Brain activity can be used to measure how well you understand a concept - <AUTHOR> https://neurosciencenews.com/concept-comprehension-14296/ <comment><USER2> I don't see where they accounted for those who incorrectly believe they understand the topic vs those who actually understand.

Unless they are claiming the process either:

1) detects how the brain correctly models Newtonian physics vs incorrectly.

or

2) detects accurate knowledge from incorrect. I can't imagine this lol rich assertion would be the actual claim. But the title does vaguely imply it.

<comment><USER3> With these kind of fMRI studies, there's usually a written assessment before or after the scan to verify your understanding of the concepts. They're making claim 1, that you can detect how learning happens. There's also usually a baseline scan before the class or whatever education method takes place.

Source: I work in a very similar fMRI lab.

<comment><USER4> Sure, I believe you can rigorously find brain patterns that are _correlated_ with understanding. The obvious, "correlation is not causation" applies, however.

The problem is such pattern aren't any guarantee of understanding. Just "feeling confident" seems like such an easily correlated thing. More people who learn a subject sufficiently to do well on a test might "feel confident" but certain kinds of people might just feel confident without that actual learning.

<comment><USER5> But they're testing the participants to see if they _actually_ understand. Re- read gp

<comment><USER6> They're testing understanding for the learning set, but applying a correlation to estimate understanding on the test set.

<comment><USER7> What is scientific causation but correlation that works to an acceptable quantity of Sigma?

<comment><USER8> Causation also implies well sequential causality in some way and reproducibility. A subtle but crucial difference.

If most people on the battlefield are covered in their own blood will soon die that doesn't mean gathering a gallon of a person's own blood through several donations and then throwing it at them at a Gettysburg musuem will kill them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder two things...

Would learning a key concept well but incorrectly defintely show up?

Could you use this for crime investigation or prediction?

\- see how familiar the suspect is with the crime scene photos

\- see how familiar they are with certain criminal acts or concepts

\- see how each member of a lineup does with these tests

<comment><USER10> I would imagine you can get false positives from _thinking_ you understand a concept - can do plenty of mental processing without ever really having any thoughts on the subject that are technically correct.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I give it five years before this is involved in technical interviews.

<comment><USER12> And after 20 years it is applied to neuroscientists with the result that it is complete nonsense. Not the first time something like that happened.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The true value of this likely/ isn't/ in its ability to access directly the understanding of the subject - we can tell that already but /how/ the thinking process works. Correlations only tell you consistency not being right.

The real intersing cases would be the outliers who literally think differently yet have same or better performance. Even if they are just say brain damage cases that don't have the same location so do it some place else picks up the slack.

</comment><comment><USER13> Well hello dystopian world, we meet again. On the plus side, kids won't have to take long boring exams anymore. On the down side, everything else about discrimination...

<comment><USER14> Discrimination doesn't have to be bad. It can be used to direct resources where they will do the most good, for instance.

The real solution is to build a robust egalitarian culture, not to clutch pearls every time something potentially harmful and potentially useful is created.

<comment><USER15> > _It is true that a computer, for example, can be used for good or evil. It > is true that a helicopter can be used as a gunship and it can also be used > to rescue people from a mountain pass. And if the question arises of how a > specific device is going to be used, in what I call an abstract ideal > society, then one might very well say one cannot know._

> _But we live in a concrete society, [and] with concrete social and > historical circumstances and political realities in this society, it is > perfectly obvious that when something like a computer is invented, then it > is going to be adopted will be for military purposes. It follows from the > concrete realities in which we live, it does not follow from pure logic. But > we 're not living in an abstract society, we're living in the society in > which we in fact live._

\-- Joseph Weizenbaum, [http://tech.mit.edu/V105/N16/weisen.16n.html](http://tech.mit.edu/V105/N16/weisen.16n.html)

That's not pearl clutching, that's being serious, and ignoring it for long enough will make it impossible to build a robust egalitarian culture -- because the potential for oppression and the conditioning of being subject to automatic processes, confusing "measurements" with things, and "labels" with people, will have been amplified extremely, not to mention the sheer capabilities of mass manipulation and control, with rather little to show for on the other side of the scale.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> "Goodmorning kids, Please wear your helmets"

</comment><comment><USER17> Whenever I read one of these articles/headlines, I wonder how/where can I get a device to measure brain activity. Some sort of fitbit for the brain (ideally with no connection to 'the cloud', of course).

<comment><USER18> OpenBCI sells kits. I personally wont buy until they get up to like 64/128 channels but they have decent 16/32 channel kits right now. They even started offering all-in-ones so you don't have to mess around with picking the wrong set of components to get up and running

<comment><USER17> Interesting, thanks for the tip. Have you tried one of those to decide not to buy them? The 'open' in their name is encouraging. How far are we to train some sort of assistant that executes commands based on brain activity patterns, e.g. instead of shouting '<assitant-name> turn off the music', just think it and have it executed?

<comment><USER3> I've used OpenBCI before, it's pretty good - noise filtering was the hardest part, which isn't really that bad of a problem to have. Here's a paper showing how to read eye movements with it: [https://sci- hub.tw/10.1109/ICORR.2017.8009392](https://sci- hub.tw/10.1109/ICORR.2017.8009392)

The Muse ([https://choosemuse.com/](https://choosemuse.com/)) is much more of a consumer-friendly device, and it was super easy to get working at a hackathon years ago, but it looks like they suspended access to their SDK.

<comment><USER19> No, don't buy anything from Muse. Those devices are _awful_ and the firm works (worked?) hard to reduce visibility on the problems for example in their developer forums, instead of working to address the problems. I owned multiple device versions from the Kickstarter forward and they were all universally finicky and shit. The one redeeming feature were the (patented) sensor pads, which can work better than more "traditional" sensor pads. But they dry out and get gross pretty quickly, and also are easily damaged, and it felt like the Muse people really wanted deep down to be in the business of supplying people with fresh new sensor pads like -- badum-psh! -- some kind of subscription. Interestingly, I _also_ used one from a maker event, and it definitely seemed like they had picked the cream of the crop in order to market them better. But the production units were terrible!

<comment><USER20> Can you confirm that you are bashing the right company? There is nothing on a Muse that I can imagine fits the description of a sensor pad that could wear out. I have two devices and they work fine -- but EEG is itself a major challenges and dry electrode even more so.b

<comment><USER19> Oh jeez what the hell, you're right. I was thinking about Emotiv! Well it'd be nice if I could unfuck this situation, as I also got a Muse through Indiegogo and even though I gave it to a friend some years ago, it did what it said on the tin.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It appears the multiple choice test worked better (a greater difference in scores). Which I suppose isn't surprising, they aren't limited to the yes/no style questions that the fMRI used.

</comment><comment><USER21> Me on CORS: _________

<comment><USER13> That's going to be my next interview question...

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's _getting a sense_ of some kind of measurement of how it is written in the brain. It's not _understanding_ : brain != you. and not limited to the concept. For example, it doesn't take into account how well you "feel" about the concept. People are not computing machines per se. People are very emotional for one thing and without any research everybody knows that your current mood and state of mind influences a lot. Two people with the same understanding could fire different brain patterns, perhaps.

</comment><comment><USER20> What is the evidence this approach would transfer to new concepts, new test materials or non-Dartmouth students?

</comment><comment><USER23> This can be used to A/B test online courses to perfection.

</comment><comment><USER24> Seems like a very broad conclusion for such a narrow study. I'd question whether it is as successful when it comes to concepts that are more fluid, such as those found in the humanities.

I also don't really see the advantage of this kind of examination. One still needs to develop tests to trigger the students thinking on the concepts—it seems we merely trade one potential form of error on the part of graders (checking students answers) for another (misinterpretations of results or bugs or in the algorithm or unanticipated changes in the model).

Just because certain practices are historically prior does not mean they're necessarily worse. Certainty is a slippery beast. The results here still depend entirely on the assumptions of the developers of this ML algorithm, their notions of what it means to "understand something" etc.

Our era's obsession with throwing technology at literally everything will bite us in the bum at some point (if it hasn't already).</comment>


Differential Fault Analysis of SHA3-224 and SHA3-256 [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://eprint.iacr.org/2016/709.pdf <comment><USER2> tl;dr if an attacker can flip certain bits in one of the last phases of a SHA3 execution (e.g. through power glitching on a device) and can compare the result with that of a correct execution, the internal state of the function can be fully recovered. With short inputs, the whole input can be recovered. This may pose a risk for MAC protocols where the attacker might be able to reveal the secret.

Nothing to worry about outside of the hardware world.

<comment><USER3> Hardware world? Do you mean the DDR4 ram in the hardware in your server? An example of how bits can be flipped in modern hardware is the Row Hammer Attack- [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> can someone please tl;dr?</comment>


Why is Google peeping over my fence? - <AUTHOR> Ok so Im a little creeped out right now, just saw google has added my back lane to their street view database, the problem is they are looking over my fence into my back yard. I am worried because what I thought was private has now been shared with the world! https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_Nfay2U0AAX7Sx.jpg <comment><USER2> "because they can."

</comment><comment><USER3> Google Streetview link?

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't have a link for you but I found this and many more images of my neighborhoods back yards by opening Google Earth then dragging the little man icon onto the lane way behind my house. I understand these are old images but that worries me even more as who knows how many images are on file and who is Google selling access to these images before they are made public? Are bylaw enforcers looking into our back yards? I think there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, that is being taken away when Google records then shares images of my fenced back yard taken from such a high viewpoint, sure the driver of a large truck driving down the lane might have this perspective but they are not photographing then sharing those photos..or are they?</comment></comment>


Australia versus Philip Morris. How we took on big tobacco and won - <AUTHOR> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-versus-philip-morris-how-we-took-on-big-tobacco-and-won-20160517-gowwva.html <comment><USER2> Linkbait title on the newspapers' part. This is the summary and the extent of the "how":

'The 186-page judgement, unsealed on Tuesday, shows the tribunal rejected the claim at the first hurdle, finding Philip Morris had moved its Australian and Asian headquarters to Hong Kong for the express purpose of making the claim.'</comment>


Show HN: My notes on Java 8, JEE, Spring – week long course - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/aysark/NotesOnJava8

<comment><USER2> Great work !! May be you should put a blog to accompany this work so it will be picked up easily by Google.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, yeah- i should really start a blog but just haven't got around to it.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is the business model of ICO? - <AUTHOR> Somebody just told me that they raised $16M in ICO. That is like a lot of money. How will the money be used? <comment><USER2> * Make imaginary money.

* Sell it to people who've gone mad.

There is no step 3. It's not an investment, you don't own a portion of the company as a result. It would be like selling monopoly money except that monopoly is a trademark so that stuff's probably worth more.

</comment><comment><USER3> There was a recent comment on Reddit that during the first dot-com bubble there were a lot of people who just used start-up money to have fun. That didn't really happen a lot this time and people now in SF are super famous for their irrational belief in their company and working 130 hour weeks ala Melissa Mayer.

Anyway I think ICOs are like some start-ups in the first bubble, using the money to party because no one is looking closely. After all, if you have a great company or a shit company, you still raise the same amount of money. Why work hard when you know the upcoming bubble correction will wipe out your gains?

</comment><comment><USER4> I believe the business model is something along the lines of:

* start up

* cash in

* sell out

* bro down

</comment><comment><USER5> As I see it - ICO is a very quick way to bypass 100% of regulations to raise money.

As long as buyers are ok with potential to lose 100% of their investment - everyone (but government regulators) are happy.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> So it is better not to chase the fame. Build something which lasts:)</comment>


The Top 1% of Artists Earn 77% of Recorded Music Income, Study Finds... - <AUTHOR> http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2014/03/05/toponepercent?utm_ <comment><USER2> So more balanced than real-life?</comment>


Snek: An experimental system for writing generative art systems - <AUTHOR> http://inconvergent.net/snek-is-not-an-acronym/ <comment><USER2> I've used his differential-line repo to make some wall art for my apartment, it's some beautiful stuff:

[http://imgur.com/a/BoKdy](http://imgur.com/a/BoKdy)

Repo at: [https://github.com/inconvergent/differential- line](https://github.com/inconvergent/differential-line)

</comment><comment><USER3> Hi, I'm the author of the repo.

If you want to read about the "framework", rather than look at the code: [http://inconvergent.net/snek-is-not-an- acronym/](http://inconvergent.net/snek-is-not-an-acronym/) .

<comment><USER4> Great! I like the other stuff on your website too.

<comment><USER3> i'm glad to hear it!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The author also wrote On Generative Algorithms[0] which is a very inspiring overview for many types of generative art.

[0]: [http://inconvergent.net/generative/](http://inconvergent.net/generative/)

</comment><comment><USER6> I follow this guy's (@inconvergent) generative art on twitter and I highly recommend it as it is awesome: organic and yet clearly procedural.

</comment><comment><USER7> So if I'm understanding this correctly, you are generating a data structure describing geometry manipulations which can then be applied to a distinct geometry "instance?" If so, isn't this just a free monad?

Also, what are the advantages of this approach over simple function composition operating on immutable data structures/geometries?

<comment><USER3> i don't know what a free monad is.

not sure if there are any advantages. this is an experiment i'm working on because i find it interesting. separating the data structure from the instructions that attempt to manipulate it has the advantage of making it easier to deal with the state [the state is not changed inside (with-snek ...)]. basically it's a kind of map-reduce. i'm sure you can achieve this in multiple other ways as well.

one of the reasons i'm interested in this particular pattern is described further here: [http://inconvergent.net/a-method-for- mistakes/](http://inconvergent.net/a-method-for-mistakes/).

<comment><USER7> It's indeed very interesting!

What I meant is that it might be simpler to just have pure functions operating on immutable data structures, which you could then compose in whichever you want. I.e. you could have a function collapse-vertices that takes some geometry and produces some _new_ geometry (without altering the initial one!), which you could then compose with some other pure function, like produce- random-vertices, and so on, much like a Unix pipe.

A free monad is just a formalization of the command/interpreter pattern in a purely functional context (i.e. most useful in languages like Haskell or Clojure).

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure about how you would efficiently do this. (I'm not experienced with pure functional programming.) cloning the entire structure for every applied function sounds like it will be slow? is that not what you will have to do in practice?

i basically want the alterations to change the data structure, and i want them to do it according to a particular priority eventually. atm there is no priority ordering.

i can already make (almost) arbitrary functions, but you have to register them ahead of time, and they have to follow a particular pattern: [http://inconvergent.net/arbitrary- alterations/](http://inconvergent.net/arbitrary-alterations/). this is so that i can control the order in which they are applied, eventually.

<comment><USER7> > cloning the entire structure for every applied function sounds like it will > be slow? is that not what you will have to do in practice?

In short, no - as an example, when an element is added to an immutable map, a big part of the newly produced map is structurally shared with the old one (check out [0].)

As for the ordering, you could have a list of geometry -> geometry functions. You could then take the initial geometry and apply the list of functions in order, or a permutation of it, or drop some functions, or apply some others multiple times, and so on.

But anyway, it's just an idea - thinking in terms of atomic geometry transformations instead of alternations may or may not be easier in more complex scenarios, I don't know :)

[0] [http://hypirion.com/musings/understanding-persistent- vector-...](http://hypirion.com/musings/understanding-persistent-vector-pt-1)

<comment><USER3> this link looks interesting, thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I find the description confusing: "snek is a simple data structure for working with vertices and edges"

If I hear data structure lisp code is not on my mind, so it's rather an API or a drawing library?

What am I manipulating exactly?

        ; context start
       (with-snek (snk)

What's in `snk`? Sorry, I never used lisp before

Do you plan to write an API documentation?

<comment><USER3> you manipulate a data structure that contains vertices and edges. there is more about it here [http://inconvergent.net/snek-is-not-an- acronym/](http://inconvergent.net/snek-is-not-an-acronym/).

snk is an instance of snek, so it contains a realisation of the structure and its current state.

<comment><USER9> so...snk is a graph?

<comment><USER10> Most data structures are graphs. This one just happens to be "self-aware" enough to use graph terminology.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


M2OS: A Small and Lightweight Ada RTOS for Microcontrollers - <AUTHOR> https://m2os.unican.es/ <comment><USER2> This:

> allows to apply the advanced techniques used in high integrity systems (i.e. > aircraft flight control, medical devices, critical industrial control) to > the smallest MCUs used by industry and hobbyists

But also this:

> M2OS implements one-shot non-preemptive scheduling policy

Uhm, what? Those two paragraphs cancel out each other pretty much.

> The STM32F4 board is based on the ARM Cortex-M4 microcontroller. The amount > of memory available in this board does not justify the use of a small RTOS > as M2OS, however we have decided to port M2OS to this board to explore its > implementation on ARM microcontrollers.

STM32F4 is a controller family, not a board. Is this some GPT-3 output?

The list goes on ...

Seriously, what am I even looking at? Is this just some SEO optimized site with a bunch of buzzwords and some seemingly valid content?

<comment><USER3> If you look at ST's product chart page, STM32F4XX microcontrollers can have anywhere from 512K to 2056K of flash, maybe they're suggesting that 512K doesn't justify the use of small rtos?

<comment><USER4> It's usually not the amount of flash that's the problem with an RTOS on an embedded microcontroller. It's the amount of RAM. Because each process requires it's own stack. That said STM32 parts generally have enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _There 's a mini-RTOS in my language!_

[https://blog.adacore.com/theres-a-mini-rtos-in-my- language](https://blog.adacore.com/theres-a-mini-rtos-in-my-language)

Fascinating.

</comment><comment><USER6> There's quite a lot of OSS RTOSs.

[https://www.osrtos.com/](https://www.osrtos.com/)

</comment><comment><USER7> When did Ada become popular in the embedded RTOS space? First I've heard of it and I've been working in the space for two decades.

<comment><USER8> In aerospace and/or defense?

<comment><USER7> No. Is that where Ada is used?

<comment><USER8> Yup; there's real-time Ada in half the things flying around, and most all of the ones painted grey.

<comment><USER7> That is amazing. There are so many good links in the peer comments. I worked at STMicro, then briefly at Arm, then at IAR. I never once encountered Ada. Two separate worlds!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


I put together a list of resources for preparing for interviews - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/andreis/interview

<comment><USER2> FYI, deleting and resubmitting links is against HN rules. This is the third time I've seen this one.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. I thought I was hellbanned or something. Will behave now.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Validate my startup idea - <AUTHOR> Meet Repairer: https://hammadn.wixsite.com/repairer
An on-demand repair service. Get your damaged products repaired as fast and as cheap as possible without the need of going anywhere!
Please let me know your comments & feedback. <comment><USER2> I believe you have far too broad a task to start out with. You won't be able to gain efficiencies from repeated tasks if you need to be able to repair anything. I think you will only achieve meaningful price-points (ones consumers will pay instead of purchasing new goods) if you can gain significant efficiency over existing home-shop repair guys.

</comment><comment><USER3> Maybe try making it more specific. Have them specialize in one difficult but common task. Ideally one that can happen away from the house, because people want to minimize visits to their doorstep from strangers, even invited strangers.</comment>


Ask HN: Please review my web app: online video converter - <AUTHOR>

Encode (http://en.co.de/) is an online video converter built for people who don't care about conversion details. I've built Encode as part of November Startup Sprint (although it slipped a bit into Dec). I've written more about my experiences building it here: http://senko.net/en/experiences-building-encode/ <comment><USER2> Congrats on the new app :)

I'll share a few things:

I'd suggest revising/rethinking your one sentence pitch that, "Encode is an online video converter built for people who don't care about conversion details." The "conversion details" would be what exactly? To me, I interpret that to me "what format the output file is". If that's the case, then every single user/person is interested in the "conversion details". If you meant something else, then I didn't get it.

Also, I don't guess that I understand who would use this. When you buy almost any video camera, digital camera with video, or even video phones, almost all of them come with a way to convert/output the video into multiple formats. There are several open source converters as well and even iTunes can do some conversion. Maybe this is what you mean by "conversion details"?

I would also agree with lukeinth that pricing seems "off". But... what startup web app ever gets that right anyway!?!

Enjoy the journey and congrats again for putting it together

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the kind words :)

By "details" I meant details like video / audio codec combination or codec params. But even "output file format" doesn't neccessarily interest the user. A lot of people might say "I want to watch this file on my iPhone", not "I want to have it in H.264/AVC with AAC sounds, because that's what my iPhone prefers". At least that's my base assumption.

So I'm targeting really the most non-techincal users. This is also why I believe Encode stands a chance besides a host of quality free(ware) software available. Non-technical users (still) have a fear of computers, of installing stuff and having to deal with breakage that often ensues. Encode is hassle free (modulo the hassle of uploading big files and paying).

<comment><USER2> Okay. I get it - that makes more sense. Have you thought about how will you target people who are (a) not technical enough to want the 'details', yet (b) are technically savvy enough to know that they should find a video encoder?

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that non-technical gadget-owners are a good (first) approximation of those people, since they (might) have a clear need - they want to watch something on their gadget and it doesn't work. They may not know the tool they need is called "video converter", but that's about what they need.

So, one of my marketing plans is to contact blogs/sites/people that have content / reviews / howtos / tips for gadget-owners and see whether they'd like to cover Encode.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> First of all, great job! I love the simple design and layout!

I'm a bit tired which might have affected things, but I a bit confused on the initial upload page - I kinda expected the upload to start automatically, and then when I clicked on the video format some kind of magic would kick in.

Personally, I would experiment with the page layout a bit; I'm not sure how well it'd work but maybe something like the user clicks browser, selects the file and that uploads automagically, and when that's complete the buttons for the video format appear, and finally there's a big "ENCODE"-type button at the bottom which kicks off the whole process.

But that's me and a tired, slightly confused mind ;)

Oh, a couple of minor points: I'm using Chrome 8 and the copy link to clipboard button didn't work. Also, the download link for the video took me straight to the video playing in my browser - if you want to change that you can send a (damn, getting old, memory failing...) header that'll bring up a file save box :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

I want to make the service as dead-easy and obvious as possible - it should work for you if you've just been woken up after 2 hours of sleep with a huge hangover and you're totally annoyed that you have to mess around with converting and you just want to get it over and go back to sleep. So your tired&confusing experience is valuable for me :)

I've had the option for automatically uploading the file, but decided against it thinking the files will be quite big and people might not appreciate the upload start automatically (in a different context, I'm really annoyed when web/flash video starts playing automatically, even if I opened the page with the intention of watching it). But since they already selected the file, it might make sense to start the upload "in background" while they can review and select what they want to convert to.

About the video page comments: both good points, will fix, thanks :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Love the domain name, site looks good too. Pricing seems rather high but I guess developers are not the target audience. I tried uploading a video and it seemed to get stuck 1/4 of the way though 100mb. Thats probably my net connection, not your service though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

The target audience is casual user, who might prefer an online tool (even if it costs a bit) to downloading and using the tool on their computer. The pricing is quite high atm - I hope I'll be able to lower the costs (and thus the price) down soon (as there are rumors of Paypal coming to Croatia in 2011), but I decided to start higher and then lower when possible, instead of being cheap and then having to bump the prices up afterwards.

If it got stuck during the upload, yeah it was probably some problem with the upload (Have you used the flash uploader? I've got ordinary file input field for browsers with no flash (IOS/Android devices), but I haven't tested that as much as the Flash one).

That does bring an interesting question tho: would users want to upload hundreds of MB of video? I don't have a good answer to that. Google search trends suggest people do want "online video converter", so I guess there are some people who would prefer it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very nice. Worked as advertised. Great domain name, and love your simple design and UI. I won't say anything more, because I don't need this right now. But if anyone else here is interested, I highly recommend you try it out.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Clickable links: <http://en.co.de/> and <http://senko.net/en/experiences- building-encode/>

</comment><comment><USER6> Have you considered the possibility that online video encoding is only a partial solution to a greater problem? Why do people want to encode videos? What do they do afterwards?

Have you considered providing an API for developers and reduced prices for "bulk encoding" (on a monthly basis let's say).

Even if you just want to do the encoding part (it's OK to want to do one thing and do it well) others may want to use your service to build theirs. It's another revenue channel for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good questions.

> Why do people want to encode videos?

My assumption: Because they either want to watch them on some gadget of theirs (eg. smartphone), or they want to "give" the video to someone (colleague, friend, etc - so not neccessarily sharing in the tweet/post on youtube/vimeo sense). To address this, Encode gives them a video page url they can share / retype in their gadget or use to preview, instead just a download link to the media file.

> Have you considered providing an API for developers and reduced prices for > "bulk encoding" (on a monthly basis let's say).

This is exactly what Zencoder does (as well as several others). They're awesome at doing this and have a great API - if you're a developer in need of something like this, you should definitely take a look. Encode is basically a trimmed-down Zencoder for the casual / average Joe user.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Nice web design, looks very professional. (Although I'm not the target market because I don't mind installing Handbrake and Evom)

On the custom encoding options, I only see 4:3 sizes, no 16:9. Is that intentional?

<comment><AUTHOR> I wanted to trim the possibilities to as low number as possible (even in the "advanced" options). To do this, I basically arbitrarily picked up a few resolution - iPhone one because that's what iPhone specs are, Flash one because that's YouTube's Flash SD size, and a few others inbetween.

The conversion process maintains aspect ratio by setting the larger dimension to what's selected. So for widescreen videos, this would mean that you choose based on the width, and the height will be scaled accordingly.

It's not very clear this is how it works tho (it's buried in Video page) - thanks for pointing it out.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Review my portfolio - <AUTHOR> http://ramanuj.me/

<comment><USER2> Looks nice... once suggestion - the first thing I noticed were he rounded corners on the top, and the ~1px of white which looks like it occurred when you cut the background out in photoshop (or whatever). My eyes were drawn to that immediately, and it would take very little effort to clean that up

<comment><AUTHOR> I used CSS3 border radius over the sliced image and it didn't blend well i guess! Thanks for letting me know.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The fonts you're using are really ugly, at least to me. Even a default Verdana would have been better.

<comment><AUTHOR> I use two fonts, Tangerine from the Google font library and Fertigo Pro from the exljbris font foundry, both via @font-face. Not sure if they don't go well together. Fertigo is more a print friendly font i guess. Thanks for the feedback. I will try a few other font options.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Very nice.</comment>


EU alleges Facebook provided misleading information about WhatsApp takeover - <AUTHOR> http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-4473_en.htm <comment><AUTHOR> > in a reply to a request of information, Facebook indicated to the Commission > that it would be unable to establish reliable automated matching between the > two companies' user accounts.

>Subsequently, in August 2016, WhatsApp announced, among other updates to its terms of service and privacy policy, the possibility of linking WhatsApp user phone numbers with Facebook user identities.

> If the Commission's preliminary concerns in this case were confirmed, the > Commission could, impose a fine of up to 1% of Facebook's turnover</comment>


Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030 - <AUTHOR> https://www.euractiv.com/section/electric-cars/news/denmark-to-ban-petrol-and-diesel-car-sales-by-2030/ <comment><USER2> At the start, I thought these announcements and laws (eg Scotland) to ban ICE vehicles by 20XX were cheap politics. A promise Someone Else will deliver later, with credit due to you now.

I've come around though. I think all the bastardized carbon accounting, market based solutions are on average quite bad. The idea of a neutral, "market decides" policy is a myth. These things are complex, and that compmexity is an opportunity for regulatory capture.

For example, most European vehicle tax codes have been altered to reflect emissions.

The upshot is that (1) new vehicles are 20% ish more efficient (2) older vehicles become uneconomical faster (3) people who drive older vehicles clear pay more tax. (4) Switching from a 10yr old ICE hatchback to a new one can easily save you $500 pa. Going from a new "efficient" ICE to an electric will save you a fraction of that.

New car buyers pay less tax, old cars pay more. Vehicles hit junkyards faster. Manufacturers sell more cars. Over a decade we'll see a minor (maybe 20% at best) decrease in carbon emissions.

Very little environmental juice for a lot of poor and middle class squeeze. A nice little sales boost for VW.

There's a lot to be said for the simplicity of an outright ban. Ban ICEs. Ban commercial fishing. It worked for CFCs and market hunting. In retrospect, no one wishes we had split hairs with a complicated policy.

<comment><USER3> Unfortunately, production of cars (and consumerism in general) is extremely bad for carbon emissions and for the environment. Carbon emissions from the production of 1 car generally rival the lifetime emissions from the tailpipe [1]. If you have no choice but to replace an old car for new then sure, get a more efficient one. If you're replacing cars every 3 years like an average westerner, given the age of cars I see on the road, you are doing extreme harm. Old cars that are running should be incentivized to continue to be on the road, barring any other pollutant or smog issues.

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living- blog/20...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living- blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car)

<comment><USER4> Consumerism is bad for the planet, 100% true. However the "every 3 years like an average westerner" remark needs citation. In the context of the article (Denmark) it is certainly not true. Cars are so expensive (the 180% tax is absolutely real - I've paid it) that people hold on to cars longer and buy used more. In fact, the number of people with zero cars would be hard to believe if you come from California.

Alas, the politics are made by city people (who have access to really good public transport) and paid for by people in suburbia who _have_ to own a car to survive (and no, we can't just move everyone to the city).

EDIT: typos

<comment><USER5> > (the car tax is) paid for by people in suburbia who _have_ to own a car to > survive.

I have been wondering for a little while now if the extreme libertarian position on private roads has been vindicated. I am not sure yet, but it seems possible where once it was ridiculous.

Starting with (let us say) World war two, cities and states built out substantial, publicly funded roads and road networks in order to connect up newly developed sub-urban centres that were designed for car owners. These new centres were affordable for the emerging middle classes, who migrated there en-masse. This co-incided with the baby-boom, which was partly possible due to cheap housing.

But this left the inner cities to die slow deaths where immigration was not high. (Side note: This is more true of American towns, in Australia I don't know that we had the dramatic changes seen in the highly industrialised centres of the USA.) So it possibly boosted the middle class at the expense of the lower class (?) and it created huge urban sprawl.

Would private roads, paid for collectively by the developers or residents of those suburbs, have helped to alleviate or reduce the problems outlined above?

I am spitballing here, and it is a little off-topic, but please indulge me!

<comment><USER6> Japan has a majority- privatized highway network, funding it requires tolls way higher than would be politically feasible in any western country. Gas and tolls make taking the bullet train cheaper for some distances if you're alone (the equation changes if you load up your family).

I live here and have to pay the tolls but I still prefer it from a "user pays" justice POV.

It doesn't have to be privatized though - Singapore is introducing a GPS- distance-based congestion charge on their roads ("ERP 2" if you want to Google it)

<comment><USER7> As a recent example, the cost to travel by train into Tokyo from Narita cost me about ¥800, but the tolls from driving cost about ¥2000. So, if you travel with 3+ people in a car, it's cheaper to drive, provided you already own a car.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> People especially here constantly rail against Europe, specifically their start-up scene, against taxes, against regulations, etc. At the same time, our cities are unlivable, inaccessible, crowded, our infrastructure is falling apart, a widening gap between the wealthy and the poor causing increases in homelessness in cities and opiod addiction in rural areas. Western Europe isn't utopia, but in many areas, their policies are actually in the public interest and raise most people up[0].

[0] Perhaps not natives, but that's another story.

<comment><USER9> > "People especially here constantly rail against Europe"

> "our cities"

Where is "here" and "our cities"?

<comment><USER10> People love to cherry pick a statistic from one European city, and ask why all of the American empire can't be like that.

/s/public transportation/health care/cars/etc.

<comment><USER11> Cherry picking isn't really needed, infrastructure and health care are a disaster here.

edit: For some perspective, there are 240,000 water main breaks every year in the US, wasting over 2 trillion gallons of treated drinking water.

[https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat- item/drinking-w...](https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat- item/drinking-water)

<comment><USER10> These statistics are only possible in a nation that has over 240,000 water mains (or do some break more than once a year?)

A smaller nation can choose a solution that works better at smaller scales, but doesn't scare well - because they don't need it to scale much. A larger empire has fewer options.

<comment><USER12> Europe has far more people than the US, I don't know what you're on about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> While the promise sounds great, it's important to note that no law has actually been passed.

Also, incentives to increase sales of electric vehicles are yet to be announced.

Denmark's Scandinavian neighbour Norway is on the other side of the spectrum. Heavy subsidisation has caused every 2nd (!) car sold to be electric ([https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-norway- autos/...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-norway-autos/norway- powers-ahead-over-half-new-car-sales-now-electric-or-hybrid-idUSKBN1ES0WC)).

<comment><USER14> Isn't it ironic that most of welfare and subsidies actually come from the oil. Stuff like 25km of under sea tunnel leading to a town with sub 2k population is quite a common sight there.

While Norway is an amazing country in many aspects, the amount of oil owned by a state company puts it in a rather unique position.

<comment><USER15> This is a great article explaining how an Iraqi was largely the mind behind putting all the oil money in a state-owned fund as to avoid the damage that oil usually had done to any country that had discovered it.

[https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feab...](https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0)

<comment><USER16> Putting all oil money into state owned fund also kinda helps the people ruling the state :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> As great as it is, remember that hybrids are exempt. And the law is very lax when it comes to a definition of a hybrid - Range Rover has a model with a whooping 1 mile(!!!) of electric range, but of course it has an electric motor so it qualifies as a hybrid and could still be sold under this ban. I expect very very soon we'll see this kind of extremely minor electrification coming to all kinds of vehicles, where a tiny electric motor integrated into the transmission provides few extra HP of power just to call the car a hybrid.

<comment><USER18> > 1 mile(!!!) of electric range,

Other people have talked about this, but I'm wondering if the change to having electric drive motors and an engine just for generating electricity is more efficient and easier on the engine. (regenerative breaking aside)

<comment><USER19> The Chevy Volt is like this -- drivetrain is electric, gas engine is just a generator.

<comment><USER20> What you are describing is a "series hybrid". The Chevy Volt is not a pure series hybrid, it has an elaborate mechanism to connect the gas engine to the wheels when it is efficient to do so. For example highway cruise where the gas engine can run near its optimal rpm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I went to Denmark last year and spent two weeks driving all over the countryside, and likely would have been difficult to reach with an electric car. Many of the places I visited would not have been accessible via public transit. I'm curious how future generations will reach remote places as we move away from fossil fuels.

BTW, I loved Denmark :)

<comment><USER22> Send yourself back in time to when less than 1% of the populace is using petrol cars to get around. In that timeframe of the early 1900's, it would've been incredibly hard to get around the rural areas as well, since they'd still be dominated by horse, foot, and perhaps bicycle traffic. Now, send yourself forward 100 years: it will be nearly impossible to use petrol-powered transport, and EV will be the standard.

Saying the current infrastructure is inadequate for a new mode of transport is a truism. Infrastructure takes decades to build out, of course EV's will not be expected to have huge charging infrastructures while less than 1% of cars are EV.

Long term, It'll be just as easy, if not easier, to get around in the future. Consider all the new transport tech that's emerging: electric bikes, scooters, fully self-driving vehicles, drones which can carry people, VTOL aircraft, hyperloop, etc. They are all more interesting and promising than the current noxious fume spewing transport. I'm excited for even 1/3 of those options to come to fruition :)

<comment><USER23> I absolutely agree with you about infrastructure. Its definitely coming and will cover most use cases.

But I do wonder how we're gonna cover that last mile. Adding hundreds of miles of range to an ICE car is hilariously simple, just a couple of plastic containers in the trunk and you're good to go.

Can't add extra batteries like that. Energy density is not a truism.

Maybe portable ICE generators, sort of like hybrid addons for full EVs.

I really liked the hybrid tech. I don't know why its not dominating.

<comment><USER24> There are power lines to most places already. The utility replaces/upgrades them on a schedule (IIRC the expected lifespan for overhead lines last for 17 years, underground for 15). Which is to say the infrastructure is mostly there, and just needs updates that would happen anyway.

<comment><USER25> This seems so clear and yet we get the "how are we going to build this huge charging network" all over the place. If the situation was reversed we'd consider it preposterous to think we could build a network of gas stations that get their fuel driven in by trucks. The current network is far crazier than just adding a bunch of outlets that use the existing and extremely robust electricity grid that's already in place.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> There is a long list of countries that decided to ban fossil fuel burning cars in the upcoming years.

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

Personally, I don't think the ban will ever be enforced. It will create the right incentives and most car sales will be electric, but there will still be fossil fuel burning car sales.

<comment><USER27> Enforcing it is going to be quite simple.

The "DMV" or equivalent will have a very hard time explaining why they are still giving out license plates for new vehicles that are not electric if the ban is made law.

<comment><USER17> As I explained elsewhere - hybrids are exempt. And all current manufacturers can make all of their models into some extremely mild hybrids just to get around the ban. So expect to see a lot of models with 1bhp electric motors just to classify as hybrids coming out soon. And cars made before the ban will obviously be still allowed, so there's no issues there.

<comment><USER28> floatrock previously pointed out that your statement about hybrids being exempt does not appear to be true:

""In just 12 years, we will prohibit the sale of new diesel and petrol cars. And in 17 years, every new car in Denmark must be an electric car or other forms of zero-emissions car," Rasmussen said, implying that hybrids will be phased out in 2035."

<comment><USER17> Uhmmmm....it does the exact opposite - it proves what I said. The law coming in 12 years will have an exemption for hybrids. The hybrid ban will come later(if ever)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Wonder what it'd do to the resale value of cars even before 2030.

Denmark with their famous 150% registration tax already has cars being used much longer than what I've seen in other countries. I'd love to see the 150% tax waived off for 100% electric cars that are not luxury vehicles. Set strict constraints for a common man car, and incentivize it turning electric.

Also, think about the charging infrastructure....

<comment><USER30> I never understood how anyone possibly felt the ridiculously extremist state of affairs of automobile/fuel regulations/taxes/etc in Denmark is appropriate. The rest of Europe isn't that great either but Denmark is one of or the most insane examples (memory isn't clear on if there was another member state that was even worse). One of the things that makes me grateful to live in the USA - owning and operating a car doesn't bankrupt me, especially anything bigger than a clown car with any less than 50mpg.

<comment><USER29> I wrote the comment you responded to. I live in Denmark, and here is my take on this.

It's not as extreme that I'd call it "extremist state of affairs". Fewer cars are for the greater good. However, what pisses me the most is how it is really implemented. There is the famous 150% tax when you buy a car, and then there is a green tax every 6 months/quarter that is based on how efficient &a safe your car is. I'm all for the green tax. Heck, double or triple it, and make the SUV drivers pay. But, the 150% tax IMO is lop sided policy. It lead to too many small cars(VW Up, Seat equivalent, and the like) because that's what common people can afford. Another side effect is that people tend to keep shitty cars much longer than rational, because they cannot afford a better car - throwing away all the emission savings in the wind(pun intended).

I think the law is made by politicians just based on life in Copenhagen, where you can use the trains and bike wherever. Public transportation is A-class, and you don't particularly need a car for the most part.

The rest of Denmark, where I live, public transport is not as good, and car becomes a necessity if you go to work outside the city. We're the collateral damage of the narrow minded policies.

/rant.

Denmark, as everyone here says is an excellent place to live, and I have a bigger list of positives to list, and a tiny list including this car tax to complain about.

<comment><USER31> > It lead to too many small cars(VW Up, Seat equivalent, and the like) because > that's what common people can afford

Slightly confused - what's the issue here? Small cars are good. They take up less street space and tend to be more economical. My wife owns a Fiat 500 (which is about as small as you get); it's much easier to park on the narrow streets of our rural town than a bigger car would be, its fuel consumption is stellar, and it's no bigger than we need.

<comment><USER32> Large cars are seen as status symbols, so a lot of people _think_ they need a big car to show how successful they are, and to "keep up with the Joneses".

The sooner people shed this silly consumerism mindset, the better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Instead of governments announcing bans (I believe france announced a future ban a couple months back), I would rather see these governments committing to only purchasing electric vehicles for all government fleets. Why not put your money were your mouth is and help pump money into the industry via purchasing orders, rather then simply announcing a ban?

<comment><USER34> Because this does exactly that, and more. The gov have effectively committed to buying only elecrtic fleets because thats all that will be sold.

<comment><USER33> Not really, these bans are set so far in the future that they are almost meaningless, a problem for the next government to figure out, or delay even further.

On the other hand, the current government could easily announce that starting in 2020 all new government fleet purchases are required to be electric and it would help create a lot of new competition to bid for those orders.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is really the only, and best, solution. It's simple and clear. Car manufactures cannot get around it with their bag of tricks. Plus, 12 years is a long long time.

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm guessing economies of scale will finish the job somewhere over the next decade already. If you operating any kind of vehicles commercially, eliminating fuel cost should be high on your agenda. Whether it is taxi's, buses, police vehicles, delivery vehicles, etc. For that kind of market what matters is the total cost of ownership. This is why many taxis were early adopters of hybrids. As soon as they become affordable enough, they'll be going full electric.

Currently battery cost and production volumes are the main limitation. As that improves, the market will gobble up whatever is being produced. This just puts the pressure on a bit more. 2030 is not even that ambitious.

<comment><USER37> Seems like we need to see about 10K less capital cost, and/or less atrocious depreciation, and TCO should come into line with a comparable ICE. Solve that and maintain the range we've got in the latest crop of EVs, and I think they'll take over pretty steadily.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> It's a step forward. However I'm surprised that the focus is still on individual cars, construction of an ev is still quite polluting.

I expected to see suggestions about increase in public transportation coverage and frequency to compensate, or maybe steps towards self-driven collective fleets (2030 seems ambitious).

I don't know Denmark, are public transportation already well developed? Or am I not cynical enough and it's just an economically driven decision?

<comment><USER32> Public transit is relatively well developed. We're a relatively small country, very flat and reasonably densely populated. Obviously public transport is most well-developed in the larger cities, with several expansions in progress.

But even rural areas are serviced by trains and bus lines. It may be slower in rural areas than taking the car, but you can make it work. At least you can do with one car per household instead of two.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Electro cars are great, until you start count. Ok, if Denmark population is about 5.7M and based on aerostat ([https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php...](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php?title=Passenger_cars_in_the_EU)) there're around 500 cars per 1000 citizen. It means country holds ~2.5M cars right now. In general (based on [https://www.worlddata.info/europe/denmark/energy- consumption...](https://www.worlddata.info/europe/denmark/energy- consumption.php)) every Denmark's citizen consumes 20kh per day. 1 of 2 citizen has a car. Electro car charging requires 50kh (average electro car consumption). So It means Denmark must increase electric production in 5!!! times. In order just a charge those new 2.5M cars. I'm now talking about infrastructure requirements for this signigficant electric consumption increase, I'm pointing to the basic knowledge (by wikipedia) that around 50% of energy comes from coal and all renewable are less than 5%. COAL! MORE COAL I SAID!

<comment><USER40> That assumes that every car in Denmark will consume 50kwh per day. The 64kw Kona Electric will do 300 miles according to the WLTP [1]. So, that assumes every car does 234 miles every day, or over 85k miles per year.

I can't find any solid data, but I'd assume its closer to 10k miles per year, or an eighth of what you're suggesting. That is still a lot, but it is achievable especially with more offshore wind.

1\. [https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/kona- electric](https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/kona-electric)

<comment><USER41> Just look how much gasoline and diesel was sold. Anything else will give you tremendously wrong result.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Good luck with that, especially with banning ultramodern, low emission, high performance diesel cars.

I was in Denmark last year to see what's going on over there and I observed the infrastructure very carefully: there is no widespread electric infrastructure for cars; it will be a gargantuan investment of epic proportions. Even if the infrastructure is put in, the current battery technology is only barely adequate for daily city driving. Everything else - forget it! So this is banking on future infrastructure improvement in batteries and recharging, and it's especially banking on invention of fast recharging. And it's assuming diesel engines and emissions will stand still, with no further improvements. Just wondering, Danes like to travel and they like to hitch a camping trailer to their cars and drive all over Europe; how will they be able to do that if their government bans sales of cars with internal combustion engines?

Whatever stuff that government is on, it's gotta be potent; I'd like some of whatever they're smoking.

<comment><USER43> > Even if the infrastructure is put in, the current battery technology is only > barely adequate for daily city driving.

Barely adequate? We are reaching almost 500km on a charge now (around 300km is more common). This is Denmark we are talking about, not Russia.

> and it's especially banking on invention of fast recharging

You mean under 30 minutes? How often do you need that? Road trips?

Note that they are not banning hybrids, which will take care of your road trip needs just fine.

<comment><USER42> "You mean under 30 minutes? How often do you need that? Road trips?"

Of course and of course!

"Note that they are not banning hybrids,"

Yeah but hybrids suck: gasoline automatics, and except for the Volvo, ugly sedans. If there were more sportwagon diesel hybrids with manual transmissions, that'd be a different story, but there aren't and probably won't be.

And what will happen to car enthusiasts in Denmark if this legislature is enacted?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> As an idealist I'm glad to see the world transition away from fossil fuels in any capacity.

As a "Car Guy" however, there is a small sadness that I won't really get to experience much of the internal combustion engine. I feel like I was born a decade too late and a lot too poor. Similar to some techies who feel the missed the early internet.

<comment><USER19> Why the sadness? As a "Car Guy" I'm thrilled about electric! Instant torque and acceleration, way more responsive than ICE. Just the other month there was the story where an electric shattered all the previous Pikes Peak records: [https://www.teslarati.com/vw-id-r-electric-vehicle-pikes- pea...](https://www.teslarati.com/vw-id-r-electric-vehicle-pikes-peak-record/)

I mean, yeah, it doesn't have the same growl, but if you want raw performance, I'll take my spaceship whirl over rube goldberg-like thousands-of-tiny- explosions any day of the week.

<comment><USER45> the growl / sound / smell. The ability to modify, upgrade, "wrench on a car on the weekend"

the ability to get beat on the track 1 weekend, drop a couple grand on new parts the next, then go back and beat them the following weekend.

car shows and seeing a super charged mustang or camaro or twin turbos or something completely different someone came up with an idea for and built.

the same way us programmers tinker and build stuff for the hell of it, is the same was us car guys build stuff and tinker for the hell of it. some take it seriously and go to track, some (me) just do it cause it's a nice break.

spending a day installing a new exhaust can be fun. playing with 240volts of batteries (or whatever it is, lol) (if theres anything to play with) - not so much i'm thinking, lol...

<comment><USER46> Sounds like when I early adopted digital photography. My friends with proper cameras told me how much there was to film grain, how they loved playing with chemicals and the rest of it. They sneered at my passion for digital photography claiming it was dull. Where are they now, on Instagram with an iPhone.

<comment><USER47> I see your point, but to be fair Kodak did bring film back. [https://www.kodak.com/US/en/consumer/products/super8/super-8...](https://www.kodak.com/US/en/consumer/products/super8/super-8-film/default.htm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> I have a hard time believing that the vast majority of cars won't already be 100% electric by then. Also, I doubt there will be nearly as many personal cars and that there will be much more ride sharing and public transportation options.

</comment><comment><USER49> Isn't Denmark the country that taxes new car purchases 120% of the price of the car already? I don't think they're a good indicator of the overall attitude of the EU.

<comment><USER50> yes, and you were close with 120% but it was recently reduced to 180% from somewhere north of that

<comment><USER32> Not quite.

It used to be 180% for the high tier, 105% for the low tier. I don't know the cutover points used back then.

Today, it's 85% for the low tier (below ~190K DKK) and 150% for the high tier above that. The cutover point will increase to account for inflation and such.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> This is great. I don't think we in the US realize how far ahead European countries are wrt EV. Their governments are working like startups to make this happen. Even if only cars get replaced (and not trucks or heavy vehicles), that's a huge boost.

Further, I think the biggest gains of this are in emerging countries like SE asia, India etc. where the cost of oil fuel is much higher than the US. The market size willing to ride on this tech is insane.

</comment><comment><USER52> The more countries that commit to this, the more innovation we'll see, happy to see this being taken seriously!

<comment><USER41> Quite the opposite, actually. Governmental regulations kill innovations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> This is a solid move. Better air quality and smaller chance of natural disasters benefits us all.

</comment><comment><USER54> While this is a good thing, it's not nearly sufficient to stop climate catastrophe.

<comment><USER41> Nothing can stop the next climate catastrophe. Which is the next ice age by the way, and not some mythical global warming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> denmark is the size of bayarea. Yes, they can move to electric cars, because a tesla will NOT run out of battery by travelling all over the country.

OTOH, do they even need cars? Why can't denmark just use public transportation and abolish cars altogether?

<comment><USER56> Rural areas are neither economical nor convenient for public transportation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Coal price will rise. Oil will fall. Gas'll rise.

</comment><comment><USER41> Incredibly dumb move. CO2 is our friend, not an enemy.

</comment><comment><USER57> Atsushi Horiba seems to think this is rubbish.

Does he have a point?

</comment><comment><USER58> 2030 is ages away, try 2020.

<comment><USER59> Out of curiosity, are you the kind of person who complains if Google shuts down a free product with less than a 1 year heads up?

I wonder how some HN commenters would do at being head of state, sometimes. The bar seems to have lowered lately anyway.

Edit: just to clarify and be less dismissive: Banning things everyone uses with little homework is a great way to fail at it. Since this is a tech forum, you can think of it kinda like upgrading your language, framework, kernel and landing a massive refactor, all at once, in production, without testing. It's like that, except you have tens-to-hundreds of millions of users, and their lives are at stake.

Bans take time, otherwise they're not effective. Besides, if they had announced 2020, I'm nearly certain the parent comment would ask for 2019.

<comment><USER41> Bans like this are unlawful and should be countered by a revolution.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why isn't Discord marketing to companies? - <AUTHOR> It seems the whole "for gamers" thing is a missed opportunity considering how much marketshare Slack has. Their app is consistently recommended on HN as replacement too. Are they better off as a "gamer" chat/voice app? <comment><USER3> I helped a Slack competitor with sales for one job. They said they avoided marketing to tech companies because it's really hard to convince techies that Slack is better than X, and many were fanatically attached to it.

However, they have a very good market share with non-tech companies - <USER2> industry, construction, hospitals, etc.

It wasn't so much that it was a bad app for tech industry, more that it's hard to penetrate the market. The other industries were dealing with WhatsApp groups and needed something better, and even considering building a solution themselves.

</comment><comment><USER4> I spent around a year building a game on iOS with a couple colleagues and we only really communicated via Discord. However, whenever I'm building a product for someone else outside of the gaming industry I mostly use Slack/Skype. I tend the think the reason for this is that Discord is just a little more on the casual side and they seem to be doing very well within their market. Thus, sometimes it's better not to fix what isn't broken.

</comment><comment><USER5> It might be that Discord does no want to compete with Slack/Teams but wants to fully take a gaming/community niche while bigger players are fighting.

</comment><comment><USER6> It doesn't satisfy business needs (saved history for all time mainly) while it supplants WhatsApp and Facebook messenger group chats for casual groups very well</comment>


If you switch from Tea to Coffee, how much more caffeine are you getting? - <AUTHOR> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=caffeine+in+a+cup+of+coffee%2C+cup+of+tea

<comment><USER2> Silly, this assumes that all coffee and tea are equal, they're not.</comment>


Purpose of a surveillance state? - <AUTHOR>

Other than possibly preventing crime and terrorism. <comment><USER2> The purpose of the surveillance state is to preserve the existence of the surveillance state.

<comment><AUTHOR> may you expand on your idea? why'd they want to preserve such state?

<comment><USER3> Why would a judge intentionally send children to prison?

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

<comment><AUTHOR> deym, that's messed up.

correct me. your thought is that surveillance state enriches the pockets of those who run it by finding people to imprison?

<comment><USER4> Equipment to purchase, contractors to hire, subcontractors to hire, ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> States are likely to share its surveillance with the big corporations (who are much more powerful than elected politicians) to ensure that any union activists never ever gets a job again. It's a much better tool to maintain the status quo with than physical force. There is at least two dozen famous political philosophers who you can read for all the details.

</comment><comment><USER6> Ultimately, it's about self-preservation and control. Control over citizens, corporations, the economy, and so on.

<comment><AUTHOR> i see. do you think the people in the government are pulling the strings or is it the corporations?</comment></comment>


The Reason High School Bullies Get Back in Touch Later in Life - <AUTHOR> https://mashable.com/article/high-school-bullies-getting-in-touch/ <comment><USER2> Seems to me most High School Bullies eventually get in touch with their victims as they have burned up all their recent contacts and have few if any friends in their current lives.

They reach out to people they knew and bullied in their past with the hope they can obtain a relationship in which they will still be dominant, instead of the friendless pathetic losers that they now have become because they made others feel that way in their past.

By the time a person reaches high school they have already learned what is kind and what is cruel, as much as people can change, most don't. A person who was cruel to you in the past will most likely be cruel to you again if you let them into your life.

Forgive and forget them, literally!</comment>


What do you hate about email? - <AUTHOR> Hello everyone, We're redesigning email from the ground up. Giving it a whole new look. A breath of fresh air.
Soooo... we'd love to know about your experience with email. Do you have any wishes or requests?<p>Appreciate your time! Have a nice rest of the day ;) <comment><USER2> The ability to encrypt messages that's easy enough that non tech professionals can use it - or even tech professionals.

I'd like to be able to read mails simply by sorting them into filesystem folders and reading them like text files. The need to understand mbox and mdir and emix or whatever other formats are out there is annoying. I want to be able to read them with or without an app, and for different apps to read _from the same data without reorganising it_. Why should I have 3 different stores of the same emails on my laptop because I installed 3 different mail clients?

If you're really coming up with a whole new system then clarify your terms - what's the different between an MTA or and MRU or an MDA… I remember physics lectures easier than this.

I could go on all day. Good luck, I genuinely hope you manage it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Don't pull a google and make email dynamic. The stable nature of it when received is the best feature.

I like email. It just works. Lean UI would be nice. Top functions one touch or click please.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome, great feedback! Highly appreciated :)

<comment><USER3> Looking to move off gmail.

Conversation view and killer search also make great sense.

If free, show me a nice add; otherwise, I am happy to buy. Bonus for long term, like 2 year service pricing advantages.

Email is not a thing I want to think about much. Just works, just use

Good luck, have fun!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the ideas! The pricing expectations are good to hear. We're planning on going with the freemium strategy, so there will be a version of an app for everyone. If you'd like to stay updated, here's a link to our website: [http://juicymail.co](http://juicymail.co). Feel free to sign up or ask anything else that's on your mind.

Regards, Roman

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like Thunderbird and Mutt.

If your system can't handle and categorize IMAP folders of 50,000 messages and 500 new emails per day, don't bother on my account.

Have good GPG support.

Search is important. My cyrus imap server can find good search results in a couple of seconds out of 15 GB of email. You'd have to at least match that.

Make sure I can send messages in plain text with formatting that is exactly how I wrote it or pasted it.

But on the other hand, I do need to be able to read HTML email. I just won't write it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great feedback, thank you! Which OS do you use? Are most of those 500 emails promotional, or do you communicate via email a lot?

Thanks in advance!

<comment><USER4> I use Linux, Windows and Android.

Mailing lists. Then probably promotional. Notifications from things like Facebook, LiveJournal, Patreon, various web forums, etc. Then probably status reports from various scripts. The least amount of email is from people I actually talk to.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You're not really redesigning email. You're only designing a new email client. Good luck with your project, there have been many email clients over the years, so I'm not sure what you can improve that hasn't already been tried. Gmail and Outlook, for example, are already very good at what they do.

<comment><AUTHOR> Our goal is to redesign email, not an email client. I sounds far-fetched, but there's a lot about that can be improved. From the basic UX to the way we communicate and share media via email. It takes many iterations and a long process, but there is a lot of room for innovation in email. In a long run, it will be much much more powerful then Gmail or Outlook, those are almost the same experiences we had 40 years ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> > We're redesigning email from the ground up. Giving it a whole new look. A > breath of fresh air.

It already had been done []

[] [http://mutt.org/](http://mutt.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Plz ignore the cockly language :D

We believe email is extemely outdated, and all the current solutions out there aren't really making it any better. We're taking a whole new approach and our only mission is to bring a whole new email experience that everyone can love. That's why I'm curious to know about your opinion, basically :)</comment></comment>


Uber leaves San Antonio to protest regulations: It wasn't an empty threat - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/04/02/uber_leaves_san_antonio_to_protest_regulations_it_wasn_t_an_empty_threat.html?wpisrc=obnetwork <comment><USER2> Good riddance.</comment>


Ask HN: How to write financial projections? - <AUTHOR>

Hello, at the moment I am writing a kind of an business plan for an incubator program. On point is to write projections of profit and loss for the next two years. My problem is I don't know how to estimate sales. I want to sell a hardware product in the consumer market and I don't think I can make a serious statement about the sales in the next two years. How did or would you do it. Any are ideas welcome.<p>Rockin' regards, Marco <comment><USER2> My experience is that good investors know that profit+loss projections for certain kinds of products at certain stages are pretty much useless. In these cases, your goal is to make something that isn't laughable (when forced to make projections).

It's easier to forecast expenses -- you know how many engineers you want, and can guess at legal, rent, etc.

But it's also good, if you can't have a market ready piece of hardware within two years, to have an alternate source of revenue in the beginning. For example, you could sell a suped-up (expensive) early-adopter version for a year which will serve as a prototype for the real (cheaper) consumer version.

Plan to sell very little in the beginning, as that's what always happens in hardware. And consider planning to sell through someone else. For example, if your device has to do with telephony, assume you will sell through one of the major telephone networks in your area. Then guess at what percent of their users in your target market area you can convert in the first year and calculate your cut of the sale. It's easier to estimate sales if you're thinking about taking a bigger and bigger slice out of a large, defined pie (rather than growing from nothing).

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah right, that is a good thought, you are normally not going from 0 to 100. You need some kind of adoption rate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> www.alexkrupp.com/projections.xls

I just added this for you. It should do the trick. Just use the tab labeled "income statement_b" at the bottom and ignore the stuff in the other tabs. Then you can just swap in your own numbers.

In terms of figuring out sales, just figure out how many units you can sell per day. If you are in an incubator then you're probably going to be the only sales guy, at least until you hire another. Here is what Guy Kawasaki has to say on the topic:

<http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/11/the_art_of_proj.html>

<http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/07/how-to-write-a-.html>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the chart. That is some great work. I will use it tomorow, it is 3 a.m here now. The thing is a consumer you don't sell all your stuff all personally. So its hard to tell, but maybe I should get over it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's better to make them too big than too small. There's no real reason to be conservative, within reason. If you make them too small you force the investor to think of ways that you could be bigger to generate the return that he or she wants.

</comment><comment><USER5> As Alex mentions, unit sales is usually the best way to do this.

Have you benchmarked sales figures for similar products as a possible baseline?

<comment><AUTHOR> No, but I will try to get some more information on that.</comment></comment>


Interesting Cases of Biomimicry - <AUTHOR> http://brainz.org/15-coolest-cases-biomimicry/

<comment><USER2> The content is a rip of the National Geographical article from few months back; and not a hint of a credit.</comment>


First steps with Vim script - <AUTHOR> http://edne.net/2015/07/10/first-steps-with-vim-script.html

<comment><USER2> Very well written, Bravo!

I also didn't know Vimscript, and I've always been curious but without any discipline to look into it.

Actually it doesn't seem so scary.</comment>


Show HN: Adorable Avatars an avatar placeholder service for web devs and designers - <AUTHOR> http://avatars.adorable.io/ <comment><USER2> Funny idea, and more cool than Gravatar. My emails looks adorable good :)</comment>


Western ecommerce companies and Asian marketplace success - <AUTHOR> https://www.techinasia.com/talk/western-ecommerce-companies-secret-asian-marketplace-success <comment><USER2> I am french and I have been working in China (Beijing) for nearly 4 years, there is no doubt that shopping on the internet here is really convenient.

You like a product but you want to know more about it? OK, you can be in contact will the (re)seller in less than a minute without leaving the current website by using chat boxes.

My cart is ready and it's time to pay, let me grab my wallet, get my Credit card, start to type the 16 numbers... oh no, I just need to scan a QR code with my phone and it's done. I have a SMS that said everything is ok. By using a credit card, you have time to regret when you type the numbers into the form, but when you use a fast way like Wechat or Alipay you only regret and think that what you have bought is maybe useless few minutes after you paid.

The next early morning (I am not kidding, I have bought stuff at 3am and got my delivery at 9am the same day), I happily open my package but unfortunately, the size of the shoes is smaller than I thought. No problem, I call back my (re)seller and tell him to send me another pair of shoes which are a bit bigger. Then he sends back a delivery guy anywhere I want to get my painful pair of shoes back without asking anything. Afterward, I get the new ones in the afternoon or the next day.

The package logistic in this country is just amazing but I think it's because of the road/driving regulations that are not very strict in my own opinion. If you see some of those delivery guys driving, you would get crazy.

The fact that you can pay with your phone, fast delivery, no bargain to get a replacement product might help a lot. Did I mention that there are nearly no delivery fees?

If you have a look of taobao.com, tmall.com or jd.com, you can see that you have tons of suggestions, it's sometimes hard to only buy what you want. For example, when I ask my girlfriend to order a single new t-shirt for me, I know in the end that she will also get herself some new clothes as well. They target their customers in a very efficient way.</comment>


How to rob somebody using Google Buzz - <AUTHOR> http://www.itworld.com/internet/97164/how-rob-somebody-using-google-buzz <comment><USER2> It's actually simpler (and I think more used) to wait until someone leaves their home, and then one follows the victim while the other one enters the home. Why using google buzz and having to figure out their name and address?

I personally don't think this is that great risk.

</comment><comment><USER3> That article is a populistic bullshit. Sure social media are good source of information about target person and it is good to point that out, but there are zillions better ways how to plan a robbery.

If some low-life is so sophisticated to plan it using google buzz technology, he would probably do this instead: 1\. find initial set of rich individuals/families in your operational radius (use whatever technology) 2\. evaluate their behavioral patterns (using google buzz or whatever) 3\. evaluate level of their protection (like alarm systems etc.) 4\. evaluate risk/outcome chances and focus on the best one(s)

So using Google Buzz has very little to do with your changes to be robbed. You have much better chance when you are visibly rich.

</comment><comment><USER4> I am not sure the strategy in the article will work or not but it sure does highlight the trade off problems between internet and personal security/identity. Seems like no one likes the preferences opt in/opt out that everyone is currently using.

</comment><comment><USER5> ...or Facebook, or Twitter, or Foursquare...this guy sounds like he couldn't get a job writing at a real tabloid newspaper so he carved out a gig at some also-ran computer publication.</comment>


Ask HN: Why are good night vision goggles so expensive and hard to come by? - <AUTHOR>

They are at least as useful as binoculars and most households have those. <comment><USER2> It's all down to quality. A high-quality pair of binoculars cost you £200 or more, and I doubt most households would ever consider spending that much.

Then you move onto the actual differences between the two. Most binoculars contain some lenses and other small components (admittedly the more expensive ones now also include rangefingers etc). Even the most basic (true) NVG by comparison require image sensor, processor and display.

Then you move up to the _good_ goggles. These are the ones with anti-flare protection, more realistic colour and higher gain so you don't need an IR source (which lights you up like a christmas tree).

At the end of the day, NVG aren't just binoculars with some fancy lenses.

</comment><comment><USER3> While I was serving in my country's army, I had access to both night vision and thermal goggles. When I asked about their costs they told me that although most of the components (lenses, energy units & wiring etc) were produced locally, the chips that converted light & thermal signatures to vision were imported, and they cost a lot. So they're probably the reason that makes these equipment so costly.

</comment><comment><USER4> Quora is that way ----->

</comment><comment><USER5> This question is better asked at Quora, but one reason quality NVGs are so expensive are because the high gain/low noise components required for modern, passive NVGs are quite expensive to 1) produce, 2) QA, and 2) buy.</comment>