER9> _What happens if you access the database simultaneously from different browser tabs?_

It works fine. Transactions prevent conflicts. And you can even do schema upgrades because there is built-in versioning, and it provides events to let you handle when a version change occurs in another tab.

 _Also, is there some eventing mechanism to push messages through the database between tabs?_

No, you have to do that yourself.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> No mentions of promises? Any reason to rev the spec _without_ promises?

<comment><USER14> IIRC the main reason indexeddb does not use promises is because promises are required to reject/resolve asynchronously [1]. Indexeddb requires that you manipulate the object stores in a synchronous way from it's event handlers, so it can terminate the transaction after running the event handlers synchronously. It can't do this with promises that will run their resolve handler at best in the next microtask.

It's been a while since I looked into this, but I remember this being my conclusion.

1: [https://promisesaplus.com/#point-34](https://promisesaplus.com/#point-34)

<comment><USER9> That's actually not true in Chrome [https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=457409](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=457409) although it's not clear if that is a bug in Chrome or in other browsers. It would be nice to have more clarity on that, or an explicit promise API like [https://github.com/inexorabletash/indexeddb- promises](https://github.com/inexorabletash/indexeddb-promises) because until then it's really shitty to use - you have to constantly worry about cross- browser compatibility.</comment></comment></comment>


India's red rain may contain life not seen on Earth - <AUTHOR> http://www.news.com.au/technology/panspermia-theorists-say-indias-red-rain-contains-life-not-seen-on-earth/story-e6frfro0-1225913620448 <comment><USER2>
      The team also found an unusual pattern in the way the cells changed colour under UV light, known as "fluorescence behaviour".
      They said it was "in remarkable correspondence" with red emissions from the Red Rectangle planetary nebula some 2300 light years away, "suggesting, though not proving, an extraterrestrial origin".

You have got to be kidding me.

<comment><USER3> I think you could find a good spectral match for just about _anything_ given the number of stars out there.

This whole thing screams pseudo science at me, and I'm still not sure what exactly is the state of arxiv published research. It's a mixed bag.

<comment><USER4> I think that currently, to get on arxiv you just need some arxiv-trusted person to vouch for your work. The idea being that if you vouch for too many kooks they stop letting you vouch for anyone.

<comment><USER3> _Any_ cook is a blemish on arxiv that diminishes both arxiv and all the rest of the publications on there.

There is the reason why big name publications are very careful not to be associated with cranks, reputable scientists will start to avoid your publication and that is the start of a downward spiral.

Axxiv would do well to increase their barrier to entry to up the quality, the principle is great but the execution so far is less than fantastic. And that's a pity because something like arxiv with a really good reputation is badly needed.

So, very good peer-review of all that's input and fewer rather than more 'publications' of excellent quality, with a very good set of verification criteria for extraordinary claims.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _The team's findings are yet to be verified._

Sigh. Nine years, no independent verification. For reproducible incredibly unique behavior like that? Verification of a real phenomenon would be massive and immediate.

<comment><USER6> "Verification of a real phenomenon would be massive and immediate"

Incorrect. Something involving alien life, comets, etc? Scientists run the other way.

In a sense, this publication is verification by scientists in the UK of a previous paper by Dr. Louis that described the cells/particles/whatever reproducing at high temperature.

If the cells are of extraterrestrial origin and are not DNA-based, this will be the scientific discovery of the century. One would hope that other labs will step forward and attempt to reproduce the work.

<comment><USER5> You've misunderstood me.

Take any of the phenomenon described, say "organisms that reproduce at 121 degrees" Send samples out, samples are reheated, other independent scientists verify this cause and effect.

Sure, the _entire_ set of wild claims would take a heckuva lot of verification. But any one of the claims? Dead simple. Why don't we have independent verification of dead simple things? Probably because there is no verification to be had, sadly.

<comment><USER6> I wouldn't be surprised if the Cardiff group spent six months on the research and three years getting the paper accepted.

Agreed, it would have been nice if the Dr. Louis had sent samples to any lab that would take them, but instead he sent them to just one lab.

Besides a possible lack of labs volunteering, perhaps he was motivated to retain as much credit for what he felt would be an important discovery.

In any case, I still would like to see some other facilities step forward and attempt to verify the work.

<comment><USER7> Arxiv is not a peer-reviewed journal where papers need to be accepted or not; it's more like HN for scientists, where anyone can present a result for consideration. Without digging into the history in detail, it's worth noting that one of the co-authors on this paper is at the University of Sheffield, and was vocally critical of an earlier paper on the same subject; his co- authorship may be a signal to other labs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If I recall correctly this was properly debunked as false. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_rain_in_Kerala> from the article "The color was found to be due to the presence of a large amount of spores of a lichen- forming alga belonging to the genus Trentepohlia"

<comment><USER9> I'll second this. I was under the impression that it was spores of a decidedly earthbound variety. I wish it were little extraterrestrial organisms but t does not look to be the case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Uh, guys... you found the rain _on earth_. This is where you saw it. Just sayin'.

There should be some kind of rule that evidence is only strong enough to support a theory of equal or lesser weirdness. "Bacteria reproducing at 121 degrees" is way less weird than "Bacteria from outer space".

<comment><USER11> Occam's Razor?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I know a girl from Kerala. It is a very beautiful place - very lush - from the photos I have seen. I will have to ask her about the Red Rain.

"Growth and replication of red rain cells at 121 oC and their red fluorescence" (2010 August)

<http://arxiv.org/pdf/1008.4960v1>

"The Red Rain phenomenon of Kerala and its possible extraterrestrial origin" (2006 January)

<http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0601/0601022v1.pdf>

<comment><USER13> The paper from 2006 (second link above) has very interesting scanning electron microscope pictures of the critters (3D reconstructions).

<comment><USER3> These look quite similar:

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

<comment><USER13> Yes, but the first paper has images of daughter cells in various stages of reproduction.

Bit hard to get a piece of rock to do that, no?

<comment><USER3> I don't see a daughter cell in various stages of reproduction, I see different 'cells', and I'm not sure at all if they're cells or not. They could be dead single celled organisms with some kind of outer coating.

A time-lapse series of the same cells from the first image would be conclusive evidence, that can't be too hard to make, a magnification of 1,000 is well within the abilities of oil immersion objective: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Xk_piPBnwY>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> So Kerala was repeatedly hit by projectiles from space over a span of months, producing a red rain of alien life.

But nowhere else was.

As the earth spun on its axis. And the earth moved around the sun.

The space-spores kept landing on Kerala.

Right. How does that work, exactly?

<comment><USER7> The hypothesis is that the rainfall followed from a single meteoric event, which preceded the first 'red rainfall' by a few hours, with greatest concentrations of red material in the 10 days afterward.

Meteors burn up in the mesophere, about 40 miles above the earth's surface. There is weather up there, but not the normal wind patterns that we are used to. There are standing waves and strange weather phenomena like notilucent clouds up there that we don't fully understand; also, some gasses separate there, impossible at the higher temperature and pressures which we are used to. A trail of dust debris from an incoming meteor may take much longer to dissipate in the mesosphere than a cloud of the same size lower down.

<comment><USER4> " A trail of dust debris from an incoming meteor may take much longer to dissipate in the mesosphere than a cloud of the same size lower down."

Making it even less likely that it would all land in the same place.

Adding unusual atmospheric phenomena on top of everything else just makes this more and more absurd.

<comment><USER7> It didn't all land in the same place. The 2006 paper mentioned upthread documents 124 separate reports, spread along a path over 300 miles in length down the coastline of India's Kerala province.

Nor am I not suggesting any unusual atmospheric phenomena; I'm pointing out that that part of the atmosphere is known to differ substantially from lower altitudes. Multiple interacting tides, for example: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_tide>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> That is alot of speculation for something that the article says is "rejected by the scientific community at large" and "yet to be verified".

<comment><AUTHOR> It's easier to dismiss theories than nail one...

<comment><USER2> I guess the question is, why does this theory deserve to not be dismissed? There are (pulling a number out of my ass) tens of thousands of theories on anything and certainly not enough resources to test them all. I think the burden of proof rests with those pushing a new idea. There are people working on this, but without further substantiation, there's nothing special about it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Link to the paper:

<http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1008/1008.4960.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER15> "The only lifeforms that occur or Earth without DNA, according to another commentor, are proteins known as 'prions', best known on Earth as the cause of Mad Cow Disease."

I was not aware that prions were considered a lifeform.

<comment><USER16> It depends on the definition of 'life' you're using. There's lots of disagreement on what the definition should be exactly.

<comment><USER17> There really is nobody arguing that prions are alive. Unlike viruses, for which there is at least a vigorous debate, prions just don't cut it, lacking virtually all of the features that we associate with life.

I can't believe that this news article is quoting from _commenters_ on the technologyreview arxiv blog.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I want to believe.

<comment><USER19> I am listening to Peter Gabriel, truly the man is a prophet ... he did a song called "Red Rain" years ago .

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Is 'all-in boffin barney' a respectable news phrase in Australia?

<comment><USER21> Apparently. I think its Australian for kerfuffle.

<comment><USER22> _I think its Australian for kerfuffle._

Specifically, an argument amongst all scientists.

all-in: involving everyone

boffin: scientist

barney: argument (from rhyming slang: "Barney Rubble" - "trouble")

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> the "Growth and replication of red rain cells at 121 oC and their red fluorescence" paper at arxiv does not contain a single reference to the alledgelly-named "cells" lack of DNA (apart from being plagued of obvious spelling errors). If I were them, I wouldn't bother with spectrographic analysis if the real finding is non-dna based life form.

Having worked at a biotech lab, this "study" of replication without saying anything about microbiological characterization smells like a fun replica of the Sokal affair <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Affair>.

<comment><USER3> Sokal is a hero for doing that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> This reads like a Pravda article. Sensationalist and next to no substance.

<comment><USER25> It is news.com.au, a Murdoch paper in Australia. It is as authoritative as a Fox news broadcast.

<comment><USER26> And it has more than 100 points at HN.

<comment><USER3> Not from me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> > While many spores on Earth can survive that kind of extreme heat, none have > yet been discovered that can reproduce in those conditions, much less > require it to begin reproducing.

Much less than none?

<comment><USER17> >He says the cells - inert at room temperature - begin to reproduce at 121C. ... While many spores on Earth can survive that kind of extreme heat, none have yet been discovered that can reproduce in those conditions, much less require it to begin reproducing.

Right, except there is a word for those organisms, some of which _do_ thrive at those temperatures: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthermophile>

(Specifically, organisms are known that grow at up to 122 deg Celsius.) Did this newspaper do any actual research before making those claims?

<comment><USER3> > Did this newspaper do any actual research before making those claims?

I wouldn't fault the newspaper as much as I would fault the original research.

<comment><USER7> I'm starting to wonder if you read the paper or just glanced at it.

 _1\. INTRODUCTION Most forms of life on Earth are adapted to growth within the temperature range, 10-45C. Microorganisms, known as thermophiles, however, grow optimally between 45C and 70C. Recently novel microbes, growing at temperatures above 80C have ben reported, and the upper temperature limit for growth has been extended to 113C and 121C by the discovery of Pyrolobus fumarii and "strain 121", both having been isolated from hydrothermal vents (Kashefi and Lovley, 2003). Stetter (1992) termed these newly discovered microorganisms "hyperthermophiles". There also exist in the literature disputed claims that bacteria, isolated from black smokers can grow at 250C (Baross and Deming, 1983). Louis and Kumar (2003) also reported that red cells which fell in so-called "Red Rain" over at Kerala in India (and which are studied here) could replicate at 300 C (Louis and Kumar, 2003, 2006), a claim that needs to be verified independently if it is to gain acceptance._

Wickramasingh and Wainwright were publicly critical of the earlier claims made by Louis and Kumar in 2003. This paper investigates one aspect of those claims by testing whether any growth of these cells take place, and if so whether it can occur at high temperatures. The answer to both those questions is 'yes'. It's reasonable to begin by investigating whether the phenomenon occurs at the known upper temperature bound mentioned in the first citation, and to solicit confirmation of that result, before investigating other conditions for growth whose very possibility is speculative at present.

I don't know why you're ragging on this paper so much. The news report is trash but the paper is cautious (indeed the Louis papers are a good deal more cautious than their linkbaity titles might suggest). Even if further study determines that that the cells are definitely terrestrial, the fact that such 'extremophiles' are not confined to extreme environments like the walls of volcanoes or undersea is itself news.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Five Technological Advancements to Boost Your Mental Health - <AUTHOR> http://mickgill.blogspot.com/2010/08/five-technological-advancements-to.html <comment><USER2> One paragraph per page combined with ads?</comment>


Build your own Search Engine - <AUTHOR> http://www.buildasearch.com

<comment><USER2> BuildaSearch seemed to work fine with the '<http://news.ycombinator.com'> url. I find that buildasearch offer tons more options over Google CSE. I read in some forum that buildasearch will be releasing the best build in January 2009. <http://www.buildasearch.com/itsideways> works great! BTW this site is not the most user friendly...

</comment><comment><USER3> What is the value of this over Google CSE (Custom Search Engine)?

<http://www.google.com/coop/cse/>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Gojomo...You didn't upload your logo or name of your search. Just click on each item (background, search bar, etc) and a color box will pop up.

<comment><USER4> That mechanism was far from obvious. I did enter a name; apparently that text only appears in the URL, not the page.

I also changed the background color, and that was apparently lost when I went back to adjust from 'single site' (which was not confining searches to news.ycombinator.com) to 'multiple sites'.

I see what you're trying to do with the direct click-to-change customization, but the modality/light-boxes/workflow is very confusing and frustrating. I would suggest being unapologetically web-form-like: every change should require a 'submit' to take effect; result in a full-page-reload; the reload should show the change (no separate 'preview' mode).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I tried to create one for news.ycombinator.com:

<http://buildasearch.com/news_yc>

The UI is very confusing; modal light boxes pop up often leaving it unclear if changes have been accepted. It didn't seem to accept '<http://news.ycombinator.com'> as a single-site limit; but it did accept 'ycombinator.com' as one domain in the 'multiple site' option.

It appears to be backed by Yahoo's search. (A search for [desktoppy] found the exact same results as [desktoppy site:ycombinator.com] at Yahoo, while missing results found for the same query at Google.)</comment>


Are oceans rising? - <AUTHOR> http://www.c3headlines.com/are-oceans-rising/ <comment><USER2> Looks like typical cherry-picked anti-global-warming denialism to me.

Take, for example, this quote:

> The chart also reveals the two outliers of the group: Stockholm and > Galveston, Texas. They both show a distinct cycle of ups and downs with no > obvious relation to CO2 levels. (Stockholm's gauge has recorded a declining > sea level trend.....at -14.3 inches per century, as of the end of 2014.)

Stockholm is in an area of post-glacial rebound. It makes no sense to include this as a measure of global sea level.

[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264200132_Long- term...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264200132_Long- term_sea_level_trends_Natural_or_anthropogenic) is a paper I found which does the same analysis of tidal stations, but with a Glacial Isostatic Adjustment and a longer baseline.

It's a much more thorough piece. One of points made is:

> These results confirm Meyssignac et al. [2012] observations that the sea > level fluctuations in the Tropical Pacific are due mostly to the internal > modes of ocean variability.

I bring it up because c3headlines.com page points to the lack of rise in the Pacific Islands as evidence against global sea level rise, instead of modeling both natural and anthropogenic effects.

It concludes:

> A strong external anthropogenic trend is at least 1 mm/yr in GMSLR that is > more than half of the total observed sea level trend during the XXth > century.

and it gives pointers to many other studies of the same topic, also based on a more extensive analysis of the tidal records.

The comments and method of analysis reveal a much better understanding of the details and limitation of the results than the low-quality report that user "waterrising" linked to.</comment>


Poe's Law: A parody of fundamentalism will always be mistaken as real by someone - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvVAV09-dQ8 <comment><AUTHOR> This video is Poe's Law (<http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Poe%27s_Law>) in action. The video elicits vicious hatred from the Youtube commenters but is really an exceptionally clever parody. This one did fool at me first; Poe's Law holds.</comment>


The Death of Tag Clouds - <AUTHOR> http://woorkup.com/2010/01/20/the-death-of-tag-clouds/

<comment><USER2> nope - you're just not using them properly. they're great for getting the gist from a piece of text.</comment>


Eric S. Raymond speaks heresy. - <AUTHOR> http://dotcommie.net/feed/index.php?id=160

<comment><USER2> The main point of ESR seems to be that it is economically bad for companies to close the source of their product, which is not very true considering apple has very good success rate with both MAC and iPhone. He has not give examples of his "study" about companies which lost because of closing the source of some open source software. If lawyers and corporate bosses are afraid of GPL, let them be. How can you justify removing of GPL just because lawyers and corporate bosses who never contributed anything to free community are afraid of it?

<comment><USER3> Quite. And the observation that the rise free software movement has been strongly associated with copyleft licences suggests that what ESR has no basis in reality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't really understand esr. I can't reconcile the elevated discourse of The Cathedral & the Bazaar and The Art of UNIX Programming with the constant self- praise and trolling in his blog and elsewhere. He's just too smart to be that way.

My instinct is to disagree with anyone who speaks in those tones, until I take time to really dissect what he said (and then disagree on better principles!).

<comment><USER5> It was fascinating to learn about your personal preferences for a tone of a discourse and I'll patiently wait until you decide to dissect the argument.

Meanwhile, ESR's point is an excellent one.

MIT license has proven to help a project to achieve commercial critical mass, and GPL is becoming an anachronism. Most of recent open source software that managed to build up market- and mind-share quickly was put out under MIT license.

GPL-like licenses are becoming an off-putting factor nowadays simply because you expect to be offered a 'double-licensing' option somewhere down the line. Why would people invest in a project when they are only allowed to play with it, but never to use in a commercial environment? (Until you pay for a commercial license that is).

RMS has been proven right. Software wants to be free, so it does not need chains attached to it, even when they are meant for its own protection.

<comment><USER4> If I understand his argument correctly, esr is claiming that companies can't profit from grabbing a handful of open source software and building their own product around it. The open source development model is so superior that said company will be left in the dust with their handful of code, while the open project will maintain dominance.

So why scare anyone away with restrictive licenses when open source will naturally prevail anyway.

But what about the advantage Microsoft gained from basically grabbing a BSD- licensed TCP stack for WinNT? Apparently they recoded most of that stuff since then, but it was probably a great help at the time. All you need to defeat esr's argument is one or two cases where it was proven wrong.

In my opinion, the GPL is not just a legal document but a cultural artifact. When you see a GPL notice, you can feel warm fuzzy feelings of sharing certain beliefs with the authors about freedom and sharing. You can feel the peace that comes with source code.

To paraphrase you, why should I invest my own free time in a project that could be subverted from bringing freedom to its users?

Market- and mind-share are not everyone's measure of success. And I'm not prepared to have you redefine software freedom in the name of RMS today, alright? :)

<comment><USER6> I don't think that the project can be 'subverted' from bringing freedom to users. A fork of it might be made "un-free", as in your Microsoft example. But Microsoft did a lot of their own work, and the original project is still around - completely free.

<comment><USER7> That's a good point, but I think RMS' insight was that software exists in an ecosystem. No program is an island.

Let's say I develop a very useful system under a free software model. Work that undercuts the monopoly of the unfree software producers, who fight you tooth and nail for years. They lose, but then they do the standard countermove -- taking the work and doing an Embrace & Extend. They provide a system which is _subtly incompatible_ to all their users, which aims to capture all the benefits of your new idea while wresting control of its future development.

This is the situation that RMS was fighting in the 80s and 90s. It wasn't just Microsoft; most users of any computing platform were in thrall to one dominant company or the other, be it Sun or IBM or what have you, who pulled similar tricks.

Linus Torvalds has said over and over that GPLing Linux was the smartest move he ever made. It created a situation where rival companies could trust each other, since each contribution would always go towards growing the Linux ecosystem for everyone. No one company would ever capture all the benefits for themselves. This has worked so well that Linus continues to use GPL for his newer projects like git.

Personally, I trust Linus more than ESR when it comes to understanding software. Linus is a true pragmatist with real experience running major software projects that are disruptive to the existing order.

ESR portrays himself as both a great programmer and a pragmatist, but the evidence is largely confined to his own writings. I leave it up to others to decide if fetchmail is on the same level as git or emacs. And if you look at his other writings, he's explicitly political. He is the sort of libertarian who is actively against the idea that freedom should come with responsibilities to other citizens. (As the featured speaker at a gathering of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, he ridiculed their name.) I say this not to imply he has some evil agenda - he's trying to describe the world how he sees it, and he regards appeals to "responsibility" as an Atlas- Shruggy tyranny of the mediocre. However, much like Ayn Rand, he overstates the case when he alludes to his own work as being definitive, or even academically significant. I don't know of any empirical studies that back up his political ideas, and in this excerpt at least he is not citing any.

<comment><USER8> > He is the sort of libertarian who is actively against the idea that freedom > should come with responsibilities to other citizens.

That's not true. He merely believes that they have a different set of responsibilities than you'd like.

> As the featured speaker at a gathering of Computer Professionals for Social > Responsibility, he ridiculed their name.

CPSR have a politics-laden definition of "Social Responsibility" which he doesn't agree with. Is their meaning sacred or is one allowed to criticize and even ridicule?

<comment><USER7> Well, here's the speech in question.

<http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cpsr-speech.html>

It may not be the last word ESR has to say on rights and responsibilities, but I think I accurately conveyed his views. I'm not even arguing that they are _wrong_ , although I think they are. My point was perhaps unclear, but I think ESR has a philosophical problem with the idea of a society governed by an ethos of mutual responsibility and obligations. He sees that as a road to tyranny or stagnation, consistent with Ayn Rand and her intellectual descendants.

The GPL is about building a web of such responsibilities, explicitly to force closed-source firms to abandon their tactics and become part of a community. I get the sense that ESR finds such tactics distasteful because of his political beliefs. Which is fine! He's not alone in that.

The problem is that he's still claiming the GPL has held us all back by alluding to economic studies, which I'm not sure even exist. The GPL seems to have done really well by every empirical measure I know of, and it shows no signs of strangling capitalism or anything.

<comment><USER8> > My point was perhaps unclear, but I think ESR has a philosophical problem > with the idea of a society governed by an ethos of mutual responsibility and > obligations.

Whether or not your point is unclear or incorrect, it's pretty much irrelevant to whether ESR is correct about GPL.

Reminder: good people aren't necessarily correct on a given point and bad people aren't necessarily wrong on a given point. In fact, good/bad is pretty much uncorrelated with correct/wrong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't think courts need to enforce contracts anymore. If someone doesn't live up to their word, others will find out and refuse to trust the bastard. Dishonesty is a losing strategy in the long run, and no one is likely to try it.

Furthermore, customers get scared off by contracts that they don't understand, because they could be held to some obnoxious clause that's hidden in there. Enforcing contracts is inefficient, and we should stop doing it.

Is there more to ESR's argument than that?

<comment><USER10> The reputation aspect doesn't really hold water, as a person's reputation doesn't travel that far, even in this global economy.

It's real easy to see how a negative hit to someone like Bernie Madoff ruins his career, but he's a high profile individual that many people know on sight.

If I started ripping people off, there's nothing to say I couldn't easily mitigate any negative PR by changing names (or on the internet, just changing handles). In more local endeavors, I could make a mint, ruin my name, and just move to another state (or if pressed, another country.)

Contract law still bears an important role in accountability, IMHO.

<comment><USER11> _It's real easy to see how a negative hit to someone like Bernie Madoff ruins his career..._

Yeah, about $65 billion too late.

It's not even a question about reputation _scaling_ \-- which (as you say) it does not do, which it hasn't _ever_ done, since even in 10,000 BC you could travel to a place beyond the range of your reputation. (Maybe the Internet will change that. The jury is still out on whether it can, as well as on whether the negative consequences of that are too great and we'll have to take steps to ensure that the Internet _can't_ destroy your reputation worldwide. Reputation isn't all smiles and balloons. You can destroy innocent lives with reputation. Happens all the time.)

Reputation just doesn't _work_ in all sorts of situations. Madoff is a prime example, but anyone who uses Twitter, reads _The Four Hour Workweek_ or spends twenty minutes watching TV commercials can find thousands of additional examples. Reputation is easily faked. It is easily bought. It is too readily extrapolated from one narrow field of endeavor to another. It is biased toward members of your family, and toward people who resemble members of your family. It relies on past results to predict future results, and thereby mispredicts events that occur on a longer time scale than the acquisition of a reputation. It works by implicitly assuming its own effectiveness and breaks down in edge cases. ("Why would Mr. Jones feed me Kool-Aid laced with poison? Just think what that would do to his reputation!")

Most importantly, reputation is just a _predictive_ tool. When it fails, it leaves you with no recourse: That is not its job. I can use my accountant's reputation to predict whether he will steal my money. But if he does steal my money, reputation is now useless as a tool for getting my money back. That's what a contract is for. The primary purpose of a contract isn't promoting trust; it promotes trust because its primary purpose is to _give me recourse_ after trust breaks down. I can try to take my money _back_ from my account -- and if that doesn't work I can attempt to take it out of his insurance company, his auditors, or even people he has previously paid (look up _clawback_ in the dictionary -- my accountant just explained it to me).

<comment><USER6> Also, even court enforcement of contracts has its limits - you just go outside the borders of a country, and they can't (easily) make you fulfill your contract.

That said, I am all for court enforcement of contracts. In fact, I wish that the courts would respect, if not enforce, far more contracts than they do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Well, it worked. Despite the fact that his argument has no merit and even less relevance (a _license debate_ , in 2009?), here we are: talking about Eric S. Raymond, someone who hasn't committed a line of code to any public repository in ages.

This line of argument has been part of Raymond's strategy for years. When last we saw it, he was arguing that vendors should be allowed to embed binary blobs into the running Linux kernel, because it didn't really matter if we could read driver code --- Linux just needed good device support, so people would accept it.

We get it, Raymond. Nobody's paying attention to you. Here, we'll all fix that now. Feel better?

<comment><USER13> > someone who hasn't committed a line of code to any public repository in > ages.

well, to be fair, he throws code into gpsd at times. not that gpsd is a great codebase.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> One of the things he mentions is that all GPL does is provide a mechanism to allow companies to also charge for the code. I disagree with that. I worked at a start-up that wanted to open source its code. Without the GPL, there would be no way it could do that, as a larger competitor could pick up the code base and out-market the company.

The GPL is what made it possible for that company to consider open sourcing its product. I'm sure there are other small companies like that as well. It seems like removing the GPL would only be beneficial to large companies (and, to be honest, I'm not a huge fan of the GPL, but I see its value).

</comment><comment><USER15> Another non-story. A repeat of what ESR has been saying for some time now, with the standard rebuttals.

</comment><comment><USER16> I take issue with his argument that the free market punishes those who take code close sourced. The fundamental problem with open-source development is that it's always designed by committee. In most cases, this produces cleaner, faster, more robust code, but it's not true in every case. Open-source code has this tendency to get the basics right before improving the user experience, but if the standards and basics are fuzzy, the product never gets polished. Take OpenOffice - by trying to both copy MS and improve MS, it's no wonder the entire thing is a big bloated mess.

Some others have mentioned Apple as a counter-example, and I think they're dead on. By allowing BSD to be close-source forked, the market provided the economic incentive to allow Apple to run with it. They could then close a lot of the difficulties in an OS (arbitrary hardware setups, unwillingness to couple strongly to applications, etc.), and they've made an incredible product out of it. Philosophically, open-source would never make anything like OS X, because of the amount of vertical integration.

There isn't always incentive to move a project back to closed-source, and it's hard to argue that it's a long term strategy, but you can't say that the market universally crushes projects that aren't open-source.

<comment><USER17> OpenOffice was already borked before it was opened.

Abiword seems to work just fine in contrast.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I don't find his argument particularly convincing. He's assuming that the market can see that something that was open is now closed. And while that might be true for an end user application, it's not at all true for libraries and frameworks that are folded into closed applications.

I'm the author of an LGPL-ed library. It sees a modest amount of use and my goal in choosing that license is that any changes made to that library be shared back with the rest of the community. It's not GPL-ed, so you don't have to share your application code, but if you change my library, you do have to share your changes/improvements. If you don't want to share, then don't use my library. Simple, right?

Well, every few months I get a note from someone who has noticed an application that doesn't meet this simple test. And I have to send them a dunning notice about the license violation. How many applications are there that I don't get notes about? And absent a license, does anyone seriously think that the mass market would give up "desirable application X" because its creators were bad actors vis-a-vis some embedded library?

</comment><comment><USER19> This was the basis of the "open source" split from "free software".

His examples are interesting, but of course don't apply to projects that were closed in the first place (adobe/google/microsoft/oracle/ibm - anyone making serious money from selling software). And for closed source projects, dropping the GPL would also change the game as a whole in other ways, perhaps unexpected.

<comment><USER20> Exactly, I remember these arguments then, the bottom line is the open source "movement" was all about promoting the superior development model. RMS, Eben Moglen, and others warned against this. I also recall thinking this was just some folks looking to monetize their GNU/Linux work.

The arguments about scale are interesting. For an IBM the GPL is just fine, they have the size to compete against anyone with value added services on top of Linux. For smaller, open source projects I've seen them prefer apache 2.0, I speculate because it encourages commercial growth. When you're IBM someone has to grow pretty big to pose a threat. For their other closed products they continue to enjoy great revenues. They can put the resources into keeping them best of breed.

At the end of the day I believe the GPL best serves the rights of individual programmers and a moral argument can be made that software, just like mathematics, should be free. Notice that mathematics is also largely a collaborative effort, it's very seldom done well by isolated individuals.

<comment><USER21> IBM uses the GPL as a weapon. Linux growth hurts Microsoft and provides them a platform push their own products without Microsoft's involvement.

Ordinarily however, IBM considers it's greatest asset it IP, and they see 'GPLing' their software as a threat to their IP. They are actually rather ambivalent towards the FOSS ideology.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's only heresy if you bought into the religion in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER23> Assume you accept his argument that the open source process is such an advantage and that the market is efficient enough to punish companies who use open source code but don't reciprocate. Why then isn't the market efficient enough to punish those companies who have an irrational fear of the GPL (and therefore refuse to take advantage of the majority of open source code)?

This appears to be his only stated problem with the GPL, and I thought the GPL is anti-business meme would have died long ago given the continued success of Linux.

</comment><comment><USER24> The Ruby and Rails communities realized this years ago. Almost all open source in those communities is MIT or BSD licensed. You can usually spot a newbie or license zealot by the use of GPL.

<comment><USER25> Here, here. I've always committed original code to the public domain and have been glad to see greater use of less restrictive licenses. Whatever havoc near-term miscreants create, sharealike is not easily thwarted; transparency and trust have proven brawny allies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Ignoring the economic argument, I'm happy to see that there's mass-market-ish consideration of opening up the licenses.

BSD is more inline with original hacker culture (IMHO, obviously). The GPL forces you to believe what I believe to use my code. Dropping it to get rid of viral fears is a very good idea. The more use the code has, the better off we all are -- there are enough other good reasons than force for people to share changes and contributions.

</comment><comment><USER27> What is the difference between Raymond's proposed non-restrictive open source software licensing plan and unleashing software into the public domain? It seems like the authors of such software would have absolutely no control over their software under these licenses, effectively forfeiting their intellectual property rights.

<comment><USER28> Well, if you release in public domain you lose any right, AFAIK. Someone could step over, take your code and have intellectual property over it. You don't forfeit your property of the code with BSD licensing. IANAL, of course.

<comment><USER29> Someone can't make public domain software unpublic. They can take it and do what they please, but they can't change the terms of use for others.

AFAIK, generally US Government developed software is generally public domain (unless it's classified or something) and I doubt that means someone can just "assume ownership" of it.

<comment><USER8> > AFAIK, generally US Government developed software is generally public domain > (unless it's classified or something) and I doubt that means someone can > just "assume ownership" of it.

They can't assume ownership of exactly what the US govt released, but they can create a derived work and own that.

<comment><USER29> True, but that's fine. It doesn't affect you in any negative way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Exactly how did ESR get to be so prominent in the community? <\- what ever that means.

<comment><USER31> Some famous rants like "The Cathedral and the Bazaar." The irony is most big bazaar projects switched to a cathedral model, in particular the Linux kernel. (I'm not against or in favor of this.)

The Slashdot crowd used to hype-love him.

<comment><USER32> It seemed as if the Slashdot crowd, et al, held him personally responsible for the dot com crash, coming as it did shortly after he talked about how weird it was to be rich (of course he lost it due to dropping stock prices, I think).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31>
      > Effectively putting them under proprietary control, proprietary licensing and
      > then tried to make a business model out of that. They generally fail.

It sucks if you see people being charged for your free code by some scumbag freeloader and the users end up with an inferior program. People with that mentality don't mind spam-vertising to push their scams.

I used to be pro-BSD/MIT licenses, now I'm pro GPL again.

</comment><comment><USER33> >I don't think we need licenses like the GPL -ESR

GPL is the glue that binds the community. Without that everything will fall apart. And ERS wanna go that way. So bad. I'm really disappointed of his view.

</comment><comment><USER34> It is not heresy, it is common sense.

<comment><USER35> Actually, it's self-serving stupidity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I think ESR has an excellent point, and interpret his saying that to mean that it is not mandatory to release under the GPL if it hinders what you are doing, because actual market conditions have proven that the closed source model can't compete in many ways, thus it is not as large a threat as it can be perceived to be.</comment>


Why Free Software and Open Source can never reconcile - <AUTHOR> http://harishankar.org/blog/entry.php/why-i-think-free-software-and-open-source-can-never-reconcile Why Free Software and Open Source cannot reconcile the differences: because the principles and goals are fundamentally different and incompatible with each other. <comment><USER2> That's a nice essay.

I believe you missed a "point of importance and ultimate goal" of the open source movement: to preserve and enhance the market for _proprietary_ software.

On that goal, free software and open source are diametrically opposed.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I believe that ESR himself denies this view. But a lot of OSS supporters are of the view that the enemy is Free Software and not Closed Source/Proprietary software.

By the way, I wrote that essay purely dispassionately and without trying to favour either view. Just presented my thoughts after a lot of reading up on the subject and interviews of RMS and ESR and internet discussion forums.

<comment><USER3> > But a lot of OSS supporters are of the view that the enemy is Free Software > and not Closed Source/Proprietary software.

Citation please? I can't think of any (non-corporate) person who has expressed that sort of sentiment.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've read this opinion on a lot of blogs and online discussions. But it's impossible for me at this time to collect a list of authoritative sources.

But, for instance, check out ESR's blog esr.ibiblio.org and check the comments on his latest article, calling RMS a fanatic. May of the views expressed in the comments section reflect this view.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Roberto Gómez Bolaños 'Chespirito' Dies - <AUTHOR> http://www.latintimes.com/roberto-gomez-bolanos-chespirito-dies-mexican-legend-dead-85-heart-failure-169736

<comment><USER2> I suppose this actor is mostly unknown to americans?

It was huge in latin america. Maybe "El Chavo Del Ocho" is a bigger thing in Brazil than Mexico.

Everyone my age (30) has good memories of this series and will consider watching it again if its on TV. It was huge like Sesame Street is on the US.

As a kid, I never noticed that the actors were adults playing children.

Some episode with english subtitles: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwm3MmWjess](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwm3MmWjess)

(To brazilians, the version dubbed in portuguese is considered the better version).

I love to hear about the customs of other countries regarding this small, everyday stuff. Like how finns leave their babies in the outdoors: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21537988](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21537988)

I wish this was easier. Mostly I can be exposed to US and UK cultures. The other countries, only stereotypes.

<comment><USER3> The show is still on air in Chile in one of the largest TV channels. I'm in my late 30s and I remember the show was rather old already when I was a kid :-)

Now seeing the show with the eyes of an adult feels like a portrait of a much simpler but much poorer era. El Chavo (mexican slang for "the kid") was a boy who slept _inside a barrel_ in the shared patio of a slum ("la vecindad") where most of the action happens. With plenty of physical humor, El Chavo was frequently hit in the head as a punishment in the show, specially by Don Ramón, a character which would never find a job and was always hiding from the landlord.

It's the kind of show it would never pass if it were to be filmed on this date, but we grew up watching it and learning to love it, in the same way we loved racist cartoons by the Warner Bros. or those old episodes where the Flintstones were heavy smokers.

<comment><USER2> _El Chavo (mexican slang for "the kid") was a boy who slept inside a barrel in the shared patio of a slum ("la vecindad") where most of the action happens._

Interesting! In portuguese they made it into a name ("Chaves").

Some say that El Chavo Del Ocho ("The kid from 8") actually lived in the apt. 8, and just liked hiding in the barrel ;)

To me, when Ramon hit El Chavo it was funny, like Chaplin or The Three Stoges slapstick humor.

(But I agree it would be banned in this politically correct days.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> His shows where well written, clever, entertaining and quietly delivered a strong social message about poverty and social disparities in latin america.. all while being really, really contagiously funny.

Many of his funny lines are now part of the daily latin popular culture.

Take care Chavo, say hi to Don Ramon up there..

</comment><comment><USER5> I must have watched hundreds of hours of Chespirito when I was a young boy in Honduras back in the 1970s, I even remember having comic books of El Chapulin Colorado.

</comment><comment><USER6> R.I.P legend. We from Brazil will miss you. Rest in peace and thanks for everything!

</comment><comment><USER7> RIP legend.</comment>


The mysterious Voynich manuscript has finally been decoded - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/09/the-mysterious-voynich-manuscript-has-finally-been-decoded/ <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15186631](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15186631)</comment>


Friend's JavaScript site that crawls a domain and returns social share stats - <AUTHOR> http://graeme-metrics.appspot.com/

<comment><USER2> Code for app is available on my github; might be a bug or two left to fix. [https://github.com/graemeboy/Javascript-website-crawler- with...](https://github.com/graemeboy/Javascript-website-crawler-with-social- metrics)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is nice.

<comment><AUTHOR> from the e-mail my friend sent about it: "The code also isn't super clean, but you can see it's all just HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Which is pretty cool. No processing on the server at all"</comment></comment>


Let's Fill Our Cities with Taller, Wooden Buildings - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/opinion/wood-buildings-architecture-cities.html <comment><USER2> What about the safety aspect? What if there's a fire? Wouldn't it spread much faster to these wooden buildings..then concrete?

How about areas with winter climates? I don't think they would be able to retain heat as well.

<comment><USER3> AFAIK wood can be made relatively fire-resistant via lamination & treatment. Plywood and Concrete can have similar r-values (depending on lots of variables). You get most your insulation from... insulation. I saw a wooden house with R60 once.</comment></comment>